BOSTON BULLY = CRITICAL AND DECLINING

Inthegame

Well-Known Member
Never understood "the hook at the end"???

If Bill's Trucking Co was a union shop for 50 years, and Bill made every penny of his contractual payments to the pension fund before he closed the doors, how can there be a "hook at the end"?
If the plan is 100% funded there is no hook. The idea is to make it uncomfortable so Bill won't walk away at the next negotiation. So when pension plans get close to 100%, trustees increase benefits to lower the funding pct which increases withdrawal/unfunded liability and re-sharpens the hook.
The problem is when Bill (Hostess, etc.) walks away and doesn't pay the unfunded liability, that bill is absorbed by the remaining participating employers.
Hence the attraction of the hybrid model.
 

LeadBelly

Banned
I'm just posting facts brother.
FACT
No you are posting misinformation and straight up non factual information. That's why I see the likeness of you with ISIS. You belong to an idiotic ideology. There is no common sense to it. Those Isis people are nuts and you are so much like them it's not even funny. There is no reasoning with you.
 

LeadBelly

Banned
Never understood "the hook at the end"???

If Bill's Trucking Co was a union shop for 50 years, and Bill made every penny of his contractual payments to the pension fund before he closed the doors, how can there be a "hook at the end"?
Because bills trucking can't pick up the tab for everyone else that went out of business and didn't cover the tab?
 

wide load

Starting wage is a waste of time.
I'm just posting facts brother.
FACT
You don't. You started a while back saying Murph lied about your bike. Then Dunn lied about your bike. Now cuz Sean is innthe light, he now stole your tricycle? Your just like TDU. All you do is use the same script but change the names. You are False brother!
FALSE!
 

Bubblehead

My Senior Picture
If the plan is 100% funded there is no hook. The idea is to make it uncomfortable so Bill won't walk away at the next negotiation. So when pension plans get close to 100%, trustees increase benefits to lower the funding pct which increases withdrawal/unfunded liability and re-sharpens the hook.
The problem is when Bill (Hostess, etc.) walks away and doesn't pay the unfunded liability, that bill is absorbed by the remaining participating employers.
Hence the attraction of the hybrid model.
Sounds to me like this "hybrid model is how it should have been all along?
Did Hostess not make their pension contributions while in business?
Could it be this" hook" you speak of is precisely what makes these pension plans legal ponzi schemes?
Something still doesn't make sense with these explanations.

Why would any Company who made all pension contributions while in business, have "continuing liability" when they close the doors?

.....yet we're told our healthcare contributions are segregated?
 

Inthegame

Well-Known Member
Sounds to me like this "hybrid model is how it should have been all along?
Maybe, but most participating employers don't plan on leaving so delaying expenses is attractive.
Did Hostess not make their pension contributions while in business?
Hostess quit contributing to plans in August and closed operations end of November (in most areas) while paying no withdrawal liability. They also stole 401K contributions from BCT members and made no reparations through bankruptcy. Their employees took two rounds of cuts prior to this. Now back in business after screwing over thousands of workers, they're celebrated as a success story as a leaner meaner company. Pitiful.
Could it be this" hook" you speak of is precisely what makes these pension plans legal ponzi schemes?
Is it the fault of the pension plan when companies default on their legal promised obligations and hide under bankruptcy law as Hostess did?
Are insurance companies legal ponzi schemes? Bank accounts? Annuities?
You disservice the efforts of hard working trustees in thousands of sustainable pension plans by those ridiculous statements. Calling a pension plan a ponzi scheme shows ignorance of a true rip off scheme.
Why would any Company who made all pension contributions while in business, have "continuing liability" when they close the doors?
Every participating employer gets a yearly unfunded liability statement. They know what they owe and choose to delay the pay. Additionally actuarial forecasts (among other factors) change with mortality tables adjustments so when members live longer, the plan needs more funding.
.....yet we're told our healthcare contributions are segregated?
They are and bringing that up is apples and fruitcakes.
We're "told" a lot of things, but the earth is not flat. I try to correct some inaccuracies but when my answers don't fit your preconceived notions, you struggle with the factual info and hang with the BS. That's OK.
There's plenty of room on the Vote No on reality bus.
 

anHOURover

Well-Known Member
You don't. You started a while back saying Murph lied about your bike. Then Dunn lied about your bike. Now cuz Sean is innthe light, he now stole your tricycle? Your just like TDU. All you do is use the same script but change the names. You are False brother!
FALSE!
Brother
They all came here and lied to 623
Did Murph win the ugly sweater contest this year?
I want to go after and record angry Tim again but I have bigger fish to fry.
But trust me , when I see him again I'm going to expose that funny talking waste of sperm

The Boston bully is in charge of the New England pension and its failing.
He also stole my bike and I want it back
You guys are all rooster heads up there that always accept less

What's false ?

FACT
 
Last edited:

anHOURover

Well-Known Member
No you are posting misinformation and straight up non factual information. That's why I see the likeness of you with ISIS. You belong to an idiotic ideology. There is no common sense to it. Those Isis people are nuts and you are so much like them it's not even funny. There is no reasoning with you.

Everything in this post is true. See my above post.
You rooster heads in New England think your human waste smells great.
You rooster heads always accept less!
FACT
 

wide load

Starting wage is a waste of time.
Brother
They all came here and lied to 623
Did Murph win the ugly sweater contest this year?
I want to go after and record angry Tim again but I have bigger fish to fry.
But trust me , when I see him again I'm going to expose that funny talking waste of sperm

The Boston bully is in charge of the New England pension and its failing.
He also stole my bike and I want it back
You guys are all rooster heads up there that always accept less

What's false ?

FACT
The pension was in critical before Sean took the seat. Learn your history before you post stupid. As for 623, the actuaries explained the plan. Your elected officials just past out fliers to go to a meeting. But you would know this Mr. Hidden Camera Boy, huh?
FACT
 

wide load

Starting wage is a waste of time.
Everything in this post is true. See my above post.
You rooster heads in New England think your human waste smells great.
You rooster heads always accept less!
FACT
IMG_1906.GIF
New England
IMG_1904.PNG
Ohio
FACT!
 

Bubblehead

My Senior Picture
Maybe, but most participating employers don't plan on leaving so delaying expenses is attractive.
Hostess quit contributing to plans in August and closed operations end of November (in most areas) while paying no withdrawal liability. They also stole 401K contributions from BCT members and made no reparations through bankruptcy. Their employees took two rounds of cuts prior to this. Now back in business after screwing over thousands of workers, they're celebrated as a success story as a leaner meaner company. Pitiful.
Is it the fault of the pension plan when companies default on their legal promised obligations and hide under bankruptcy law as Hostess did?
Are insurance companies legal ponzi schemes? Bank accounts? Annuities?
You disservice the efforts of hard working trustees in thousands of sustainable pension plans by those ridiculous statements. Calling a pension plan a ponzi scheme shows ignorance of a true rip off scheme.
Every participating employer gets a yearly unfunded liability statement. They know what they owe and choose to delay the pay. Additionally actuarial forecasts (among other factors) change with mortality tables adjustments so when members live longer, the plan needs more funding.
They are and bringing that up is apples and fruitcakes.
We're "told" a lot of things, but the earth is not flat. I try to correct some inaccuracies but when my answers don't fit your preconceived notions, you struggle with the factual info and hang with the BS. That's OK.
There's plenty of room on the Vote No on reality bus.
Lighten up Francis.
Please don't confuse my questions as statements.
If you look back at my quoted text by you, they are closed with a question mark, while the whole discussion was preceded with the phrase "I still don't understand".
I don't think that constitutes indigence on my part, rather a desire to understand.
I will climb on the "Vote No Bus" when the time is right and the circumstances warrant it, just like I did during the last contract debacle.

Perhaps my phrasing of the questions are missing the mark, because in my head, your answers are missing the mark.

I'll try and rephrase them later when I have more time, if your still willing?
 
Last edited:

Inthegame

Well-Known Member
Lighten up Francis.
No worries, I'm so light I float...
Please don't confuse my questions as statements.
Gladly if you stop adding statements to your questions like this...
Could it be this" hook" you speak of is precisely what makes these pension plans legal ponzi schemes?
I don't think that constitutes indigence on my part, rather a desire to understand.
That's why I answered...again. But I sense the ever present suspicion lurking.
I will climb on the "Vote No Bus" when the time is right and the circumstances warrant it, just like I did during the last contract debacle.
I hope you're not fighting your new best friend AnHOURover for the wheel.
Perhaps my phrasing of the questions are missing the mark, because in my head, your answers are missing the mark.
Not a surprise at all that you feel my answers are missing your mark.
I'll try and rephrase them later when I have more time, if your still willing?
I'll try to break the bonds of time that shackle me. But odds are I get captured by trust fund administrators and whisked off to Dubai for a golf weekend, so you may need some patience.
Peace on Earth.
 

LeadBelly

Banned
Lighten up Francis.
Please don't confuse my questions as statements.
If you look back at my quoted text by you, they are closed with a question mark, while the whole discussion was preceded with the phrase "I still don't understand".
I don't think that constitutes indigence on my part, rather a desire to understand.
I will climb on the "Vote No Bus" when the time is right and the circumstances warrant it, just like I did during the last contract debacle.

Perhaps my phrasing of the questions are missing the mark, because in my head, your answers are missing the mark.

I'll try and rephrase them later when I have more time, if



your





still willing?
:)
 
Top