CSPF awarded 36 billion.

Trucker Clock

Well-Known Member
What about hostess?
They went bankrupt and owed many pension funds a lot of money

That was the benefit of a multi-employer pension fund, at one point. If a company went belly up, there were more than enough other companies still paying into the fund to absorb the loss. This was because an employee only received a portion of the money paid into the fund on their behalf by their employer. The other portion covered the loss of bankrupt companies no longer paying into the fund but still had retirees collecting a pension.

The problem is that too many companies went bankrupt. There are not enough companies paying into the fund. If there is enough money in the fund, everyone still gets a pension.

The problem is that there is not enough money in the fund. So cuts have to be made. Is it fair to keep paying a retiree, whose company went bankrupt and is no longer paying into the fund, a pension, and then force a cut to other retirees, whose company is still paying into the fund?

A multi-employer pension fund only works when there are numerous employers paying into the fund. They do not work today.

Now, thanks to the Government, everyone still gets a pension and the hard choices do not have to be made.
 

rod

Retired 22 years
So that op-ed claims anyway haha. The point is, anyone who defrauds us of our money -- retirees and active employees alike -- must be held accountable.
And that is what happened. Central States went broke under the control of Uncle Sam and now Uncle Sam has done the right thing and reimbursed it-----like they should have all along without a YEARS long battle.
 

542thruNthru

Well-Known Member
That was the benefit of a multi-employer pension fund, at one point. If a company went belly up, there were more than enough other companies still paying into the fund to absorb the loss. This was because an employee only received a portion of the money paid into the fund on their behalf by their employer. The other portion covered the loss of bankrupt companies no longer paying into the fund but still had retirees collecting a pension.

The problem is that too many companies went bankrupt. There are not enough companies paying into the fund. If there is enough money in the fund, everyone still gets a pension.

The problem is that there is not enough money in the fund. So cuts have to be made. Is it fair to keep paying a retiree, whose company went bankrupt and is no longer paying into the fund, a pension, and then force a cut to other retirees, whose company is still paying into the fund?

A multi-employer pension fund only works when there are numerous employers paying into the fund. They do not work today.

Now, thanks to the Government, everyone still gets a pension and the hard choices do not have to be made.
My multi employer pension is working. ;)
 

Wally

BrownCafe Innovator & King of Puns

Why is that, what makes your fund different from Central States?
Sounds like they didn't do business with deadbeats.

Za2F4fuz6VPD.jpg
 

Road Dog 56

Well-Known Member
Happy for retirees even though do not know the whole story.

Govt just printing more money?
Worldwide , govts have printed 11 TRILLION new dollars in the sham name of covid and other lame excuses and then everyone wonders why inflation is out of control.

Ya , we got some "stimulus checks" ( welfare ) but we have more than paid that back with interest.
 

542thruNthru

Well-Known Member
Why is that, what makes your fund different from Central States?
I would assume because we also have part timers in our fund and more diversified when it comes to the different crafts that participate in our pension.


Oh and we can't forget. Because the west is just naturally better. ;)
 
Top