Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bill" data-source="post: 227890" data-attributes="member: 5483"><p>The funds in NY and NJ are in bad shape because UPS has control.&nbsp;&nbsp; (correct me if I am wrong).&nbsp; As for the APWA, this new union would be controlling the pension fund (as CS and the Teamsters do now), but would not have the liabilities of funding employees of other companies that the multi-employee fund has now. Under the present situation, UPS employees receive only 40% of the money that UPS contributes, but the APWA, being a single pension plan that represents only UPS people, we would receive all (100%) of UPS contributions.&nbsp; Is it better to receive 40% or 100%?&nbsp; This is a no brainer.&nbsp; By sticking with a failing fund(CS), we can never get an increase in our pension under the RED ZONE amendment signed into law until the fund is 100% funded, which can not occur.&nbsp; We could however, be forced to take additional cuts in order to stabilize the pension fund.&nbsp; A change MUST be made now.&nbsp;&nbsp; Let me ask you a question.&nbsp; If you went into a grocery store and bought a pound of meat for $10, but only received 4 ounces for $10, would you accept this and go home happy?&nbsp; No you wouldn&#039;t.&nbsp; You would demand that you receive the full pound of meat.&nbsp; The same could be said for our pension plan.&nbsp; WE WANT THE FULL AMOUNT.&nbsp; IF THEY (TEAMSTERS) CAN&#039;T DELIVER, THEN WE SHOULD TAKE OUR BUSINESS SOMEWHERE ELSE (APWA).</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Bill, post: 227890, member: 5483"] The funds in NY and NJ are in bad shape because UPS has control. (correct me if I am wrong). As for the APWA, this new union would be controlling the pension fund (as CS and the Teamsters do now), but would not have the liabilities of funding employees of other companies that the multi-employee fund has now. Under the present situation, UPS employees receive only 40% of the money that UPS contributes, but the APWA, being a single pension plan that represents only UPS people, we would receive all (100%) of UPS contributions. Is it better to receive 40% or 100%? This is a no brainer. By sticking with a failing fund(CS), we can never get an increase in our pension under the RED ZONE amendment signed into law until the fund is 100% funded, which can not occur. We could however, be forced to take additional cuts in order to stabilize the pension fund. A change MUST be made now. Let me ask you a question. If you went into a grocery store and bought a pound of meat for $10, but only received 4 ounces for $10, would you accept this and go home happy? No you wouldn't. You would demand that you receive the full pound of meat. The same could be said for our pension plan. WE WANT THE FULL AMOUNT. IF THEY (TEAMSTERS) CAN'T DELIVER, THEN WE SHOULD TAKE OUR BUSINESS SOMEWHERE ELSE (APWA). [/QUOTE]

Verification