Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Inthegame" data-source="post: 1149971" data-attributes="member: 37112">While the duty of trustees is fiduciary, to delude oneself into thinking these trustees act &quot;independently&quot; of their respective appointive bodies is ridiculous.&nbsp; If the trustees start acting too independently, they&#039;ll be replaced or retired. Their fiduciary duty requires them to make decisions based on participant benefit and fund needs. To assume changes would be made to a group under contract assumes the administrator didn&#039;t request or receive adequate funding in negotiations. Tom Nyhan, the CS H&amp;W administrative guru, was intimately involved in consulting the IBT on fund needs when the proposal to move to the CS H&amp;W was made. Adequate contributions have been negotiated.The language you fear in the MOU is standard boilerplate language present in every plan, including the current UPS plan. &quot;That one little sentence in the MOU that clears them to change benefit levels at any time tells you that they are preparing to do just that&quot; Here&#039;s where you&#039;re way off the track. Vote No if you want but don&#039;t make up stories to scare.&nbsp; You&#039;re better than to use Rovian tactics. This protective language mirrors what already is in the CS H&amp;W Plan document that gives the trustees ultimate authority. The MOU does not tell anyone that plans to change terms are imminent. Don&#039;t mix opinion with fact.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Inthegame, post: 1149971, member: 37112"] While the duty of trustees is fiduciary, to delude oneself into thinking these trustees act "independently" of their respective appointive bodies is ridiculous. If the trustees start acting too independently, they'll be replaced or retired. Their fiduciary duty requires them to make decisions based on participant benefit and fund needs. To assume changes would be made to a group under contract assumes the administrator didn't request or receive adequate funding in negotiations. Tom Nyhan, the CS H&W administrative guru, was intimately involved in consulting the IBT on fund needs when the proposal to move to the CS H&W was made. Adequate contributions have been negotiated. The language you fear in the MOU is standard boilerplate language present in every plan, including the current UPS plan. "[B][I]That one little sentence in the MOU that clears them to change benefit levels at any time[U] tells you that they are preparing to do just that[/U]" [/I][/B]Here's where you're way off the track. Vote No if you want but don't make up stories to scare. You're better than to use Rovian tactics. This protective language mirrors what already is in the CS H&W Plan document that gives the trustees ultimate authority. The MOU does not tell anyone that plans to change terms are imminent. Don't mix opinion with fact. [/QUOTE]

Verification