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
The Latest UPS Headlines
Tensions at UPS are brewing between leadership and unionized drivers as the new CEO doubles down on drivers who make deliveries in their own cars
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="brownIEman" data-source="post: 4888286" data-attributes="member: 14596"><p>Actually, you are wrong that their was no mention of a withdrawal penalty in '97. UPS was offering $2B at that time. What they wound up paying was just north of $6B, not 8 when they did leave in '07. The plan included attempts to take care of the UPSers left in the plan. Remember, their was a provision for UPS to give a "make-up" payment to any former UPSers in the plan who wound up with a lower benefit than what the UPS plan was offering due to any possible shortfall in the Central States plan fund. The Teamsters tried to screw UPS with that one by proposing a bail out for central states that would basically pay everyone else first, then leave UPS on the hook for a larger make up. </p><p>It was a plan to both save costs, and do the right thing for UPSers. It was not a plan to "take control" of the pension as it never did that. The plan was equally controlled by UPS and the teamsters.</p><p></p><p>Again, yes UPS could have done to that plan what they are now doing to the management plan, but only if the IBT agreed to such in contract negotiations. You seem to be missing that simple point. I have read enough of your posts to know you cannot be missing that simple point because you are simple (you clearly are not). So, my only possible conclusion is that you have swallowed the line sold to you by the IBT on that whole score. Their propaganda was very good, but it was not entirely truthful.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="brownIEman, post: 4888286, member: 14596"] Actually, you are wrong that their was no mention of a withdrawal penalty in '97. UPS was offering $2B at that time. What they wound up paying was just north of $6B, not 8 when they did leave in '07. The plan included attempts to take care of the UPSers left in the plan. Remember, their was a provision for UPS to give a "make-up" payment to any former UPSers in the plan who wound up with a lower benefit than what the UPS plan was offering due to any possible shortfall in the Central States plan fund. The Teamsters tried to screw UPS with that one by proposing a bail out for central states that would basically pay everyone else first, then leave UPS on the hook for a larger make up. It was a plan to both save costs, and do the right thing for UPSers. It was not a plan to "take control" of the pension as it never did that. The plan was equally controlled by UPS and the teamsters. Again, yes UPS could have done to that plan what they are now doing to the management plan, but only if the IBT agreed to such in contract negotiations. You seem to be missing that simple point. I have read enough of your posts to know you cannot be missing that simple point because you are simple (you clearly are not). So, my only possible conclusion is that you have swallowed the line sold to you by the IBT on that whole score. Their propaganda was very good, but it was not entirely truthful. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
The Latest UPS Headlines
Tensions at UPS are brewing between leadership and unionized drivers as the new CEO doubles down on drivers who make deliveries in their own cars
Top