Has IBT/CS been a wise steward of our pension?

[wkmac]

Thanks M2C.

From the George Will piece:
In 2003 GM's pension fund needed an infusion from the largest corporate debt offering in history. And the cost of providing health coverage for 1.1 million GM workers, retirees and dependents is estimated to be $5.6 billion this year. Their coverage is enviable -- at most, small co-payments for visits to doctors and for pharmaceuticals, but no deductibles or monthly premiums.

GM says health expenditures -- $1,525 per car produced; there is more health care than steel in a GM vehicle's price tag -- are one of the main reasons it lost $1.1 billion in the first quarter of 2005......

Going right along with what OK said about the health care situation, Mr. Will if what he stated is correct and base on some of the things the CS folks said to us in Atlanta concerning health care costs I'd think this is so, health care maybe more the threat than a stinking stock market and this could also be a drain on Corp. America's bottomline along with the cost of oil to cause the market to stink. Are we more in need to look long term at health costs and if curing that or coming up with some solution then could the retirement part begin to take care of itself? This is a question on my part and not a statement so any thoughts would be most welcome. I am starting to wonder if in fact this just may be the case as when the new rules for retirement were laid out so was the co-pay doubled, which I had no problem with (long overdue IMO) and we saw other changes just on the healthcare side for current employees and I haven't even brought up the cost to current and future retirees.

Trick,
There are a lot of quite sideline UPSers who have watched this very thing real close and are expressing the very same concern. I can throw a rock and hit corp. and when the MIP changes happened a corp manager I knew was up my way and we talked about it and he understood the whys and what fors but he told me straight up that if we ever get the chance to change our pension try my best to go with a system where I get the money and no one else controls or has their hands on it. He's a loyal and damn good UPSer and I'd go to hell with 5 gallons of gas to put the fires out if he ask me to do because I'd know I could because otherwise he wouldn't ask and to hear him say what he said was not so much eye opening but it did just reconfirm what I already believed was the real answer. UPS is gotta protect UPS first and foremost and I understand that and have no problem and if scarificing one or many is what it takes then it will happen. It's not personal, it's business but boy do they not like it when we do it back. LOL!!!!!

 

[sawman]

OK2, I have been studying the CS fund a little deeper and I agree with your analogy on the state of the multi-employer fund. I for one can admit when I am mistaken.
As far as the 7000.00 dollars a month is concerned, if we are not intitled to this.
How do you explain that some UPSers are already getting this amount if UPS is not paying enough to cover it?

 

[sawman]

On another note:
It is my opinion that one of the main problems with UPSers pension, health care, and working conditions is UPSers unwillingness to participate, discuss, or support any effort by others to improve the situation that we all are in.
This is proven any time someone makes a comment on a message board. You constantly here show us proof.
My opinion is that this is the problem. UPSers are always wanting something handed to them in a silver spoon, without raising a finger for it.
It seems to me that if you think something is not right, then prove it wrong. But that would involve putting forth effort.
I am not speaking of all UPSers, because there is a handful who do put forth the effort, but the majority want lift a finger, even to save their futures. They will sit back and let a small group carry the burden.
Whatever the solution may be to our retirement funds problems, the number one thing that all of us must do in order for this problem to be solved is to get as many UPSers involved as we possible can.

 

[ok2bclever]

That isn't a UPS worker thing, it's human nature to wait and let someone else do it.

As for the 7000 part, it is easy to promise a figure, but that doesn't mean it is supportable.

Realize, I am not necessarily saying it isn't supportable as I admit I am not a qualified financial CPA or anything.

However, as I have stated before UPS is a relatively young workforce so the system hasn't been actually tested on whether it can support itself.

The greatest asset the UPS only funds have is superb demographics, few retirees, lots of workers.

Obviously, switching to a UPS only pension fund would create a superior fund for UPS people at this time as the percentage of retired and retiring non-UPS Teamsters is far higher than the amount that are UPS people.

That will change in time, but for now it would benefit us for the section involved in the new fund.

The danger is that switching would hasten or directly cause the collapse of the old fund and as I understand it under current policies we would be drawing from the old fund for all credit so far and from the new fund for future credit.

For those of us with significant time in the old fund anything that contributes to it's collapse would not be a good thing as we would lose 2/3rds of our monthly income if/when that happens.

Nothing is simple and where money is concerned, especially retirement money, nothing should be taken for granted.

Any suggestions to solutions are welcome, but they must stand investigation and reality.

PS - Sawman, I appreciate your honesty and as stated several times I believed you were not purposefully trying to misinform anyone.

It's hard for any of us to fully understand all the ramifications as neither party to this is willing to be fully upfront and cooperative in supplying all the facts, not UPS or the Teamsters.

 

[ups79]

sounds to me that a lot are finally starting to question your creditiabilty, sawman. I have been questioning you since day one. I assume you will seek flight any day now.

 

[ok2bclever]

Actually, for some reason you have been virtually attacking his character from day one which is different.

I can understand you not liking anyone potentially messing with the sweetheart deal you personally are sitting with there in your little Chicago local, but this unrelenting attack on the individual rather than the idea is deplorable.

I appreciate your character Sawman for admitting perhaps it isn't a simple cause scenario regarding the CS problem.

 

[sawman]

Thanks OK2, My only motive is to pass info along that I come apon from many different sources in an effort to get UPSers interested and involved, as I stated before, I beleive that this is vital to solving our problem.
UPS79, Although you may wise that I would as you state( take flight), I'm not going anywhere until we have answers and solutions. So, stick in there, although we don't agree on much, at least you're getting involved.

 

[ezrider]

The danger is that switching would hasten or directly cause the collapse of the old fund and as I understand it under current policies we would be drawing from the old fund for all credit so far and from the new fund for future credit.

For those of us with significant time in the old fund anything that contributes to it's collapse would not be a good thing as we would lose 2/3rds of our monthly income if/when that happens.

Sawman, there's the rub. Wkmac and I may not agree on who earns what, but I would agree with him that if there is a pullout from the Taft-Hartley plans then the short-timers and retirees need to have guarantees also. If we stand by and watch the company disregard them, then we help set a precedent where the company could just as well disregard us down the line if they get the opportunity. That essentially is robbing Peter to pay Paul and we don't want another train wreck.

Some tidbits I picked up from the July 21st,2004 article from citypages.com were that 4500 companies contributed to CSPF. UPS's share was over 50% of the total amount contributed. That tells you how quickly it would capitulate if UPS pulls out altogether. The article also states that UPS has pressured the trustees of many plans to hold the line and even cut benefits until the plans can show sufficient funding levels.

Ok2bclever in another thread some time ago pointed out how the company passed the buck when it had come to I think healthcare insurance at a time when they could have backed up thier talk about being concerned about not having more control over our health and welfare and yet they testify on Capitol Hill that if only given the chance... (feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken on that Clever)

What I'm getting at here Sawman is that if the company is pulling strings behind some of the reductions of CSPF and others then just maybe they might try to set the stage to induce a panic by rank and file drivers to dump the Teamsters out of fear. Begging the management to take over the pension isn't going to get us any better deal in 2008. They know if we are scared of losing it all, that we might settle for 50 cents on the dollar for fear of having nothing.

Nobody is more dissapointed in the IBT than I am, but lets not make the mistake of being hoodwinked into doing the company's dirty work for them. If they want the Teamsters out badly enough, then we should be able to get a deal where past, present and maybe even future hourlies can keep all that they have sacrificed for.

 

[trickpony1]

ezrider,
Valid point!
The company is skilled at covert tactics such as fear and intimidation.
They are also shrewd enough to use that fear to incite the mass panic you refer to.

 

[wkmac]

Trick,
Along your line commenting earlier about the MIP I haven't kept up with the MIP thread until you mentioned it so I did a little backtracking and we'd all do well checking this out from time to time. I truly believe especially the baseline supervisors got thrown to the wolves just so Glenlake could add almost a nickel to the bottomline to satisfy a bunch of whiners on Wall Street. If they will do this to their own what would they do to us if they got half a chance?

BTW:I know many of us hourlies could have much to say about the MIP but we need to stay out of that forum (other than reading) and let those management folks have free reign to discuss this without one of us going over and making a comment to stir the pot. If you noticed none of them have come into this forum with an Ha! Ha! Ha! I told you so attitude or any other comment for that fact. I'm sure they are watching to some degree but they are showing us respect and letting us openly hash this one out. We should do the same for those guys with the MIP. JMO.

Besides, I've always felt the baseline supervisors have more in common with us than the suits up the foodchain and right now some of them are seeing that more and more.

 

[robonono]

To continue with wkmac's comment, I have been very impressed with the quality and quantity of intelligent discussions ongoing in several of these threads. Most impressive

 

[trickpony1]

robonono,
I agree. This board doesn't have the filth and name calling that some other boards have. Perhaps there is a higher caliber group of people here. I am impressed also.

 

[sawman]

Speaking of UPS and its role in the mess we are in and their responsibility to do something about it.
Through bits and pieces that I hear, it is my gut feeling that come 2008 the company is going to draw the line and tell the Teamsters that their contract has expired and they have no intentions of negotiating another with them.
This is why I thing it is imperative that UPS employees have some form of organization in place by 2008.
I state again, this is my opinion and gut feeling.

 

[trickpony1]

Wkmac,
The intent of my comments WAS NOT to rub anybody's nose in anything. I was trying to establish a commonality between management and the hourly and illustrate to the non-believer that the company is capable of screwing everyone.....a real concern especially with the pension/contract issue looming.
I will respect your thoughts and those of management and refrain from further comment on that issue. Thanks.

 

[ok2bclever]

Sawman,

I believe you are dreaming.

I believe UPS is more likely to look at a Teamster union that becomes more dependent on them year after year as a possible pet poodle that they can use to control and pacify their employees with.

Why would they give that up?

 

[ups79]

sawman must not be able to get enough converts, now he is really using scare tactics. only my opinion. If sawman is really a UPS employee, doesn't he have any other comments on any other thread in this message board? Just asking. I know the answer "visit the website".

 

[sawman]

UPs79,
90% of the threads on here have to do with package car issues, I am a Feeder driver and have no reason to comment on package car issues.
As far as UPS and 2008, I stand on me opinion, I think that UPS knows that the hourlies want walk another picket line for the Teamsters and they will use that to get rid of the Teamsters once and for all.

 

[wkmac]

Don't know how many saw this in yesterday's news but it worth taking note of. It does give good argument for those opposed to a or any company run plan although CS in one of their recent magazine issues discussed what would happen if the gov't took over our fund and some suggested this might be a precursor to this really happening. That did give pause for thought but thankfully so far this hasn't happened. The more and more I think on this folks the more I believe the problem is the medical not the retirement part itself and I'll give you my reasons why. First off they vastly raised the premiums a retiree has to pay with a declining scale from 57 to 62 years of age. Now why 62? Isn't 62 one of the earliest ages you can qualify for medicare which by law becomes your primary coverage once you reach certain age brackets? If so this in a sense gets CS off the hook for a bulk of cost coverage. Most of the formulas I've seen have those of us with 20 years or more at the time of the CS cuts being able to walk away at 62' with the max. payout if you have the years service along with the least amount of out of pocket for the insurance premiums. Fall somewhere outside that employee group and it looks like 65 years of age is the magic number. Will this all change if the Federal gov't rolls up the coverage ages for medicare and social security? Most all agree that even with all the coverage over social security and the related concerns or non-concerns, pick your political poison, the real trouble on the immediate horizon is medicare which our esteemed sorry asses in Washington on bothsides won't talk about or give the time of day too. Could what we see on the larger scale with Social Security showing some longterm concerns true but the medicare side being in a real dicey situation almost right now be a mirror image so to speak of what we are seeing in out own pension plans? Just thinking out loud with this whole side of medical costs just to see what thoughts and ideas others had.

Trickpony,
Although I thought your observation about the MIP, thrift plan was dead on my other comments concerning how we express opinions to say the management folks about their current MIP problem was not directed at you. If you will noticed I used terms like we, many of us and yes I was even including myself. There was a time many of us and yes many even myself would have gone to the MIP Redesign thread and popped off with "We told you so" or "and you wanted us to trust big brown" but that hasn't happened and you could make the argument, maybe not in the end a valid one, that those type of comments could be justified. On the flip side, none of the management folks have been overhere blasting us with "Well you struck for it in 97' so live with it" and yep there is a thread of truth to that on the surface but I think there was a whole lot more to it and I also think the pension offer was a last ditch effort by the company to soil the strike impact as much as they could and to be honest I'd do the same thing in their position. I do agree they knew something was coming and whether or not the offer was really genuine will really never truly be known IMO. We can only speculate. The bottomline is bothsides are facing situations that aren't good. With our current pension problems and no telling what looms on the horizon and now management is slapped with a compensation cut which IMO will force more good folks to look towards the door as an option coupled with the fact many good folks now hourly who were thinking management may decide to stay where they are. Through all this both sides held their tongues and that was the real point. I consider that a good thing and a positive. As I said, those of us in the trenches whether hourly or management have a lot more in common than either we realize or it probably more than we want to admit.

Sawman,
There's several problems with your bust the union idea. I think OK2BC has it dead on that the IBT is now the pet toy of Glenlake and getting even moreso by the day. However, if we did go on strike in 2008' the way some management folks feel right now I'd not be surprised to see some of them out there with us but I just don't think that will happen either way. I know down South you'd have a large group of especially FTer's who just might not walk out to begin with and you have a good percentage of PTer's in numerous locations outside say the really big hubs who are small business owners during the day and use UPS for the insurnace coverage who aren't in the union to begin with and wouldn't walk and a segement of the college students probably either wouldn't or wouldn't stay out long especially is they saw a large segement of FTer's going across. UPS doesn't have to worry about a strike as based on what I see it will fall on it's face almost from the start. Based on what I hear out of the Carolina's you too know full good and well how many drivers have left the IBT completely and do you think they will honor a IBT picketline if that happens in 08'? Who you kiddin' Son!

 

[wkmac]

ups79,
I'll say this for sawman that at least he's willing to promote an idea that to be honest at least in the south is very widely popular and that is a UPS only employee union. In Atlanta 15 or so years ago UPS members were able to get a UPS only local and although the union leadership at the time did this as a political manuver if was widely popular but that leadership was voted out and the UPS local was collapsed back into the old local. To this day a wide degree of folks regret letting that happened but it opened many folk's eye that we could have our own union and this was accelerated with the pension cuts coupled with large dues increases. There is a growing element out there who feel like sawman and it continues to grow. I'm starting to see and hear talk of APWA at work and it's coming in with Feeder drivers. You may not like it but the ideas are starting to spread and the feeder drivers are the pony express of information so it's just a matter of time before the ideas spread out farther. Going into the 2008' contract and various IBT elections is great timing for this. Whether APWA is the perfect solution I can't say but you can bet dollars to donuts I'll use it like a baseball bat on our officials as we all should to at the least get IBT to do it's job overseeing our interests no matter what anyone else does.

 

[sawman]

WKmac,
That is what I said, if the IBT called a strike it wouldn't be honored. I know in the south (cs) it would be business as usual and that would spell the end of the IBT at UPS.
Also, the IBT being the companies "Lap Dog Pet", is all the more reason to look elsewhere for our representation and H/W.