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="JonFrum" data-source="post: 121748"><p>I maintain there is in fact a subsidy going on, it's just not big enough to get very upset about. The total subsidy is spread out among several features of the pension plans and is hard to identify. There is the uncollectible portion of Withdrawal Liability which by definition is owed by defunct companies and paid by still existing ones. There's the "free look" provision which (I think) allows new companies to join the plan without having to worry about Withdrawal Liability for a while. There's the granting of free Past Service Credit to the members of a new company joining the fund. The members get limited unearned Pension Credits in proportion to their years of service with the new company prior to its joining the fund. There's investment losses, which are borne by the pension credit earners from the time of the loss, and thereafter. If anyone has estimates of the extent of these or any other subsidies, post your infomation. Remember, UPS may have been on the receiving end of some of these subsidies for a time, so only the net amount would qualify as a subsidy. </p><p>- - - - -</p><p>When advocating Partitioning the funds so UPS contributions benefit only UPS retirees, bare in mind that the funds are already partitioned in a way. Each employer contributes at a given hourly rate on behalf of its employees. The higher the rate the higher the benefit. In effect, each employer and its employees are in a category which it shares only with other employers and employees at the same contribution level. </p><p>- - - - -</p><p>I can usually only crank these postings out on Sunday nights because working for UPS Monday through Friday is time consuming and draining. If I find the time I plan future posts that compare Single-Employer vs. Multi-Employer funds (the Multi-Employer funds win by a landslide), and an explanation of why so much of UPS' contributions never benefit UPS retirees. ( Hint: it's because so many UPSers have contributions made by UPS on their behalf, but they fall short of reaching one or more of the many milestones along the way to obtaining the benefits offered. If UPS didn't make getting to the finish line so difficult, and tried to advise employees of the benchmarks and assist them in meeting them, then many more would qualify for at least some benefits and others would qualify for ever higher benefit levels. In effect, UPS and UPSers probably hold the world's record for "Abandoned Property" when it comes to deliberately leaving monies unclaimed due to lack of meeting known eligibility requirements. It's like a baseball team that routinely strikes out to end the inning with the bases loaded. No runs score, the three baserunners just disolve, poof!) I'd also like to expose the many shortcomings of the pension plan proposed by UPS in 1997, and analyze the plan proposed by the APWA. If anyone has facts, corrections, or opinions on any of this, post away.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JonFrum, post: 121748"] I maintain there is in fact a subsidy going on, it's just not big enough to get very upset about. The total subsidy is spread out among several features of the pension plans and is hard to identify. There is the uncollectible portion of Withdrawal Liability which by definition is owed by defunct companies and paid by still existing ones. There's the "free look" provision which (I think) allows new companies to join the plan without having to worry about Withdrawal Liability for a while. There's the granting of free Past Service Credit to the members of a new company joining the fund. The members get limited unearned Pension Credits in proportion to their years of service with the new company prior to its joining the fund. There's investment losses, which are borne by the pension credit earners from the time of the loss, and thereafter. If anyone has estimates of the extent of these or any other subsidies, post your infomation. Remember, UPS may have been on the receiving end of some of these subsidies for a time, so only the net amount would qualify as a subsidy. - - - - - When advocating Partitioning the funds so UPS contributions benefit only UPS retirees, bare in mind that the funds are already partitioned in a way. Each employer contributes at a given hourly rate on behalf of its employees. The higher the rate the higher the benefit. In effect, each employer and its employees are in a category which it shares only with other employers and employees at the same contribution level. - - - - - I can usually only crank these postings out on Sunday nights because working for UPS Monday through Friday is time consuming and draining. If I find the time I plan future posts that compare Single-Employer vs. Multi-Employer funds (the Multi-Employer funds win by a landslide), and an explanation of why so much of UPS' contributions never benefit UPS retirees. ( Hint: it's because so many UPSers have contributions made by UPS on their behalf, but they fall short of reaching one or more of the many milestones along the way to obtaining the benefits offered. If UPS didn't make getting to the finish line so difficult, and tried to advise employees of the benchmarks and assist them in meeting them, then many more would qualify for at least some benefits and others would qualify for ever higher benefit levels. In effect, UPS and UPSers probably hold the world's record for "Abandoned Property" when it comes to deliberately leaving monies unclaimed due to lack of meeting known eligibility requirements. It's like a baseball team that routinely strikes out to end the inning with the bases loaded. No runs score, the three baserunners just disolve, poof!) I'd also like to expose the many shortcomings of the pension plan proposed by UPS in 1997, and analyze the plan proposed by the APWA. If anyone has facts, corrections, or opinions on any of this, post away. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Retirement Topics
UPS subsidizing non ups pensions
Top