Question about Central States Funding.

[grgrcr88]

Have any of you big numbers guys seen any actuarial forecasts for the Central States Health and Welfare Fund if they were not to acquire 160,000 new participants?

Just found this with a quick search, I realize its older but shows the fund is not yet upside down in income/payouts at that time.

Central States Southeast & Southwest Areas Health & Welfare friend in Rosemont, Illinois (IL) - faqs.org

 

[Bubblehead]

I have repeatedly read about the CS H&W fund being fully funded, with a substantial reserve.
What I haven't seen is the actuarial forecast for the fund for the upcoming years.
It is no secret that most every other sector of our union is in decline.
It seems reasonable to me to think that a trend is occurring, whereas the number of retirees in the fund is increasing while the number of active participants is decreasing, creating an inevitable backwards slide in the CS H&W fund.
It is for this reason that I believe we have been sold a bill of goods in an attempt to bolster the number of active participants in the fund on the backs of the IBT's only remaining cash cow, UPS.
While I still would have voted NO on the National Master, I would have had more respect for those on the negotiating team if they would have told us the truth rather than pissing down our backs while telling us it is only raining.

Have any of you big numbers guys seen any actuarial forecasts for the Central States Health and Welfare Fund if they were not to acquire 160,000 new participants?

Just found this with a quick search, I realize its older but shows the fund is not yet upside down in income/payouts at that time.

Central States Southeast & Southwest Areas Health & Welfare friend in Rosemont, Illinois (IL) - faqs.org

Thanks, but actuarial forecasts look into the future, not the past.
I'm guessing what I am looking for is a well guarded secret that isn't accessible via Google search.
That's why I was asking you guys that are obviously well connected.

 

[grgrcr88]

Thanks, but actuarial forecasts look into the future, not the past.
I'm guessing what I am looking for is a well guarded secret that isn't accessible via Google search.
That's why I was asking you guys that are obviously well connected.

I know that's not what your looking for and If I can get it I will. I don't think it's a huge secret!

 

[Bubblehead]

I know that's not what your looking for and If I can get it I will. I don't think it's a huge secret!

​I won't hold my breath.

 

[Inthegame]

​I won't hold my breath.

H&W plans usually "forecast" two years forward. The CS Trustees receive those forecasts annually.

 

[RealPerson]

H&W plans usually "forecast" two years forward. The CS Trustees receive those forecasts annually.

I doubt there are any real numbers just good guesses.
You can't go off the norm, as now 150K people are being added to the plan.

 

[Retired 2016]

This is the way I apply simple truck driver logic to Central State Pension Fund.

This year the fund, CSPF, broke about even after getting a return of 13%. The winds were blowing in Central States Pension Fund favor, no major trucking companies went out of business and a good return. In a year when the stock market ( assume CSPF tracks the market within 2%) breaks even the 19 Billion fund will lose close to 2.5 billion dollars and be a 16.5 billion dollar fund.

In a bad stock market year (10% drop) we could expect the fund to lose the 2.5 billion above with an additional 2 billion dollars for over a four billion dollar drop or a 20% drop in the funds assets. This type of market is typically experienced once every 5 years.

Two other factors will speed up this downward spiral: 1. The active participants in the fund are aging and we will see more retirees and less contributors to the fund, 2. a major trucking company going out of business would speed up the retirees going collecting from the fund and putting the fund under additional stress.

The one hope is for a hot steady stock market that will delay the collapse of CSPF because the mathematics say that it is just a matter of time before CSPF goes under.

 

[Bubblehead]

H&W plans usually "forecast" two years forward. The CS Trustees receive those forecasts annually.

Perhaps two year forecasts are widely available.
Believe me, they look further ahead than two years.

 

[Inthegame]

Perhaps two year forecasts are widely available.
Believe me, they look further ahead than two years.

Acturarily they forecast H&W on two year blocks because, among other reasons, unpredictable claim experience. Pensions can run out forecasts for multiple years because of predictable future obligations. Two different animals. Rising H&W reserves are the key component to healthy plans. CS H&W reserves are rising. With the addition of UPS participants, if adequate funding was negotiated, this pattern should continue and most likely be strengthened.

 

[PiedmontSteward]

This is the way I apply simple truck driver logic to Central State Pension Fund.

This year the fund, CSPF, broke about even after getting a return of 13%. The winds were blowing in Central States Pension Fund favor, no major trucking companies went out of business and a good return. In a year when the stock market ( assume CSPF tracks the market within 2%) breaks even the 19 Billion fund will lose close to 2.5 billion dollars and be a 16.5 billion dollar fund.

In a bad stock market year (10% drop) we could expect the fund to lose the 2.5 billion above with an additional 2 billion dollars for over a four billion dollar drop or a 20% drop in the funds assets. This type of market is typically experienced once every 5 years.

Two other factors will speed up this downward spiral: 1. The active participants in the fund are aging and we will see more retirees and less contributors to the fund, 2. a major trucking company going out of business would speed up the retirees going collecting from the fund and putting the fund under additional stress.

The one hope is for a hot steady stock market that will delay the collapse of CSPF because the mathematics say that it is just a matter of time before CSPF goes under.

The trustees have also had to take more chances just to keep treading water. If they try and play it safe, they'll hit that downward spiral even faster. The CSPF crises mirrors the same one going on in Detroit right now, although the root causes were different.

 

[Bubblehead]

Acturarily they forecast H&W on two year blocks because, among other reasons, unpredictable claim experience. Pensions can run out forecasts for multiple years because of predictable future obligations. Two different animals. Rising H&W reserves are the key component to healthy plans. CS H&W reserves are rising. With the addition of UPS participants, if adequate funding was negotiated, this pattern should continue and most likely be strengthened.

...while my benefits are reduced from the ones I presently enjoy in the UPS plan.

Trust me, actuarial forecasts are done well past two years out.
They just aren't made public knowledge.
I am not suggesting that I should receive better benefits than others already in the CS plan, rather we all should enjoy the superior plan my family has for my entire career.
The company is certainly in the position to just that.
I hate it when people try to bring themselves up by bring others down, which is exactly what is happening when advocating this C6 "enhanced" plan.

 

[Inthegame]

...while my benefits are reduced from the ones I presently enjoy in the UPS plan.

Trust me, actuarial forecasts are done well past two years out.
They just aren't made public knowledge.
I am not suggesting that I should receive better benefits than others already in the CS plan, rather we all should enjoy the superior plan my family has for my entire career.
The company is certainly in the position to just that.
I hate it when people try to bring themselves up by bring others down, which is exactly what is happening when advocating this C6 "enhanced" plan.

No need to argue the point but I know for a fact H&W forecasts are two years out. I've read them.
Who's getting an advantage by bringing UPS'ers into the C6 H&W plan?

 

[Bubblehead]

No need to argue the point but I know for a fact H&W forecasts are two years out. I've read them.
Who's getting an advantage by bringing UPS'ers into the C6 H&W plan?

The advantage goes to all other non-UPS Teamsters who participate in the fund as well as UPS as a company who will now be able to cap their expenses for the duration of the agreement in regards to health care, instead of having to maintain a defined benefit.
That is unless health care costs fall?
​Who thinks that will be the case?
​
Am I the only one who sees the irony in the fact that we as a union struck in '97 to keep the pension, gave it away in '08 to put a $6.1 billion band-aid on the failing fund and to secure a card check agreement with UPS Freight, and now are being asked to go back into a Central States Health Fund?

 

[Inthegame]

...while my benefits are reduced from the ones I presently enjoy in the UPS plan.

I hate it when people try to bring themselves up by bring others down, which is exactly what is happening when advocating this C6 "enhanced" plan.

The advantage goes to all other non-UPS Teamsters who participate in the fund as well as UPS as a company who will now be able to cap their expenses for the duration of the agreement in regards to health care, instead of having to maintain a defined benefit.
That is unless health care costs fall?
​Who thinks that will be the case?
​

So how are the "advantaged" non-UPS'ers responsible for the actions of the UPS Yes voters?
All those non-UPS participants in CS H&W plans that you feel will be advantaged, need to have contributions sufficient to "buy" their level of coverage. If their negotiated contributions aren't high enough they get bumped into a lower level CS Plan. C-6 is the best plan in CS. Granted, UPS contributions will increase funding but with the funding comes the claims. UPS may be advantaged as they operate a self funded pay plan presently and pay only for incurred claims, but now going to a defined contribution obligation could in theory be more expensive depending again on claim experience.

 

[Bubblehead]

So how are the "advantaged" non-UPS'ers responsible for the actions of the UPS Yes voters?
All those non-UPS participants in CS H&W plans that you feel will be advantaged, need to have contributions sufficient to "buy" their level of coverage. If their negotiated contributions aren't high enough they get bumped into a lower level CS Plan. C-6 is the best plan in CS. Granted, UPS contributions will increase funding but with the funding comes the claims. UPS may be advantaged as they operate a self funded pay plan presently and pay only for incurred claims, but now going to a defined contribution obligation could in theory be more expensive depending again on claim experience.

The "advantaged" non-UPSer's aren't responsible for for the actions of the UPS Yes voters, they will just reap part of the spoils.
I don't believe that the contribution money is held in separate accounts for each individual employer that participates.
As far as UPS, I covered that possibility.
Is it your inference that UPS will actually be paying more under this plan?
Do you believe the cost of health care will go down over the next 5 years or somehow we will be more healthy?

 

[Inthegame]

I hate it when people try to bring themselves up by bring others down, which is exactly what is happening when advocating this C6 "enhanced" plan.

The "advantaged" non-UPSer's aren't responsible for for the actions of the UPS Yes voters, they will just reap part of the spoils.
I don't believe that the contribution money is held in separate accounts for each individual employer that participates.
As far as UPS, I covered that possibility.
Is it your inference that UPS will actually be paying more under this plan?
Do you believe the cost of health care will go down over the next 5 years or somehow we will be more healthy?

The non-UPSers in CS will reap the benefits of their negotiated contributions, just as UPSers will. UPSers in CS now get "benefitted" from non-UPSers as all contributions are pooled, which produces greater discounts from providers when those participants are steered into those networks. But this is a pay to play system, the levels of coverage are attained only by negotiated contribution levels from employers and in some cases employees in co premium status. CS has at least 4 different levels of coverage plans. UPS has agreed to contributions sufficient to purchase the best plan.
UPS's costs could be higher in total after five years than what would be spent in self funded claims. That is unknown.
As far as health care costs going down, I don't know. Unfortunately the for profit insurance industry heavily influenced the ACA and watered down provisions (the public option) that could have reduced costs. I do know the % of increase has slowed and that means the dollars negotiated should allow trustees to continue benefits as are present today. Choices in lifestyle lead to good health. If members make good choices, better health will follow.

 

[Bubblehead]

The non-UPSers in CS will reap the benefits of their negotiated contributions, just as UPSers will. UPSers in CS now get "benefitted" from non-UPSers as all contributions are pooled, which produces greater discounts from providers when those participants are steered into those networks. But this is a pay to play system, the levels of coverage are attained only by negotiated contribution levels from employers and in some cases employees in co premium status. CS has at least 4 different levels of coverage plans. UPS has agreed to contributions sufficient to purchase the best plan.
UPS's costs could be higher in total after five years than what would be spent in self funded claims. That is unknown.
As far as health care costs going down, I don't know. Unfortunately the for profit insurance industry heavily influenced the ACA and watered down provisions (the public option) that could have reduced costs. I do know the % of increase has slowed and that means the dollars negotiated should allow trustees to continue benefits as are present today. Choices in lifestyle lead to good health. If members make good choices, better health will follow.

It's funny that you use the term "pay to play", as this is exactly what 160,000 UPSer's like me will be doing for the first time in my 4 decades of employment.
I fully understand how this multi-employer healthcare fund will work and it isn't a good thing for us.
At least we now agree that non-UPS Teamsters benefit from this contract.
We, UPSer's, can do better and some of us
​ have for decades.

I'll tell you what, since we agree that UPS's position in the deal is "undetermined", I will give you 8-1 odds if you are willing to wager that UPS will spend more in their contribution to the C6 plan than they would if they continued to provide their present defined benefit under the company plan?
Are you really willing to wager on the possibility of improved "choices in lifestyle"?

Make that 18-1 odds.

 

[Inthegame]

It's funny that you use the term "pay to play", as this is exactly what 160,000 UPSer's like me will be doing for the first time in my 4 decades of employment.
I fully understand how this multi-employer healthcare fund will work and it isn't a good thing for us.
At least we now agree that non-UPS Teamsters benefit from this contract.
We, UPSer's, can do better and some of us
​ have for decades.

I'll tell you what, since we agree that UPS's position in the deal is "undetermined", I will give you 8-1 odds if you are willing to wager that UPS will spend more in their contribution to the C6 plan than they would if they continued to provide their present defined benefit under the company plan?
Are you really willing to wager on the possibility of improved "choices in lifestyle"?

Make that 18-1 odds.

How about I buy you eight beers (or 18) sometime and we'll call it even. That'll be a healthy choice. I'd place the wager but I'm pretty sure we'd have a tough time getting five years of accurate info on claims properly covered when we can't get more than a two year actuarial H&W forecast.

 

[Bubblehead]

How about I buy you eight beers (or 18) sometime and we'll call it even. That'll be a healthy choice. I'd place the wager but I'm pretty sure we'd have a tough time getting five years of accurate info on claims properly covered when we can't get more than a two year actuarial H&W forecast.

Cheers!!!

 

[smart girl]

Pension and Health are separate funds, but any good accounting team could easily intertwine the two.

However Hoffa just wrote the President Obama that the Health Fund was unsustainable.

http://www.browncafe.com/forum/f39/teamcare-unsustainable-hoffa-words-not-mine-351379/

Taft Hartley prevents mingle