Central States Pension Fund cuts

[Jkloc420]

Since I've been gone for over 2 weeks and don't feel like reading the 17,908 post that have been posted since I was last here I just want to say my love letter from the Union was waiting for me when I got home today. Its kind of a slap in the face when you read it in black and white. Mine reads "Under Central States' proposed pension rescue plan, effective July 1,2016, your monthly benefit is proposed to be reduced from $3,000.00 to $1,500.00." So much for all the rumors about it being cut only a third or not at all for UPS employees. If its like any other big cut forced down labors throat in the last 25 years it will soon be followed by an announcement that all the major players in the Union will be getting big time raises.

Makes you wonder why the union kept telling you to vote for this kind of stuff and the people w ho did it.

 

[Mugarolla]

The union? How about other members. If the protecting language disappears, it will be a company proposal. If a contract without protecting language passes, it will be the fault of the voting members. The "union" doesn't vote. The members do.

The members vote on a contract that the union negotiates. The union can "turn down" a contract submitted to the union without the protecting language.

 

[Mugarolla]

UPS wanted the unfunded liability of healthcare off of their books.

The Union wanted the healthcare.

UPS got what they wanted, the union got what they wanted. It's called "negotiations."

It was then, and only then, voted on by the membership.

 

[Inthegame]

The members vote on a contract that the union negotiates. The union can "turn down" a contract submitted to the union without the protecting language.

The union can stand their ground and not accept any offers from UPS to remove it.

It is extremely difficult, although not impossible, for UPS to force a vote on a contract that the union did not agree with.

And however you slice it, whatever is put in front of the members, is decided by the voting members.

 

[Inthegame]

UPS wanted the unfunded liability of healthcare off of their books.

The Union wanted the healthcare.

H&W isn't Pension. There's no "unfunded liability". It is strictly pay as you go, with whatever's left as a reserve.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

H&W isn't Pension. There's no "unfunded liability". It is strictly pay as you go, with whatever's left as a reserve.

"Unfunded liability" may have been the wrong choice of words. What I was trying to say was that UPS wanted to get healthcare off of their books.

For the company, it is not "pay as you go". They pay a contractually negotiated amount per hour per employee.

 

[Mugarolla]

And however you slice it, whatever is put in front of the members, is decided by the voting members.

Yes it is. But what is put in front of the members is what the company and union agreed to.

 

[Catatonic]

"Unfunded liability" may have been the wrong choice of words. What I was trying to say was that UPS wanted to get healthcare off of their books.

For the company, it is not "pay as you go". They pay a contractually negotiated amount per hour per employee.

The real emphasis is the Wall St analyst.
They hate companies with long term debt, open ended debt and unknown debt.
Pensions are all three.
Healthcare is not as long term but it is very much the other two.

 

[Lead Belly]

I wonder how many central states participants that got their pensions cut voted for the ups contract in 1982 that cut the pay for the part timers?

 

[rod]

I wonder how many central states participants that got their pensions cut voted for the ups contract in 1982 that cut the pay for the part timers?

I wonder how many part timers didn't bother to vote as usual. Since the beginning of UPS the part timers have cut their own throats by refusing to participate. (By the way, other than my first rookie contract, I never voted yes on another one for 30 years.

 

[Mugarolla]

The real emphasis is the Wall St analyst.
They hate companies with long term debt, open ended debt and unknown debt.
Pensions are all three.
Healthcare is not as lintel but it is very much the other two.

Yes, but the UPS/IBT pension is 104% funded.

This means that the pensions are basically paid for.

Unless UPS dips into the pension money, it does not bother Wall St at all.

 

[Catatonic]

Yes, but the UPS/IBT pension is 104% funded.

This means that the pensions are basically paid for.

Unless UPS dips into the pension money, it does not bother Wall St at all.

Tell that to the analysts ... They know better than to believe that.

 

[Catatonic]

I wonder how many part timers didn't bother to vote as usual. Since the beginning of UPS the part timers have cut their own throats by refusing to participate. (By the way, other than my first rookie contract, I never voted yes on another one for 30 years.

Seems like you believe drivers can't be trusted to do the right thing!

 

[Mugarolla]

Tell that to the analysts ... They know better than to believe that.

Really?

Then why are they recommending UPS as buy?

http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ups/analyst-research

 

[Catatonic]

Really?

Then why are they recommending UPS as buy?

http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ups/analyst-research

Like my Mom said, "People don't know what they don't understand."

 

[Mugarolla]

Like my Mom said, "People don't don't know what they don't understand."

OK.

But these are the same analysts that you said, and I quote,

The real emphasis is the Wall St analyst.
They hate companies with long term debt, open ended debt and unknown debt.
Pensions are all three.

Seems like the analysts don't hate, they actually like UPS, even with the long term debt, open ended debt and unknown debt.

 

[rod]

Seems like you believe drivers can't be trusted to do the right thing!

and your point is?

 

[Catatonic]

OK.
But these are the same analysts that you said, and I quote,
Seems like the analysts don't hate, they actually like UPS, even with the long term debt, open ended debt and unknown debt.

There are meetings between UPS and the Analysts that is not public ...
The analysts tell UPS what UPS should do to position their stock better.
that is all I feel comfortable saying.

Why do you think UPS got rid of management (non-Union) pensions and are trying to get rid of Union pensions?
UPS can easily afford pensions but it puts them at a disadvantage when it comes to buyouts, debt, etc.

 

[Catatonic]

and your point is?

I forgot.

 

[Jkloc420]

I wonder how good the healthcare is going to be after a few years of the union running it?