retiredone said:I agree that it is unfortunate that the Thrift Plan was discontinued. However, let's put that in perspective. The Thrift Plan was around for many years and was spectacularly sucessful for those that invested. I think much of the investment went into UPS stock and the company contributed an extra portion. If the company contributions to the Central States Fund had been treated in a similar manner by the Trustees, there would be no problem today with that fund. The Thrift Plan was established under rules that allowed it's discontinuance, so UPS was playing by the agreed rules when the plan was discontinued. The problem faced today by Central States is that UPS is performing as promised in the contract, but the Central States Fund is unable to keep their promises because of past misbehaviour by the trustees. It still strikes me as amazing that the rank and file would put trust in the very people who screwed them in the past, while complaining about the organization that kept it's promises. If I make a mistake, I try to learn from it and adjust accordingly.
siouxman said:we are going to pay a huge price for the poor performance of the fund.Whats the answer to this problem?We can blame the fund managers,the teamsters or who ever but lets fix the problem if its possible.The next contract this issue should be one everyones minds and make sure we ask the hard questins to our leadership.
retiredone said:I agree with the comment regarding UPS participation in multi employer plans. The burden of many employers is now being carried by fewer companies. One of the problems is simply declining union membership so there are less contributors to cover retired teamsters. The company offered to buy their way out of the pension plan back in 1997 and I believe that UPS retirees pensions would have been safe today if the rank and file hadn't resisted. Let's face facts: There are a number of teamster pension plans that are paying generous benefits and have no financial concerns at all. The problem is not now, nor has it ever been, the company's contributions. Now consider the Central State Fund, which was looted and mismanged by the "trustees" for years. It's hard to understand why the rank and file Teamsters took this, and then turned their noses up at the life ring tossed by the company back then. I don't understand why the rank and file Teamsters were so passive while their "brothers' were stealing their future. Given a choice of who to trust, I'll take the company any day of the week.
speeddemon said:You seem to forget, we never even got a chance to vote at the proposal in 97. The union does what it wants. UPS does what it wants, and we are screwed in the middle.
retiredone said:I might be wrong, but I remember the situation differently and hope someone can post and explain. I do recall a strike authorization vote that was put to the rank and file early on in the discussions. The results of this vote were used as a negotiating tool by the Teamsters and eventually resulted in the strike to deny the proposed pension change. I also remember pickets protesting the "attempt by UPS to steal our pension money". I find it hard to believe that the rank and file had no voice in this and no control over the union. The control might be indirect like exerted by people on the government (we elect people who then act on our behalf - at least indirect control). Why vote for people who don't do what you want? Has there been a move to change union leadership given the pension problem?