Contract deal soon?

[JonFrum]

I've notified the paramedics. You'll need 'em after reading ERISA . . .

Like Einstein's Theory of Relativity, Withdrawal Liability is so complicated that only a handful of people really understand it, . . . and I think all of them are just pretending.

For my New England plan, see "Article XV - Employer Withdrawal Liability"
of the "Complete Rules & Regulations" available here . . .
http://www.nettipf.com/plandocs.htm

For the Central States plan, see "Appendix E - Rules & Regulations Pertaining To Employer Withdrawal Liability"

A clickable ERISA index is here . . .
http://benefitslink.com/erisa/crossreference.html
Scroll down to Sections 1381 thru 1405

Current retirees (of UPS or other companies) are normally not effected by current plan events of any kind. ERISA protects them. Their benefits, and everyone else's Vested Benefits, are normally untouchable. It's only *future* benefit accruals that are subject to cuts and restrictions when a pension plan gets in trouble. That's why cuts are so painful. The cuts are concentrated amongst the active participants only. ERISA considers it too nasty to cut the benefits of someone who already was told his vested benefits were secure, especially someone who retired based on that assurance. It is, after all, a *retirement* plan!

 

[JonFrum]

Withdrawal Liability. Mandated by Congress Since 1980.

The fact that all withdrawn companies owe Withdrawal Liability payments to these multi-employer pension funds is also part of why multi-employer funds are considered "self-insured," and why the Congress (wrongly) allowed them to be more underfunded than single-employer funds. The participating companies are legally obligated to cover their own employee's vested benefits 100%, either through regular monthly contributions or ultimately through Withdrawal Liability payments.

Bankrupt companies often stiff pension funds by not paying the last few monthly contribution payments, and by not paying their Withdrawal Liability. When this happens, the company's employees stop accruing pension credits, and the company is sued by the fund to recover as much of the monies owed as possible.

Small companies who fail to read what they sign are sometimes shocked to learn that they owe Withdrawal Liability when they think they can save money by exiting the fund. Stockholders of large companies like UPS, whose stock just can't seem to rise, may fail to realize that the Withdrawal Liability owed to Central States equals the entire company profit for 2006. And then there is all the Withdrawal Liabilities owed to the other funds as well!

Central States has a higher portion of retirees than other funds, and by law, cuts must be concentrated among active employee's only, and can only effect their *future* benefit accmulations. Active employee's already-earned benefits are normally untouchable, just like those of retirees, and people who are no longer in the fund but haven't aged enough to start actually collecting checks yet. Painfull as they are, the cuts are temporary.

Usually current retirees are paid off in full when the pension fund buys them an annuity from an insurance company on their retirement date. The payment of these retirees' monthly benefit checks is the responsibility of an insurance company, not the fund. Retirees with small benefit amounts, are usually directly paid off in one lump-sum payment.

 

[JonFrum]

http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

Exerpts:
"UPS’s proposal would establish a UPS Pension Plan, with management officials and Hoffa administration Teamster officials as trustees. A Teamster vested in the Central States Plan would in the future draw two separate checks, which would add together to make up a pension.

Central States would not give up funds that have been contributed over the years. They would stay there and provide a partial pension, while the UPS Plan would pay the rest of the pension. Healthcare and retiree healthcare would continue to be provided by Central States. . . .

. . . If the big freight companies follow UPS’s example and pull out, the Central States Fund would be even worse off. The CEO of ABF now says busting out of the Teamster pension plans is his top bargaining goal.

UPS Teamsters would still depend on the fund for a large part of our pension. It would not be smart to weaken the fund by supporting a pullout when we will still need the fund to support our retirement.

UPS’s proposal for a UPS-Teamster plan covering the Central States has been tried elsewhere. Let’s look at the results.

Local 804 in New York is a UPS-Teamster plan just like the one being proposed for the Central States. Over the last ten years, that fund’s investments have performed worse than Central States. At the beginning of this year, UPS’s trustees forced through a 30 percent pension cut.

Now UPS is trying to push through a pension cut in New Jersey Local 177—another UPS-Teamster fund. That decision is before an arbitrator.

Both of these plans are based in Atlanta, at UPS headquarters, with all employer trustees being UPS management. They show that a UPS-Teamster pension plan would not be a magic bullet."
- - - - -
"The company wants to convince Central States Teamsters that they will look out for our pensions.

When it comes to big promises, actions speak louder than words. The fact is management hasn’t been looking out for our retirement; they’ve been leading the attack on our benefits. Just look at the UPS record:

UPS management’s representative to the Central States Pension Fund voted to cut our pensions and opposed a motion by our union trustees to increase employer contributions.

UPS management’s representative to the Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Fund voted for benefit cuts, even though that fund is 100 percent funded.

There are two UPS-Teamster plans like the one being proposed for the Central States and management has pushed for pension cuts at both. UPS’s trustees forced through a 30 percent pension cut in New York Local 804, and they are trying to cut benefits in New Jersey Local 177, where the issue is deadlocked to an arbitrator.

UPS management refused to pay millions of dollars owed to two pension funds, in Virginia and New York. In Virginia, management stopped making required pension contributions when members were on vacation.

UPS has been the number one supporter of legislation that would make it easier to cut our benefits."
http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

 

[Cole]

Re: http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

UPS management’s representative to the Central States Pension Fund voted to cut our pensions and opposed a motion by our union trustees to increase employer contributions.

Jon as much as I appreciate your attempts to get factual info out, you should show where you are getting such info as the above quote from.

It's the trustees of CS that have for years used it for their own purposes that have us on the path we are on today, starting particularly in Daddy Hoffa's era. They say "the Gov" has been involved since those days! So what?! This whole thing was announced while the Democratic primaries were getting fully engaged, so who was going to question them?

All I know is prior to that point in time, Kerry when asked about labor etc...would say he would be balanced between labor and company's etc...but I sure noticed after our pension cuts were made known he was sure talking the big talk for labor, (which seemed phony to me). They timed the announcement perfectly imho, as far as keeping those who *may* benefit from it at bay, because they needed/wanted the union vote.

 

[JonFrum]

Re: http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

Jon as much as I appreciate your attempts to get factual info out, you should show where you are getting such info as the above quote from.

Cole,
I did. The four or five new articles that I wanted everyone to know about are all featured on the link page I posted . . .
https://web.archive.org/web/20070522235555/http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

The specific quote that you ask about is contained in this article . . .
https://web.archive.org/web/20101128225722/http://tdu.org/node/1222

 

[Cole]

Re: http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

I am not saying the above was true, but just that at the time the Teamsters made the announcement about the pension changes, I noticed it was during the Democratic primaries, and that I noticed a distinct change in Kerry's demeanor towards labor afterwards.

 

[Braveheart]

One thing for sure after the last 2 contracts and elections get ready for 2 steps back in pension and healthcare instead of 1 step forward. But i bet the teamsters administration will get theirs !

If so, then why do people keep voting hoffa in? It amazes me that he was re-elected.

 

[Braveheart]

Re: http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

I don't trust UPS. They will cut costs and short change employees daily with altering time cards, paying employees at a lower rate, reducing their own benefits to managers and so forth. Who would want to trust them. I had a customer tell me one of their relatives that is a manager in the Airline department of UPS had his or her pension eliminated! If UPS wants control of it then they will cut it the first chance they get

 

[Cole]

Re: http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

Aye Sir William!

I agree with ya!

 

[30andout]

Re: http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

I don't trust UPS. They will cut costs and short change employees daily with altering time cards, paying employees at a lower rate, reducing their own benefits to managers and so forth. Who would want to trust them. I had a customer tell me one of their relatives that is a manager in the Airline department of UPS had his or her pension eliminated! If UPS wants control of it then they will cut it the first chance they get

I totally agree with you, but on the other hand UPS knows they can't make as much money with 50 and 60 year old drivers out there. Already their comp claims for on the job injuries are on the rise. They will need to make some way for old farts to get out so they can get the new young blood runners in there. Maybe in 401k match or something.

 

[Cole]

Re: http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

yeah if the pension stays as is they have will to put in wheelchair ramps with a wagon to hook up to, and give the drivers bull horns to holler out with.

 

[Fullhouse]

Re: http://www.tdu.org/view/pensionbenefits

I totally agree with you, but on the other hand UPS knows they can't make as much money with 50 and 60 year old drivers out there. Already their comp claims for on the job injuries are on the rise. They will need to make some way for old farts to get out so they can get the new young blood runners in there. Maybe in 401k match or something.

Well then, maybe a driver buyout could be more than a rumor.

 

[barking dog]

If so, then why do people keep voting hoffa in? It amazes me that he was re-elected.

Good point. Every election Hoffa relies on his outside consultants to run his campaign and get him re-elected. He does not use rank & file Teamsters in his campaign "inner circle". He uses non Teamster consultants and international employees that did not come out of the ranks. They don't have a clue what it is like at UPS and have never delivered a package in their life. They can not relate.

One of these consultants is the owner of a communications company in Detroit, Michigan that has landed several lucrative Teamster contracts and he has worked his way into Hoffa's "inner circle". So most people would say so what's the big deal that is just how politics work. True. That is the basic principles of politics and people working in the political arena need to have principles and a moral code of conduct that enables them to represent the membership (not the company) without any conflict of interest issues hanging over them.

I'll get to the point here. Hoffa's consultant and a UPS corporate manager have been reported to have a very chummy and personal relationship. That on the surface does not sound too bad. However, when you add to it that the UPS corporate manager is the UPS trustee on the Central States Pension Fund it starts to stink. What would a non Teamster consultant be doing talking with a company trustee from the central states pension in the first place? But to be talking with one of the UPS trustees when UPS is trying to get out of the pension fund?? That really stinks.

This is a matter that should be fully investigated and if any impropriety is found charges should be filed.

 

[tireknocker]

Hand Shake deal after the 4th of July week.

Inside full time employees ( carwasher, A/C clerks, front counter, etc). Will be given buy out package. Or you can have a bump.

 

[Cole]

The only reason he won this last time imho, is a very poor turnout, and Leedham didn't have the finances or support, as he's pretty unknown to the majority. You have to get your message to members or you're not going to win.

He won the 1st time based only on his name, as he has no real prior Teamster experience. You have to wonder if he is completley crooked, or if he lives hearing the threat, of "tow the line or you'll find out first hand where your Dad is buried".

Both are real possibilities, but it could be some of each. Either way, we need a real Teamster running our Union, unless the APWA wins in which case, we would need solid union people with the crust to step up to the plate quick and thorough, and get the members caring again!