Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Partners
Management Pension Changes Impact (On Topic)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="APeonInALandOfCorpLackies" data-source="post: 2945730" data-attributes="member: 67558"><p>When I looked at the "rah-rah", it's not as bad as you think, look your 401k will make up for it!, I wanted to pull my hair out.</p><p>Their "projections" on value made some pretty ridiculous, near outlandish assumptions.</p><p></p><p>The worst ones were:</p><p>1) 6% return on investment, even if true, is volatile and not securely "guaranteed" like the pension. At least it's "feasible", unlike #2.</p><p>2) Assumption that we will get a 3% raise <strong>every year</strong>. The ratings systems have made that damn near impossible. Add in the hard salary cap and it's completely unrealistic. Even getting "exception" rating can = 0% raise if you're at or even near cap. Why would they even use 3% when the "norm" for the average employee is 2.5% (as long as they're not at/near cap)???</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">a) The annualized base salary is waaay off. Like mine is overinflated by $20k. Unless they're including other "benefits" (which they shouldn't if it's the <strong>base</strong> salary.</p><p>3) All of the graphics showed a single life annuity to "prop up" the value when, what 90%+?, of people probably take 100% joint survivor?</p><p>4) Doesn't clarify whether their assumption is that you're contributing $18k (or $24k if you're in catch-up land) when determining the projected value of the 401k.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="APeonInALandOfCorpLackies, post: 2945730, member: 67558"] When I looked at the "rah-rah", it's not as bad as you think, look your 401k will make up for it!, I wanted to pull my hair out. Their "projections" on value made some pretty ridiculous, near outlandish assumptions. The worst ones were: 1) 6% return on investment, even if true, is volatile and not securely "guaranteed" like the pension. At least it's "feasible", unlike #2. 2) Assumption that we will get a 3% raise [B]every year[/B]. The ratings systems have made that damn near impossible. Add in the hard salary cap and it's completely unrealistic. Even getting "exception" rating can = 0% raise if you're at or even near cap. Why would they even use 3% when the "norm" for the average employee is 2.5% (as long as they're not at/near cap)??? [INDENT]a) The annualized base salary is waaay off. Like mine is overinflated by $20k. Unless they're including other "benefits" (which they shouldn't if it's the [B]base[/B] salary.[/INDENT] 3) All of the graphics showed a single life annuity to "prop up" the value when, what 90%+?, of people probably take 100% joint survivor? 4) Doesn't clarify whether their assumption is that you're contributing $18k (or $24k if you're in catch-up land) when determining the projected value of the 401k. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Partners
Management Pension Changes Impact (On Topic)
Top