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 Retirement Topics
UPS subsidizing non ups pensions
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="Cezanne" data-source="post: 119216" data-attributes="member: 5104"><p>Here it is in a nutshell what JonFrum is saying: The company speaks with forked tongue with it's claim of being over burdened with covering these bankrupt freight companies retirees. When employment ends, your vesting in any benefit program ends also. Your retirement benefit is frozen till you are eligible to collect which is currently at age 65. Unless these unemployed teamsters who lost their jobs with these defunct freight companies got hired on by other teamster union represented companies they will not be able to gain any vested credits to collect a full pension. Those who worked over five years are vested to collect a small percentage only at retirement age, the monetary contributions that were put into that trust is locked in for investment till the time they are eligible to collect. That is how these pension plans are set up to get the most return on the initial investments. The statement about the drastic reduction of these freight companies in the central states area because of deregulation of the trucking business causing UPS to cover all those retirees does not make sense. First of all this deregulation occured around l980, back before they started to raise benefits in the early nineties the average retirement for 30 years under central states was about 1,000 a month. I have said the before, but that famous strike in "97" was to create full time jobs as Carey stated for the sole reason to start added newer and younger participants into their pension and health and welfare programs. I too still have the booklet that the company was promoting during it's attempt to take over the pension funding, it was very vague and their was statements about them reducing your pension benefit for any other contributing factors that UPS has contributed to. Did not know if they meant the teamster's fund or social security, and of course the subject to change provisions. Trust was the deciding issue on who you would like to look out for your individual interests.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cezanne, post: 119216, member: 5104"] Here it is in a nutshell what JonFrum is saying: The company speaks with forked tongue with it's claim of being over burdened with covering these bankrupt freight companies retirees. When employment ends, your vesting in any benefit program ends also. Your retirement benefit is frozen till you are eligible to collect which is currently at age 65. Unless these unemployed teamsters who lost their jobs with these defunct freight companies got hired on by other teamster union represented companies they will not be able to gain any vested credits to collect a full pension. Those who worked over five years are vested to collect a small percentage only at retirement age, the monetary contributions that were put into that trust is locked in for investment till the time they are eligible to collect. That is how these pension plans are set up to get the most return on the initial investments. The statement about the drastic reduction of these freight companies in the central states area because of deregulation of the trucking business causing UPS to cover all those retirees does not make sense. First of all this deregulation occured around l980, back before they started to raise benefits in the early nineties the average retirement for 30 years under central states was about 1,000 a month. I have said the before, but that famous strike in "97" was to create full time jobs as Carey stated for the sole reason to start added newer and younger participants into their pension and health and welfare programs. I too still have the booklet that the company was promoting during it's attempt to take over the pension funding, it was very vague and their was statements about them reducing your pension benefit for any other contributing factors that UPS has contributed to. Did not know if they meant the teamster's fund or social security, and of course the subject to change provisions. Trust was the deciding issue on who you would like to look out for your individual interests. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
UPS subsidizing non ups pensions
Top