The strike that was

[tieguy]

How many times has the union lied to me v/s how many times ups has lied to me.

What was the final stroke count?

The question to ask is how long has the union mismanged pension funds.

how many mob loans did the union leadership make from your pension plans.

You can't be seriously trying to defend the unions abuse and mismanagement of pension funds?

 

[trplnkl]

What was the final stroke count?
That sounds a little personal to me. Shame on you.

The question to ask is how long has the union mismanged pension funds.
Do you mean before or after they got caught?

how many mob loans did the union leadership make from your pension plans.
I'm thinking ...none... that all happened way BEFORE I became a member.

You can't be seriously trying to defend the unions abuse and mismanagement of pension funds?

THe way I see it, it's either get screwed by the union or by the company, I hear the company refuses to use condoms.

 

[outta hours]

I received a letter from Central States on Friday stating that under new governmental policies that they must inform me that the pension plan has fallen into critical status or the so called "red zone" as far as funding the plan. It listed benefits that may have to be reduced or eliminated and they are:

Post Retirement Death Benefit
60 month payment guarantees
Disability Benefits
Early retirment or retirment-type subsidy
Benefit payment options other than a qualified joint-and survivor annuity (QJSA)

The last sentence was the sweetest to me and it read as follows:
If your contributing employer as of 01/01/2008 was UPS your benefits were transferred to the new UPS-IBT pension plan and will be paid by that plan.

I am so happy to be out of that Central States mess. As a 23 year employee with 7 years to go, this is great news for me and my family. Thank you UPS

 

[trickpony1]

Thats the problem. UPS fixed the CS plan and you guys keep trying to find reasons to be ungratefull.

Maybe someone needs to post this letter so Mr. Tieguy can see how vague it is.
The voting membership was promised the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow so we would vote yes and then look what happens.
BTW, it is now the UPS-IBT pension plan so Mr. Tieguy can't blame it all on the union. I think both parties knew they were gonna spring this on us after the contract got slid up our.....OOPS....after the contract passed.

 

[IWorkAsDirected]

I received a letter from Central States on Friday stating that under new governmental policies that they must inform me that the pension plan has fallen into critical status or the so called "red zone" as far as funding the plan. It listed benefits that may have to be reduced or eliminated and they are:

Post Retirement Death Benefit
60 month payment guarantees
Disability Benefits
Early retirment or retirment-type subsidy
Benefit payment options other than a qualified joint-and survivor annuity (QJSA)

The last sentence was the sweetest to me and it read as follows:
If your contributing employer as of 01/01/2008 was UPS your benefits were transferred to the new UPS-IBT pension plan and will be paid by that plan.

I am so happy to be out of that Central States mess. As a 23 year employee with 7 years to go, this is great news for me and my family. Thank you UPS

And........ this came after ups bailed it out and is now the co-administrator, and has equal control right??????????

 

[dannyboy]

Dear I work

No, Enron did TAKE OVER their plan, it just was their plan, their retirement was all in Enron stock and it went down the tubes.

I do believe what you are trying to say is illegal. I beleive that if you check your facts agains reality, you will find that companies can not hold a majority of their retirement in that companies stock. And I find your assumptions that UPS would have used the vast moneys in the CS fund to fund their expansions, somewhat humorous.

Would you care to expand on both Enron and how much of the actual retirement money in both the official retirement and 401K's were in enron stock. Not talking stock options, but actual amount of money in the official retirement fund for the employees that enron put into their own stock.

And also how much money that CS had to take out for UPS's expansion.

I would be very interested in your take.

d

 

[soberups]

Thats the problem. UPS fixed the CS plan and you guys keep trying to find reasons to be ungratefull.

We are the ones paying for it in the long run, not UPS. UPS fronted the money; the part-timers who havent been hired yet are the ones who are actually picking up the tab.

 

[soberups]

I am so happy to be out of that Central States mess. As a 23 year employee with 7 years to go, this is great news for me and my family. Thank you UPS

7 years from now, the one you REALLY need to thank is the new hire who is paying union dues for a minimum-wage job with no benefits. He is the one paying for the buyout.
I agree with the need to bail out Central States; I dont agree with the manner in which it was done. I think a 5 year pay freeze for top scale drivers would have been a more equitable choice. That would have included me.

 

[Jones]

Dear I work



I do believe what you are trying to say is illegal. I beleive that if you check your facts agains reality, you will find that companies can not hold a majority of their retirement in that companies stock. And I find your assumptions that UPS would have used the vast moneys in the CS fund to fund their expansions, somewhat humorous.

Would you care to expand on both Enron and how much of the actual retirement money in both the official retirement and 401K's were in enron stock. Not talking stock options, but actual amount of money in the official retirement fund for the employees that enron put into their own stock.

And also how much money that CS had to take out for UPS's expansion.

I would be very interested in your take.

d

Here's a list of some the problems with with the way ENRON's fiduciaries administered their retirement plan:

• They invested all matching contributions in Enron stocks, without giving consideration as to whether it was prudent to do so.
• They failed to monitor the administrative committee's performance of its responsibilities.
• They failed to share critical adverse information about Enron's financial condition with committee members.
• They failed to take steps to remove the committee members for failing to discharge their obligations before Enron's bankruptcy.
• They violated their duties of loyalty and prudence to the plans and participants by misleading participants about Enron's financial health and encouraging them to imprudently invest plan assets in Enron stock, even as signs of danger increased.

• Even when it was evident that Enron stocks were losing value, they kept the Enron stock fund as an investment option under the savings plan, and they continued to maintain an extensive portion of the plan balance in Enron stocks. For instance, at the beginning of 2001, over 60% of the plans' total assets consisted of Enron stocks. Yet, despite warnings from one of its executives, negative commentaries in the media about the price of Enron's stock and continued falling in price of its stock, no move was made to reduce or eliminate Enron's stock as an investment in the plan.

Source: Investopedia

 

[dannyboy]

Interesting read. But please note one or two things you copied and pasted.

• They invested all matching contributions in Enron stocks, without giving consideration as to whether it was prudent to do so.

Lets see, that is the matching portion of the retirement? That is the money that the company is giving to the retirement fund on behalf of the employee? It would be like UPS giving you a matching portion of your 401K in ups stock. BUt it is not at all like taking over your retirement and putting all the money into UPS stock as was presented.

So really since it was a matching "gift" of enron stock, its worth was what it was, not what it might have been represented to be.

• Even when it was evident that Enron stocks were losing value, they kept the Enron stock fund as an investment option under the savings plan, and they continued to maintain an extensive portion of the plan balance in Enron stocks.

Allrighty then, we have enron stock as an option, even though it is losing money.

Well not too long ago, the UPS/Teamsters retirement 401K plan had the magellan fund. It made tons of money for a while, then losts its collective for several years. Until it had lost 75% of its value. So who did we put in jail for them offering us that option? Did they do something illegal? Who is to blame for someone that lost 500,000 off the top of their retirement fund because they offered it to us?

Now, they, the people in charge of helping you invest your funds, people that get paid to recomend stock or funds to you, recomended you keep enron. Did they know it was going into the toilet? Maybe, maybe not. But the bottom line is that the company did not force the sale of their stock to the owners of the retirement plan. The only way you would have ended up owning Enron was you either had to opt into buying it, or it was GIVEN to you by enron as a matching contribution.

Hardly the hostile take over of the retirement plan painted by I do.

d

 

[Jones]

Interesting read. But please note one or two things you copied and pasted.

• They invested all matching contributions in Enron stocks, without giving consideration as to whether it was prudent to do so.

Lets see, that is the matching portion of the retirement? That is the money that the company is giving to the retirement fund on behalf of the employee? It would be like UPS giving you a matching portion of your 401K in ups stock. BUt it is not at all like taking over your retirement and putting all the money into UPS stock as was presented.

So really since it was a matching "gift" of enron stock, its worth was what it was, not what it might have been represented to be.

• Even when it was evident that Enron stocks were losing value, they kept the Enron stock fund as an investment option under the savings plan, and they continued to maintain an extensive portion of the plan balance in Enron stocks.

Allrighty then, we have enron stock as an option, even though it is losing money.

Well not too long ago, the UPS/Teamsters retirement 401K plan had the magellan fund. It made tons of money for a while, then losts its collective for several years. Until it had lost 75% of its value. So who did we put in jail for them offering us that option? Did they do something illegal? Who is to blame for someone that lost 500,000 off the top of their retirement fund because they offered it to us?

Now, they, the people in charge of helping you invest your funds, people that get paid to recomend stock or funds to you, recomended you keep enron. Did they know it was going into the toilet? Maybe, maybe not. But the bottom line is that the company did not force the sale of their stock to the owners of the retirement plan. The only way you would have ended up owning Enron was you either had to opt into buying it, or it was GIVEN to you by enron as a matching contribution.

Hardly the hostile take over of the retirement plan painted by I do.

d

I don't think UPS and ENRON are really comparable because with UPS we are talking about a pension plan, while with ENRON we are talking about an ESOP and a 401K. Pension plans, ESOPs, and 401ks are all regulated differently, with one noteworthy difference being that company pension plans are prohibited by law from being primarily invested in company stock while a defining feature of an ESOP is that it is primarily invested in company stock

I only provided the information that I did in order to answer a specific question that you had asked about ENRON's retirement plans.

 

[dannyboy]

And my whole point is that UPS and Enron are not compatible issues as I do less was trying to infer.

This is the type of miss information that is broadcast to the membership as fact when in fact it is only someones speculation or even more likely, someone's private agenda.

So thankyou for helping me make my point.

d

 

[tieguy]

We are the ones paying for it in the long run, not UPS. UPS fronted the money; the part-timers who havent been hired yet are the ones who are actually picking up the tab.

how do you figure? How much did you personally pay? Are you a part timer that has not been hired yet?

 

[soberups]

how do you figure? How much did you personally pay? Are you a part timer that has not been hired yet?

The part-timers who havent been hired yet are stuck at the same entry wage that they have been for years. They will have to wait a year for medical coverage and 18 months to cover their family. They will be required to pay union dues for a minimum-wage job with no benefits.
As a full-time long term driver covered under the Western Conference pension, I made out like a bandit on this last contract. I kept MOB on my medical, and PEER 80 on my pension.
The fact that I personally did well does not change the fact that the new agreement is grossly unfair. I voted against it. The union is supposed to benefit the membership as a whole. This contract does not do that.

 

[wyobill]

I received a letter from Central States on Friday stating that under new governmental policies that they must inform me that the pension plan has fallen into critical status or the so called "red zone" as far as funding the plan. It listed benefits that may have to be reduced or eliminated and they are:

Post Retirement Death Benefit
60 month payment guarantees
Disability Benefits
Early retirment or retirment-type subsidy
Benefit payment options other than a qualified joint-and survivor annuity (QJSA)

The last sentence was the sweetest to me and it read as follows:
If your contributing employer as of 01/01/2008 was UPS your benefits were transferred to the new UPS-IBT pension plan and will be paid by that plan.

I am so happy to be out of that Central States mess. As a 23 year employee with 7 years to go, this is great news for me and my family. Thank you UPS

At age 65 you go back into CS. Your only out of it temporarily

 

[dannyboy]

The part-timers who havent been hired yet are stuck at the same entry wage that they have been for years. They will have to wait a year for medical coverage and 18 months to cover their family. They will be required to pay union dues for a minimum-wage job with no benefits.

First off, the new hires can either take or leave the job as they see fit. If the wage is too low, then they will not find people to work it now will they?

Secondly, you state they will be required to pay union dues. REally? And who said that? Here, less than 10% of the part time workforce is paying union dues. So in your states, it will be even worse than it is here.

Only if they accept the minimum wage job, and join the union will they then fall under the contract. As for being forced to do anything, I just dont see it. Unless they want the job, UPS is not going out and kidnapping people to work here and forcing them into anything.

Bottom line is this. The union agreed to the contract, and the majority of those voting on the contract voted yes. So regardless of what spin is put on the contract, this is what we are working under for the next few years, like it or not. Those yet unborn or unhired will just have to cross that bridge on their own, just like you did. If you want the job, you have to take the good with the bad. If not, walmart and mcdonalds is putting people to work.

d

 

[satellitedriver]

Maybe someone needs to post this letter so Mr. Tieguy can see how vague it is.
The voting membership was promised the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow so we would vote yes and then look what happens.
BTW, it is now the UPS-IBT pension plan so Mr. Tieguy can't blame it all on the union. I think both parties knew they were gonna spring this on us after the contract got slid up our.....OOPS....after the contract passed.

BTW,
If you got the letter you would know this fact.
It says UPS CS plan covered employees (precontract and postcontract) will be the only people protected by the new UPS-IBT pension plan.
It is because the contract passed that CS covered UPSer's have some protection.
You really would not like what would have been slid up your...OOPS.., if the contract didn't pass, if you were in the teamster/CS pension plan.
No pot of gold was promised, just the promise of a rope being thrown down to us by UPS to be able to climb out of the pot of...OOPS.. that the CS plan was stewing in.

 

[satellitedriver]

At age 65 you go back into CS. Your only out of it temporarily

Exactly right.
The infusion of 6 billion and UPS paying the under funded CS promised difference in our pension, until the age of 65, is only a stop gap measure. This only gives CS some time to get it's financial house in order.
I have little faith that CS can pull that rabbit out of their hat.

 

[outta hours]

At age 65 you go back into CS. Your only out of it temporarily

Hopefully in 21 years when I turn 65 CS will be totally out of the picture and UPS will be in charge of my pension.

 

[tieguy]

The part-timers who havent been hired yet are stuck at the same entry wage that they have been for years. They will have to wait a year for medical coverage and 18 months to cover their family. They will be required to pay union dues for a minimum-wage job with no benefits.
As a full-time long term driver covered under the Western Conference pension, I made out like a bandit on this last contract. I kept MOB on my medical, and PEER 80 on my pension.
The fact that I personally did well does not change the fact that the new agreement is grossly unfair. I voted against it. The union is supposed to benefit the membership as a whole. This contract does not do that.

Yours is an excellent point sober. Lets screw all those hard working upsers out of their pension to save those who have not yet started with this company.