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 Retirement Topics
Pension Agency Faces a New Front
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="ok2bclever" data-source="post: 54908"><p>No, you misunderstand.</p><p></p><p>I am not and have never said that workers are "only using funds from their employers" as all the contributions go into one fund that is invested and pays out benefits to those who have accrued enough credit at the benefit rate they earned accruing that credit.</p><p></p><p>The problem is there is a common misconception here that UPS is somehow paying the retirements for all these various Teamster workers who's companies have gone belly up like those workers are some sort of welfare chits and UPS is the free meal.</p><p></p><p>It seems to be a very popular rallying cry here, but it just ain't accurate.</p><p></p><p>Those workers had companies putting in money for them for EVERY hour/day/year they worked that they got credit for, just like UPS workers.</p><p></p><p>When their company went out of business they stopped accruing any further credit towards a pension, just like would happen to us if UPS went under.</p><p></p><p>If they already had enough credit for a pension, they EARNED it as much as any other worker, including UPS workers.</p><p></p><p>UPS is not paying for them.</p><p></p><p>UPS's liability derives from a plan that is BASED on underfunding by all contributors in relationship to the benefits promised, including UPS.</p><p></p><p>That was fine and acceptable to all companies until recently when the sht hit the fan with the lack of industry growth, bankrupting companies, bad stock years and the baby boom generation growth curve cresting the hump and starting to put pressure on the benefit side of the inadequacy.</p><p></p><p>All remaining companies now must proportionally share the liabilities to this inadequately funded promise.</p><p></p><p>That UPS is currently the single largest, most affluent company left means that it is most likely to bear the brunt of this detereorating scenario.</p><p></p><p>That to get out from under this financial burden will come at the cost to their own workers is "most unfortunate" probably in their opinion, but it will still be "oh well, that's life" if they can make it happen legistlatively.</p><p></p><p>And sadly, in my opinion that scenario is far more likely than any happy ending for we, the people.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ok2bclever, post: 54908"] No, you misunderstand. I am not and have never said that workers are "only using funds from their employers" as all the contributions go into one fund that is invested and pays out benefits to those who have accrued enough credit at the benefit rate they earned accruing that credit. The problem is there is a common misconception here that UPS is somehow paying the retirements for all these various Teamster workers who's companies have gone belly up like those workers are some sort of welfare chits and UPS is the free meal. It seems to be a very popular rallying cry here, but it just ain't accurate. Those workers had companies putting in money for them for EVERY hour/day/year they worked that they got credit for, just like UPS workers. When their company went out of business they stopped accruing any further credit towards a pension, just like would happen to us if UPS went under. If they already had enough credit for a pension, they EARNED it as much as any other worker, including UPS workers. UPS is not paying for them. UPS's liability derives from a plan that is BASED on underfunding by all contributors in relationship to the benefits promised, including UPS. That was fine and acceptable to all companies until recently when the sht hit the fan with the lack of industry growth, bankrupting companies, bad stock years and the baby boom generation growth curve cresting the hump and starting to put pressure on the benefit side of the inadequacy. All remaining companies now must proportionally share the liabilities to this inadequately funded promise. That UPS is currently the single largest, most affluent company left means that it is most likely to bear the brunt of this detereorating scenario. That to get out from under this financial burden will come at the cost to their own workers is "most unfortunate" probably in their opinion, but it will still be "oh well, that's life" if they can make it happen legistlatively. And sadly, in my opinion that scenario is far more likely than any happy ending for we, the people. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
Pension Agency Faces a New Front
Top