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 Discussions
Memories From The '97' Strike........
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="PobreCarlos" data-source="post: 1022571" data-attributes="member: 16651"><p>It wasn't "the Market downturns" that were the undoing of the more insolvent of the Teamster trusts....rather, as "legally independent" as they were, they suffered because [1] the TEAMSTERS couldn't maintain in business the employers they had already organized (I'm trying to tread easily here!), and [2] the TEAMSTERS couldn't replace the employers they lost by organizing new ones. "Yes", there were "Market downturns"....but there are ALWAYS "Market downturns", and they affect ALL investing institutions equally. But, regardless of the market, you simply can't keep a trust plan like those of the Teamster multi-employer variety above water if, in the business sense, you "kill" those entities that sustain it. Who's to pay them? The "suckers" that are left? If so, that's something that potential employers who AREN'T yet "organized" readily see....and, because of it, they AVOID ORGANIZATION LIKE THE PLAGUE! The result, of course, is that the pensions slide even further into insolvency, as they find it impossible to replace contributors that have "gone south". </p><p></p><p>I'd assert that the "weakest link" in multi-employer trust concept was THE TEAMSTERS THEMSELVES! They apparently couldn't help but put their employers out of business....AND THERE WENT THE SAFETY FACTOR OF SO-CALLED "MULTI-EMPLOYERS"! Now employers who are no longer in business no longer make contributions as well....yet members who once worked at those firms keep expecting benefits.</p><p></p><p>Sorry, but there's no way you can put ANY blame on the employer side of the trust in situations like that of Central States; the Teamsters brought that deplorable situation on all by themselves. And AFTER they brought it on, they continued to expect the few remaining employers to bail them out. From my perspective (and that of many others as well), the pensions of UPSers would have had a lot better prospects *IF* they hadn't been weighed-down by the anchor of CSPF all those years. After all, money squandered is money squandered. Instead of trying to prop-up the pensions of the thousands upon thousands of once-upon-time Teamsters employees of other CLOSED employers, that money would have been far better spent if it had been dedicated to UPS Teamsters alone</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PobreCarlos, post: 1022571, member: 16651"] It wasn't "the Market downturns" that were the undoing of the more insolvent of the Teamster trusts....rather, as "legally independent" as they were, they suffered because [1] the TEAMSTERS couldn't maintain in business the employers they had already organized (I'm trying to tread easily here!), and [2] the TEAMSTERS couldn't replace the employers they lost by organizing new ones. "Yes", there were "Market downturns"....but there are ALWAYS "Market downturns", and they affect ALL investing institutions equally. But, regardless of the market, you simply can't keep a trust plan like those of the Teamster multi-employer variety above water if, in the business sense, you "kill" those entities that sustain it. Who's to pay them? The "suckers" that are left? If so, that's something that potential employers who AREN'T yet "organized" readily see....and, because of it, they AVOID ORGANIZATION LIKE THE PLAGUE! The result, of course, is that the pensions slide even further into insolvency, as they find it impossible to replace contributors that have "gone south". I'd assert that the "weakest link" in multi-employer trust concept was THE TEAMSTERS THEMSELVES! They apparently couldn't help but put their employers out of business....AND THERE WENT THE SAFETY FACTOR OF SO-CALLED "MULTI-EMPLOYERS"! Now employers who are no longer in business no longer make contributions as well....yet members who once worked at those firms keep expecting benefits. Sorry, but there's no way you can put ANY blame on the employer side of the trust in situations like that of Central States; the Teamsters brought that deplorable situation on all by themselves. And AFTER they brought it on, they continued to expect the few remaining employers to bail them out. From my perspective (and that of many others as well), the pensions of UPSers would have had a lot better prospects *IF* they hadn't been weighed-down by the anchor of CSPF all those years. After all, money squandered is money squandered. Instead of trying to prop-up the pensions of the thousands upon thousands of once-upon-time Teamsters employees of other CLOSED employers, that money would have been far better spent if it had been dedicated to UPS Teamsters alone [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Memories From The '97' Strike........
Top