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 Discussions
UPS/IBT pension funding
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="35years" data-source="post: 2052884" data-attributes="member: 60822"><p>No one reads the annual reports. However I did dig up this notice from last year:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.ibtupspensionfund.ups.com/content/UPS_IBT_AFN.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.ibtupspensionfund.ups.com/content/UPS_IBT_AFN.pdf</a></p><p></p><p><strong>The reporting laws were changed in 2012 to make pensions look more fully funded than they are, and lower the amount companies had to contribute to look 100% funded.</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p>As of the last published report (December 31, 2014)<strong> the UPS/IBT fund had a Funding Shortfall of</strong> <strong><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #b30000">$1,095,788,642 </span></span></strong></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #000000"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #000000">"As of December 31, 2014, the fair market value of the Plan’s assets was $4,994,575,825. On this same date, the Plan’s liabilities, determined using market rates, were $6,036,761,451."</span></span></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Under the old accounting rules the plan would have been only 78.6% funded.</strong></p><p><strong>Under the new accounting rules the 1 billion dollar shortfall = 103% funded</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Make no mistake, there was still a trillion dollar shortfall, the only thing that changed was the interest rate assumption.</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>This decreased UPS's minimum contribution by $444,415,385 for 2014 alone.</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong><span style="font-size: 18px">Something is rotten in the state of Denmark</span></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="35years, post: 2052884, member: 60822"] No one reads the annual reports. However I did dig up this notice from last year: [URL]http://www.ibtupspensionfund.ups.com/content/UPS_IBT_AFN.pdf[/URL] [B]The reporting laws were changed in 2012 to make pensions look more fully funded than they are, and lower the amount companies had to contribute to look 100% funded. [/B] As of the last published report (December 31, 2014)[B] the UPS/IBT fund had a Funding Shortfall of[/B] [B][SIZE=5][COLOR=#b30000]$1,095,788,642 [/COLOR][/SIZE][/B] [SIZE=5][COLOR=#000000] "As of December 31, 2014, the fair market value of the Plan’s assets was $4,994,575,825. On this same date, the Plan’s liabilities, determined using market rates, were $6,036,761,451."[/COLOR][/SIZE] [B] Under the old accounting rules the plan would have been only 78.6% funded. Under the new accounting rules the 1 billion dollar shortfall = 103% funded Make no mistake, there was still a trillion dollar shortfall, the only thing that changed was the interest rate assumption. This decreased UPS's minimum contribution by $444,415,385 for 2014 alone. [/B] [B] [SIZE=5]Something is rotten in the state of Denmark[/SIZE] [/B] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
UPS/IBT pension funding
Top