Central states-what happens when???

[Mugarolla]

That's laughable. Do you understand the study? The entire premise is based upon the PBGC guarantee, allowing only a 30% cut. Like the Geico commercial, "New flash!" The PBGC is damn near insolvent itself! How the hell is it going to guarantee anything?

Apparently you don't understand the study. It has nothing to do with the PBGC paying anything.

It only references what the PBGC would pay compared to what retirees would receive if their pensions were cut.

 

[Mugarolla]

The reality that you can't save a pension as underfunded as CS is by not cutting UPS retires is going to really hurt.

Yes, it is really going to hurt some retirees. They may see their pensions cut by 60%

Yes I am flat out saying that Congress is corrupt.

You're just realizing that now?

No, I didn't say they took bribes but you are extremely naive if you don't think those two receive contributions from UPS in some legal form but it's money all the same.

Yes they received money from UPS. Yes it was legal. It still was a bribe. Do what we want and get our money, else, no money.

And UPS is not the only company that does it.

You are going to be let down if you trust UPS.

The law is on the books. The guarantee is in the contract. They cannot circumvent anything right now no matter how hard they try.

Can things change in the future? You bet.

Laws could change, contracts could change.

The government could also take your 401k. No one knows what the future holds.

 

[Spicybrother]

Apparently you don't understand the study. It has nothing to do with the PBGC paying anything.

It only references what the PBGC would pay compared to what retirees would receive if their pensions were cut.

View attachment 38069

I understand perfectly. The Centrals States plan is underfunded by about read carefully 17 BILLION DOLLARS with only 1 dollar being taking in for every about 3 and a half dollars they spend! That "math" is overwhelming. They passed the law to allow great cuts and to allow people already receiving their pensions to but cut. Here's what it could look like according to the government http://www.pensionrights.org/multiemployer-retiree-cutback-calculator . That's as bad as it can get.

 

[Mugarolla]

I understand perfectly. The Centrals States plan is underfunded by about read carefully 17 BILLION DOLLARS with only 1 dollar being taking in for every about 3 and a half dollars they spend! That "math" is overwhelming. They passed the law to allow great cuts and to allow people already receiving their pensions to but cut. Here's what it could look like according to the government http://www.pensionrights.org/multiemployer-retiree-cutback-calculator . That's as bad as it can get.

If they cut half the retirees to 10% over what the PBGC would pay, this would give them an overall 30% cut.

Now they only spend $2 for every $1 taken in. And the investment return covers the other dollar. Solvent indefinitely.

This has nothing to due with the PBGC guaranteeing the pension as you mentioned in your original post.

The government knows that if CS failed, so would the PBGC. This is why the cuts are so steep. The retirees receiving the biggest cuts are still going to receive more money than what the PBGC would pay if CS failed.

I know the cuts are bad, but they are still above what retirees would get if CS failed.

 

[Catatonic]

At least the latest advisement. received today, was on a post card.
Saved some money on the latest "no news" on the CS Pension Rescue Plan

 

[rod]

At least the latest advisement. received today, was on a post card.
Saved some money on the latest "no news" on the CS Pension Rescue Plan

I got my little postcard today also. Its nice of them to give us a reminder that the ax will fall soon------------as if anybody had forgot about it.

 

[oldngray]

I got my little postcard today also. Its nice of them to give us a reminder that the ax will fall soon------------as if anybody had forgot about it.

I got that postcard. Another waste of money telling people absolutely nothing new.

 

[wide load]

I got that postcard. Another waste of money telling people absolutely nothing new.

It's required by the pension reform act.

 

[oldngray]

It's required by the pension reform act.

The mailing was required but Central States should have included real updates instead of keeping members in the dark. Again.

 

[wide load]

The mailing was required but Central States should have included real updates instead of keeping members in the dark. Again.

What does it say?

 

[oldngray]

What does it say?

The Central States Pension Fund Trustees are currently reviewing temporary and proposed guidance issued on June 17 by the U.S. Department of Treasury to multiemployer pension funds, like Central States, that are considering the development of rescue plans, including potential benefit reductions for active members and retirees, under the Multiemployer Pension Reform Act of 2014 (MPRA). This guidance is several hundred pages in length.

Our Trustees are continuing to develop a fair rescue plan to ensure that our Fund will continue to provide pension benefits for many years in the future. A proposed rescue plan may not be available for several months. We understand the uncertainty and anxiety related to this process, and appreciate your patience.

When a proposed rescue plan has been developed, we will be contacting you again through U.S. mail with detailed information about if and how it will specifically impact your pension benefits.

For timely updates, please visit our website, or call our dedicated hotline at 1-800-323-7640.

 

[rod]

The Central States Pension Fund Trustees are currently reviewing temporary and proposed guidance issued on June 17 by the U.S. Department of Treasury to multiemployer pension funds, like Central States, that are considering the development of rescue plans, including potential benefit reductions for active members and retirees, under the Multiemployer Pension Reform Act of 2014 (MPRA). This guidance is several hundred pages in length.

Our Trustees are continuing to develop a fair rescue plan to ensure that our Fund will continue to provide pension benefits for many years in the future. A proposed rescue plan may not be available for several months. We understand the uncertainty and anxiety related to this process, and appreciate your patience.

When a proposed rescue plan has been developed, we will be contacting you again through U.S. mail with detailed information about if and how it will specifically impact your pension benefits.

For timely updates, please visit our website, www.CSPensionRescue.comr call our dedicated hotline at 1-800-323-7640.

Which basically says nothing and was just more money wasted

 

[Ron Cee]

I don't think it was congress as much as President Reagan.

The trucking deregulation bill was signed into law in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter.

 

[Ron Cee]

I wonder how much these guys got paid, John Kline (R-Minn.) and Democrat Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) for the Kline-Miller amendment.

It's called a bi-partisan friend-ing. They both received equal consideration for their efforts.

 

[Lead Belly]

It's called a bi-partisan friend-ing. They both received equal consideration for their efforts.

Is that one of those hook up sites like tinder?

 

[InsideUPS]

UPS will pay you your full pension up until you reach normal retirement age. This is 65 right now. Once you turn 65, UPS will offset the amount that you collect from Central States.

If I retire at 30 and out. UPS will pay me $3200/mo until I turn 65. At that time, my Central States pension will be roughly $2000/mo. This is what I accrued for the 20 years that I was in that plan.

So when I turn 65, UPS will pay me $1200/mo and Central States will pay me $2000/mo. My total will still be $3200/mo, just coming from 2 different sources.

The Teamsters swear that the following article guarantees that if Central States reduces their portion, UPS has to make up the difference to maintain my $3200/mo.

And yes it is still in the current Central Region Supplement.

Article 14 Section 1

The UPS/IBT Plan will recognize full-time service in the CS Plan for determining eligibility for the benefits in this section and will offset at Normal Retirement Age the benefits accrued from the CS Plan commencing at Normal Retirement Age. If the benefit paid from the CS Plan is reduced as permitted or required by law, the amount of such reduction shall not be included in this offset.

I'm surprised that there is so much confusion on Article 14 Section 1. The language seems clear that if the "benefit paid from the CS Plan is reduced as permitted or required by law" (which apparently will happen next year - 2016), the amount of such reduction shall NOT be included in the offset.

According to information on the CS Rescue Plan website under the sub-heading of UPS Transfer Group. Apparently.... UPS employees that retired before December 29, 2007 will suffer economic consequences and will not be included in any offset.

NOTE: the (hedge) wording on the CS Pension Rescue website: "there SHOULD be no net loss of pension benefits for protected UPS Transfer Group participants (Employees still with the company as of 12/29/2007) or their beneficiaries"

 

[Mugarolla]

I'm surprised that there is so much confusion on Article 14 Section 1. The language seems clear that if the "benefit paid from the CS Plan is reduced as permitted or required by law" (which apparently will happen next year - 2016), the amount of such reduction shall NOT be included in the offset.

According to information on the CS Rescue Plan website at http://www.cspensionrescue.com/the-rescue-plan/ nder the sub-heading of UPS Transfer Group. Apparently.... UPS employees that retired before December 29, 2007 will suffer economic consequences and will not be included in any offset.

NOTE: the (hedge) wording on the CS Pension Rescue website: "there SHOULD be no net loss of pension benefits for protected UPS Transfer Group participants (Employees still with the company as of 12/29/2007) or their beneficiaries"

I can understand. At first glance, the article seems confusing.

What is the offset? What does NOT being included in the offset mean?

Some people still don't understand what it means and still believes that the CSPF could be wrong.

And the CSPF says SHOULD be no net loss because they cannot guarantee that UPS will live up to the contract or that UPS will not make some kind of deal with either the Teamsters or Congress.

Nothing is 100% guaranteed until it is here.

 

[oldngray]

I can understand. At first glance, the article seems confusing.

What is the offset? What does NOT being included in the offset mean?

Some people still don't understand what it means and still believes that the CSPF could be wrong.

And the CSPF says SHOULD be no net loss because they cannot guarantee that UPS will live up to the contract or that UPS will not make some kind of deal with either the Teamsters or Congress.

Nothing is 100% guaranteed until it is here.

Any time the language is not clear you can understand why people are leery of trusting either UPS or the union with their pensions now.

 

[WhatsUP]

You're confusing yourself and your first and second paragraph are saying just the opposite. UPS only paid the liability on active Central States members at that time and they had to work at least one hour in 2008 before retiring to qualify for the new pension and guarantee.

All CS UPS retirees "from day one" will not be included in the third in line carve out unfortunately - only those who retired after 2008.

The correct answer is that UPS workers in Tier 2 and Tier 3 were suppose to take equal cuts according to the Treasury Dept and Ken Feinberg issued on 5/07/2016

 

[Ms.PacMan]

The correct answer is that UPS workers in Tier 2 and Tier 3 were suppose to take equal cuts according to the Treasury Dept and Ken Feinberg issued on 5/07/2016

I know - I saw that in the Treasury Dept response letter to the Teamsters and posted it in that thread! The Teamsters apparently interpreted the law wrong with their Tier 1, 2, 3. It looks as though all UPS employees (past and present) should receive the same special status in a recovery plan.