Is Central States pension fund ready to go under?

[sawdusttv]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Perhaps worth posting to make it easier for some to read?

Teamsters Multiemployer Pensions:
Needed Change May Finally Be on the Way
By William H. Fisher,
Raymond James & Associates
June 8, 2007​

Key Excerpts: Pension Developments Discussed
Unlike single employer plans where the integrity of the pension resides with the contributing company, multiemployer plans commingle the employee pension assets/liabilities of numerous companies, implicitly pooling/diversifying the risk of failure of one company among all other contributors. In essence, if one company fails, the other contributors to the plan, through no fault of their own, would be on the hook for the residual liability tail of the failed company.

The funds are managed by trustees, not the employers, and certain provisions appear governed by the Teamsters, again, not the employers.

The data shows that Central States was $20.4 billion or only 49% funded at the end of 2005, as computed by ERISA using single employer pension plan methodology.

The irony is that these funds in aggregate are significantly under-funded despite the fact that the employers are making relatively enormous annual outlays [over $20,000 per full-time employee per year for pension and healthcare for the major union transportation companies]. As a result of the aforementioned items, according to 2005 Form 5500 ERISA data (the latest liability info available), the five largest Teamster multiemployer pensions, anchored by the poster child, Central States Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund (Central States), are collectively under-funded by a whopping ~$31 billion (or only 64 percent funded).

* * *​

There are fewer companies contributing to these pension plans. The number of trucking companies signed on to a national contract with the Teamsters union dropped from 900 in 1980 to 15 in 2006.

* * *​

Sixty cents of every dollar UPS pays to the pension funds covers the retirement costs of employees who worked for other companies.*​

* * *​

The Central States Pension Plan was only 49 percent funded at the end of 2005, with roughly $21 billion in assets as of the first quarter of 2007.**

* * *​

The ratio of assets to liabilities for the 5 largest Teamster pension plans combined is 62 percent.
Retirees outnumber active participants in the Central States Pension Plan by nearly two to one.***

* * *​

“We strongly believe UPS and its employees would be far better off if it were able to exit the Central States Plan,” said Bill Fisher, Managing Director of Raymond James & Associates.
UPS and other freight carriers (YRC Workdwide, Arkansas Best, and a handful of smaller carriers) belong to scores of multiemployer pension plans. Because of the decline in unionized carriers and the more than 600 closings of Teamster-covered carriers in the freight industry since 1980, the remaining carriers are liable for literally billions of dollars in unfunded pension withdrawal liability. ****
* Source: “UPS Uses Political Clout to Press for Cuts in Pension Benefits,” Bloomberg News, by Jonathan D. Salant and Jay Newton-Small, March 20, 2006.
**Source: “Playing the Freight Card,” Traffic World, by John Gallagher, June 18, 2007.
***Source: Know Your Pension, from ERISA data
**** Source: “Pensions Dominate Teamsters’ Talks with UPS, Freight Carriers,” Logistics Management, June 22, 2007.

Page 12 of this report is were I found the figures about .60 cent of every UPS dollar goes to retirees of other companies.

 

[tieguy]

Of course not. You're just deliberately twisting my words as you usually do so you can appear to be shocked at my stupidity/arrogance/audacity/duplicity/criminality/cunning/etc (circle one) so you can react in seeming disbelief.

scratch stupidity, arrogance yes, audacity so what/ duplicity starting to wonder/criminality absolutely not/ cunning definitely. Don't sell your efforts short. You communicate well and you definitely know what you're selling here and how you're doing it.

You've done a lot of homework. A lot of what you post is interesting to both sides of the fence. You do in my humble opinion tend to go overboard in allowing your biases against management and the company taint your analysis. This I believe discredits your argument.

I do see a clear effort on your part to sell multi employer plans as the solution and was shocked to see you try to present CS as a recovering rebounding plan. And yes it does make me suspicious when you post here anonymously and do so with what appears to be one agenda.
If you're selling those plans then why not say so in 100 words or less?Instead of telling us who you are or are not why not tell us what your agenda is here. Why not focus on the solutions instead of telling us why every other option is screwed up or fed by some management conspiracy? We've heard all the management is out to steal our pensions rhetoric 30,000 times since 97. How about some solutions?

 

[tieguy]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Sixth, no one has ever answered my request for an explanation of how it is legal to take so much of one person's money and give it to another. If the Trustees have been doing this for years and haven't been charged and jailed, then what they are doing must be legal. What is the legal basis? If it's illegal, why haven't you filed charges against them to stop it?

I don't understand your hangup with this issue. Thats the whole concept behind a multi employer plan. Those plans are not currently partitioned therefore it all goes in one fund for all retirees.

Seventh, UPS runs a workplace where it is very difficult for most employees to last for the decades that are required to actually qualify for a significant pension.(correlate to the concept behind multi employer plans, employee leaves ups, works for another teamster company and still retires. Whats the issue?)

Many employees must settle for no pension, or a reduced pension, or a delayed pension. (er umm..bull..cough ...it)
Few qualify for the maximum benefit. ( Define few, correlate a comparison to what was paid in for them. Did those recieving less pay as much into the plan as those who recieved the max?)

It isn't enough that the money was contributed on your behalf. You must *also* qualify to receive it back in the form of a pension, by putting in the required number of years and be the required age. Most UPSers, as the result of the way UPS runs its business, and the policies it adopts, just don't qualify to receive back all the money they put in.
Again the multi employer plan still allows for them to work other teamster jobs and still retire if they feel ups is too harsh a job to retire with.

The money is, in effect, abandoned and becomes the property of the fund. This is largely UPS' fault, (Is ups administering most or all plans? )although the Teamsters are to blame as well( thanks for begrudginly including the teamsters) for allowing UPS to get away with it.

This is a popular theme of yours thats pretty outrageous to me since I've seen quite a few people retire over the years. Do you have any actual numbers to support this claim which seems to be a major theme of yours? You're using words like most and few to suit your bias's here. Could you come up with tangible verifiable numbers to support this anti company theme of yours? This is to me a terrific example of how you interject your biases into the argument. You can't make a statement this outrageous without backing it up.

 

[tieguy]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Sixth, no one has ever answered my request for an explanation of how it is legal to take so much of one person's money and give it to another. If the Trustees have been doing this for years and haven't been charged and jailed, then what they are doing must be legal. What is the legal basis? If it's illegal, why haven't you filed charges against them to stop it?

I don't understand your hangup with this issue. Thats the whole concept behind a multi employer plan. Those plans are not currently partitioned therefore it all goes in one fund for all retirees.

Seventh, UPS runs a workplace where it is very difficult for most employees to last for the decades that are required to actually qualify for a significant pension.(correlate to the concept behind multi employer plans, employee leaves ups, works for another teamster company and still retires. Whats the issue?)

Many employees must settle for no pension, or a reduced pension, or a delayed pension. (er umm..bull..cough ...it)
Few qualify for the maximum benefit. ( Define few, correlate a comparison to what was paid in for them. Did those recieving less pay as much into the plan as those who recieved the max?)

It isn't enough that the money was contributed on your behalf. You must *also* qualify to receive it back in the form of a pension, by putting in the required number of years and be the required age. Most UPSers, as the result of the way UPS runs its business, and the policies it adopts, just don't qualify to receive back all the money they put in.
Again the multi employer plan still allows for them to work other teamster jobs and still retire if they feel ups is too harsh a job to retire with.

The money is, in effect, abandoned and becomes the property of the fund. This is largely UPS' fault, (Is ups administering most or all plans? )although the Teamsters are to blame as well( thanks for begrudginly including the teamsters) for allowing UPS to get away with it.

This is a popular theme of yours thats pretty outrageous to me since I've seen quite a few people retire over the years. Do you have any actual numbers to support this claim which seems to be a major theme of yours? You're using words like most and few to suit your bias's here. Could you come up with tangible verifiable numbers to support this anti company theme of yours? This is to me a terrific example of how you interject your biases into the argument. You can't make a statement this outrageous without backing it up.

Did you read this one jon. I thought it was a classic on how you spread misinformation interjected with your biases.

 

[tieguy]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Did you read this one jon. I thought it was a classic on how you spread misinformation interjected with your biases.

Jon I don't see a response ? You seem to be great at posting half truths anonymously but seem to be reluctant to back up your ramblings? Whats the matter jon jon won't the minister of misinformation let you respond?

 

[tieguy]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Jon I don't see a response ? You seem to be great at posting half truths anonymously but seem to be reluctant to back up your ramblings? Whats the matter jon jon won't the minister of misinformation let you respond?

It seems our self annointed pension expert is hiding from defending his misinformation. Perhaps his combo / carwash job is taxing his ability to respond. It must be a stressfull job and surprising he took it after 30 years of seniority. I'm curious Jon mentioned other message boards he frequents where he feels the conditions are right for him to register. Has anyone seen him posting on any other boards? Perhaps we can view those boards and see what makes him so much more comfortable there to spread his half-truths

 

[705red]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

It seems our self annointed pension expert is hiding from defending his misinformation. Perhaps his combo / carwash job is taxing his ability to respond. It must be a stressfull job and surprising he took it after 30 years of seniority. I'm curious Jon mentioned other message boards he frequents where he feels the conditions are right for him to register. Has anyone seen him posting on any other boards? Perhaps we can view those boards and see what makes him so much more comfortable there to spread his half-truths

Tie leave it alone!

 

[tieguy]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Tie leave it alone!

why? the guy makes some pretty wild comments loaded with his own biases under the guise of being a pension expert. He then runs off and hides when I ask him to explain his bias laden posts. He needs to be able to defend or explain his information. If he can't defend his postings then maybe he should get out of the posting business.

 

[705red]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

why? the guy makes some pretty wild comments loaded with his own biases under the guise of being a pension expert. He then runs off and hides when I ask him to explain his bias laden posts. He needs to be able to defend or explain his information. If he can't defend his postings then maybe he should get out of the posting business.

Tie everybody is entitled to their opinion, and everyone has the oppurtunity to research in detail what information they choose to. Just because someone sees it one way doesnt mean everyone will see it the same way. Tie im not taking sides on this between you an jon, because trithfully i have not spent alot of time researching all of his information, but i believe that your going a little to far with the attacks on him, and you should probably lay off a little, you didnt like it when susie was handing it to you!

 

[tieguy]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Tie everybody is entitled to their opinion, and everyone has the oppurtunity to research in detail what information they choose to. Just because someone sees it one way doesnt mean everyone will see it the same way. Tie im not taking sides on this between you an jon, because trithfully i have not spent alot of time researching all of his information, but i believe that your going a little to far with the attacks on him, and you should probably lay off a little, you didnt like it when susie was handing it to you!

Interesting. Jon who posts here to spread more then his opinion. In fact a clear campaign of anonymous misinformation. And you constantly running to his defense. If jon is entitled to his opinion then he should be a man and stand up for it. Instead he continues to hide from me. You claim that you want everyone to enter this process open minded but yet you continue to try to defend the minister of misinformation. You continue to try to defend someone who goes above and beyond the concept of posting his opinion. Who claims to have so much knowledge about pensions but yet feels the need to constantly slant everything he presents as facts with his own biases. And when I challenge the man to actually defend his ravings you try to stifle me. If Jon should be allowed to post his opinions then I should be allowed to challenge those opinions. But yet you only seem inclined to allow Jon his opinions not me mine. Why not ask jon to shut up?

 

[705red]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Interesting. Jon who posts here to spread more then his opinion. In fact a clear campaign of anonymous misinformation. And you constantly running to his defense. If jon is entitled to his opinion then he should be a man and stand up for it. Instead he continues to hide from me. You claim that you want everyone to enter this process open minded but yet you continue to try to defend the minister of misinformation. You continue to try to defend someone who goes above and beyond the concept of posting his opinion. Who claims to have so much knowledge about pensions but yet feels the need to constantly slant everything he presents as facts with his own biases. And when I challenge the man to actually defend his ravings you try to stifle me. If Jon should be allowed to post his opinions then I should be allowed to challenge those opinions. But yet you only seem inclined to allow Jon his opinions not me mine. Why not ask jon to shut up?

Tie you are allowed your opinion, but when you keep stalking the thread with no response from the poster its badgering, unless of course its a two person argument which in this case it is not.

 

[tieguy]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Tie you are allowed your opinion, but when you keep stalking the thread with no response from the poster its badgering, unless of course its a two person argument which in this case it is not.

Kind of hard to badger someone who moves around anonymously. You just keep firing flares and hope you find him hiding in the shadows.
The guy has annointed himself as the resident pension expert. I have asked him to back up his wild claims. What you call badgering is actually exposing him for his tactics of misinformation.

 

[wyobill]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Kind of hard to badger someone who moves around anonymously. You just keep firing flares and hope you find him hiding in the shadows.
The guy has annointed himself as the resident pension expert. I have asked him to back up his wild claims. What you call badgering is actually exposing him for his tactics of misinformation.

Tie what happens to our years with CS if UPS pulls out ? Will UPS assume our pension? Many of us have 25 yrs with CS. Was UPS
going to assume our years we had in CS during the 97 campaign?

 

[JonFrum]

Below are the Net Assets of the Central States Pension Fund. The figures are as of Dec. 31 of each year. "Net Assets," are the monies actually available to pay present and future benefits. Liabilities (such as investment losses,) and current expenses (such as administrative costs, and retirement benefit payments,) have already been subtracted.

As a result of market losses in 2000-2002, the fund's Net Assets were reduced to $15.4 Billion. It has grown every year since, and is now probably about $21 billion. The Second Quarter Financial Report (thru June 30th, 2007) should be posted soon on the Central States website to make it official. How can anyone look at these figures and say they are going down, down, down, when, in fact, they are clearly going up, up, up? I've never claimed the fund is in great shape, despite what Tieguy keeps saying. But I do say you should use the latest information available, and from the most accurate sources. And you must acknowledge True Facts when they are presented to you. Facts are facts.

Central States Pension Fund Net Assets (in Billions):
2007: $21 (estimate)
2006: $20.7
2005: $19.3
2004: $18.7
2003: $17.7
2002: $15.4

- - - - - - - - -
Consolidated Freightways went bankrupt a while ago and owed the Central States Pension Fund $318.7 million in Withdrawal Liability. They also owed $27 million in unpaid hourly contributions. Since this is a big company, its bankruptcy should hurt the Central States Fund and stick UPS with the burden of having 60% of its contributions redirected away from the UPSers for whom it was intended, and into the retirement checks of Consolidated Freightways retirees. Right?

Well, not so fast. The $27 million represents unpaid contributions. I don't know if Central States will succeed in collecting the $27 million in Bankruptcy Court, but if they do CFers will be credited with those contributions and will thus earn a few more months of pension credit. Then they will earn no more credits, unless they go out and get a job with another employer who also contributes to Central States. If the $27 million is not collected, the CFers will not receive any credit for that money. Period. In other words, the potential loss of this money is a CF employees' problem, not a Central States Pension Fund problem.

As to the $318.7 million, Central States has already recovered $45 million and says substantial additional recovery is anticipated. Tieguy may not think recovering money from bankrupt companies amounts to much, but I say, $45 million here, $45 million there, pretty soon you're talkin' real money. We need to wait until the full recovery process has run its course. Only then can we see how much money CF owed CS and didn't pay. We also need to count the money recovered by CS as the result of other types of lawsuits. For example, $5.3 million was recovered from the AOL-TimeWarner merger because of securities fraud . Money has also been recovered from HealthSouth, with more expected. These, and other recoveries, reduce the overall level of the original stock market losses.

Bear in mind that CF has been contributing money into the fund for many years on behalf of its employees who thus earn pension credits, just like UPS contributes on behalf of UPSers. The lion's share of CF retirees' benefits will be paid out of the billions and billions CF has contributed for just that purpose, over all those years. Those billions are part of the $21 billion in assets in the trust fund. It's only the ultimately unpaid portion of the Withdrawal Liability payments that is a worry. Normally, all unpaid portions of Withdrawal Liability of all bankrupt employers are distributed fairly amongst all surviving employers in the fund. This is how Multi-employer plans self-insure. This is the basis of all insurance arangements throught our economy. Contributions are pooled, and risk is spread amongst all participants. (They also have supplemental insurance thru the PBGC.)

To keep things simple, let's assume UPS must pay the entire unpaid portion of CF's Withdrawal Liability singlehandedly. Well, we have seen that number has already been reduced $45 million to $273.7 million. And that further reductions are anticipated. So how can CF retirees, no matter how greedy they are, possibly be consuming 60% of all the contributions UPS makes, year after year? Like I've been saying for about a year now, I don't want yet another poster to tell me yet again that "60% of UPS contributions go to fund the retirement of other bankrupt employers," I want someone to PROVE it to me. SHOW me. EXPLAIN it to me. I just don't believe it. The numbers don't add up. UPS' contributions are so huge, and the unpaid Withdrawal Liability of CF, whatever it ultimately is determined to be, is so (relatively) small. It's nowhere near 60%.

 

[tieguy]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Tie what happens to our years with CS if UPS pulls out ? Will UPS assume our pension? Many of us have 25 yrs with CS. Was UPS
going to assume our years we had in CS during the 97 campaign?

yes in 97. 97 was the time to buy them out. It woud have been much cheaper in 97 to do so. Changes in the laws since have made it much more expensive. At this point I don't know how 2007 is going to workout.

 

[Cole]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Jon,

With all you have said CS has and will recoup, why have we had no improvements in our plans?

Our company is too successful for us to have such a pitiful pension plan under CS, and their rules such as the no work after retirement, or no work that could be Teamsters, are plain pathetic! They need to change that garbage and be quick about it, because they are standing to lose their UPS portions as we all know, and we haven't as of yet seen a good reason to stay with CS.

 

[area43]

This is my advice to the APWA. First, I believe that you would have alot more broad range of support nationally if you focused more on putting the weekly UPS contributions into a seperate account, strickly with that employee s name on it. So simple, huh. That account could be the 401k, Roth IRA or just a plan IRA. APWA supporters I honestly feel your pain and I dont say that lightly. If I was in your shoes, and again I said this before I would be extremely pissed to put it lightly. I have almost 20 years and all of it has been in a pkg car(also 2 1/2 yrs pt loader), no offense to the feeders, but to be honest to go 25 or 30 years in a pkg car is saying alot. I thought about feeders but it just dosen't interest me as of yet. We had one driver retired sometime ago, drove the downtown route for 25 years. Wow, that guy was totally messed up physically. I truly felt sorry for him. Anyhow, I got the run after him and left to another after 3 yrs. Im tuff, folks LOL So that goes to show how tuff that run was. OOps Rabbit trail.

OK, The pension mess at CS. Folks I believe we have to go back to the basics so to speak. I know you all have heard of this before, their are only two things for sure in life death and tax's. Keep that in mind as I proceed. First, I feel that some think, My opinion of course that somehow we are intitled to a pension. Yes, I can hear the cries now. Don't base everything on the notion that UPS(who is the anchor in the CS plan) will always be in business(I hear more yells) or remain healthy. Remember the big negatives. Possible National Class action lawsuit on the lunch issue which could send stock prices and profit margins crashing to the floor, pending contract negotiations and pressing competition. Especially with todays world climate things don't look to cherrie. Terrorism, can totaly devastate an economy as we can see by 9/11. Gas prices are thru the roof. Just to name a couple. I don't want to sound dome and gloom folks, but lets be honest. I here from so many of you on this board that the way UPS is managing the centers, were on the sure road to destruction. Ok, keep that in mind.

The CS plan is not run by the federal government, but it might just end up that way. Wall Street is taking a BEATING. Take a look at your 401k's and yes it's my money to lose. Unlike Social Security which is run by the government and they can just raise tax's or print more money hehe to take care of any short comings they have. CS is not blessed to have that option CS is like social security(short falls) in some respects.

Ok, reread what I just wrote. Folks the CS plan is in a CRISIS. I believe UPS is liable to pay at least half of what the asking buy out is. Why? I might be wrong but is the pension jointly ran. Maybe it differs from fund to fund. Just so many of those darn things. Confusing at times. Kind of like the tax code. So the blame for its failure can be shared. I believe I might be wrong on this(the sharing part) due to the fact in Va Joint council 83 runs our pension and health care with no company involvement.

This is what needs to be done. Again, Crisis mode. Money that is now in the fund should be pulled out and each UPS employee should be given his fair share,plus maybe a 4% to 6% on top of that for interest per say deposited in a personal fund or account of his choice. This would be based on years of service and contributions made on his behalf by the company(UPS). What's fair is fair folks. Remember, Crisis and world climate uncertiany and you just might not live past tomorrow. Now! Cut out the middle man. The weekly UPS pension checks will start pouring in now combined with lets say your 401k you should have a healthy nest egg with in no time, even if you go with a very conservative investing plan. Excited!! yet. Folks the more hands the pension money passes through the less your going to get. Don't even trust the APWA, when ever there's a human element involved the chance for corruption exist(ex. crazy admin fees 65 million would be terminated). The best one to trust your money with is YOU. ( : This option is surely better than what you have now. Just think, most of us don't even consider us to get no social security(which is supposed to be a sure thing u know taxed funded and all) when we retire. Don't you wish the government would let us control or own retirement and let us just keep those so called tax S.S. donations to ourselves. I feel the CS plan is in the same boat. Power grab over the little guy. Isn't the Teamsters all about giving power back to the little guy, the common laborer. The Teamsters in my opinion is acting like a BIG Corporate GREEDY Giant. Sorry folks I might be over my word limit on post. I will proceed to the next post.

 

[area43]

cont. from permalink 241

Ok let me address the retire's that are in the CS plan. Remember folks, CRISIS. Please go to the history of my post and do a little research and find the post that has some of my input on the retire's. Hint its in one of the 3 CS pensions threads that are running now and no its not in the Jonfrum thread.

Teamsters, Oh those Teamster. I love em but their accounting practices and making promises they know they cannot keep leaves me to wonder. Promises, What I mean here is that they have made promises, basically to give everyone, UPS and non UPS retire's a retirement check to the day you die. Side not , People are living a hell of a lot longer. Wow, Folks they were smart and they got us into believing it. Ok, Retire's its time to face the music. Remember, CRISIS everyone has to do their part and help out this sinking CS titanic(Jon made a similar analogy). Again, Teamsters broken promises. Why should just the(present) working man have to suffer with the thought of possibly getting nothing and your still getting a check. Don't get me wrong, your are in titled to some, but not to the extent the Teamsters had originally promised you. Reality Check. Do the math, add the years of service that they the company you worked for made contribitions on your behalf and add roughly 4 to 6 % Remember most of the companies you worked for have gone out of business.

Some or most of the basically 200,000 retire's I believe in The CS plan have never worked for UPS. Yes, its an MEP(MEP are a bad way to do Pensions, PERIOD) Hey, Jon you told me earlier about how MEP are so great and that SEP are the worse I guess at the present. Well, Jon here is another SEP that' s about too or allready is going to go bust. Right under our noses,folks. Social Security. Ok, retire's CRISIS remember. Teamster Promises that can't be kept. Next, most or some of the retire's companies have gone out of business. So, what do we do then? Teamsters think Hmmmm. We have been taking their companies contributions on their behalf. Don"t really want to give it back to them, even if it theirs and they worked hard for it. Remember folks, Teamster looking out for the common laborer. (teamsters thinking) Hey, I got it lets just make up some bogus promises(dime a dozen) after all we can still get the monthly dues out of him. We also can steal from Peter to pay Paul. MEP, you gotta love it. Pure corrupt Genius. LMAO Folks you just have to laugh or you'll just plan go insane.

Retire's what fair is fair. To be honest, most of you have probably received more than your fair share. Some(alot) of your companies that you have worked for have long ago gone out of business. Have compassion over the present day workers that are about to get a possible royal screwing. Teamsters, sadly to say, sold you a bill of goods. Promises that were never meant to be kept. How could they keep all those promises. There not a business. They don't make a product, etc, etc. Their a parasite when it comes to pensions.

In closing, Retire's its all about planning. Self reliance. I hope and pray that your economics affairs are in order, because if and when UPS pulls the plug so to speak. The CS titanic will go down. Thus the feds will have to take over in which case you will be making a lot less than what you are making now. Look at the Bright side. At least your getting something. The rest of the presentlly working CS laborers have the worry of getting nothing.

Oh, by the way Jon on your possible unethical practices. As you know by now I have passed alot of your posts to my center manager and acct rep. I have recently talked to the acct rep in particular. He has also told me some very interesting info. Anyhow, enuff said, Good Morning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Cafers. area 43 out

 

[JonFrum]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Jon,

With all you have said CS has and will recoup, why have we had no improvements in our plans?

Cole,
Because your Plan improved benefits some years ago which the Fund could not fully afford. This left your Fund underfunded to begin with, then the market dropped, making it even more underfunded, then the government changed the funding rules, making it *seem* even worse still. Now, benefit cuts will probably not be fully restored until the Fund's assets improve to a 90% funding level or better.

There are so many problems with the whole Central States situation that I would need to write a book to cover them. But as bad as everything is, I still say the bottom line is the membership could reform things if only they put their mind to it. Unfortunately, as discussions here on Browncafe have demonstrated, there is a tremendous lack of information coupled with a great deal of misinformation being spread. To reform things, first you have to read up on the subject and become a bit of an "armchair expert" on all aspects of the matter. Then you need to band together with others who have done the same and see if you can agree on a set of facts and a strategy to persue. Then, as a group, you need to take action. I don't see this happening in Central States. TDU goes one way, APWA goes another, online posters who claim to support APWA go a third, the Teamsters go a fourth, and the lunitic fringe muddies the waters to insure we are all distracted and confused. It seems you live in the worst of all possible worlds.

I've tried to do my part by posting as much information as I can find, (all public, by the way) and providing links to the original sources so everyone can get the full story. I've also tried to correct some of the many errors floating around. And just look how I am being treated!

By the way, when I said that moving to another fund would have the problem of still working under the same retirement-hostile policies of UPS, I should have added you will also be stuck with the same cast of disruptive characters (posters) as well. The ones that cause so much trouble here on Browncafe and aparently have the run of the place. It's very odd that the moderators don't police this site, and even stranger that Van and Danny don't police their online supporters. Apparently, anyone can say anything. Truth doesn't matter.

 

[Cole]

Re: 60% . . . Where's your PROOF?

Then, as a group, you need to take action. I don't see this happening in Central States. TDU goes one way, APWA goes another, online posters who claim to support APWA go a third, the Teamsters go a fourth, and the lunitic fringe muddies the waters to insure we are all distracted and confused. It seems you live in the worst of all possible worlds.

I find it odd how TDU is defending CS and even Hoffa's Sr's legacy there, yet they are the one's that showed us in yrs past about the corruptive elements at CS, now it's a good deal? As far as CS they are not accountable to us and many of their rules etc...are not even constitutional imho and others, so we can raise all the hell we want, but they are not bound to the very members, and can make whatever rules they pretty much want.

You should post your info Jon, and I do thank you for your research, and know that when we have something more tangible to look at people will be looking more at what you have posted, I would think. I still need to go back and read alot of your links as I haven't yet.