Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DELACROIX" data-source="post: 5669490" data-attributes="member: 49065">From my understanding when a pension fund reaches that 100 percent threshold the employers do not have to put in anymore monetary contributions to cover their promised benefits.&nbsp; They can maintain their required vesting ratios by just their returns on their investments.For example the IBT/UPS Pension Plan has the ability to forfeit their end of the year monetary contributions if it is presently sitting at 102 percent,&nbsp; it depends on their investment returns for that particular year.That was the real reason for the “97” strike, the Company was going to use the Central’s future underfunding as an excuse to take over every “Monetary Contribution Plan” that they were contributed to like the West and DC.&nbsp;They got half of their goal when the Union agreed to let UPS out of their pension obligations under the Central in 2008.Their ultimate goal was to get Western’s, probably a pipe dream by now.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DELACROIX, post: 5669490, member: 49065"] From my understanding when a [B]pension fund[/B] reaches that [B]100 percent threshold [/B]the employers do not have to put in anymore monetary contributions to cover their promised benefits. They can maintain their required vesting ratios by just their returns on their investments. For example the IBT/UPS Pension Plan has the ability to forfeit their end of the year monetary contributions if it is presently sitting at [B]102 percent, it depends [/B]on their investment returns for that particular year. That was the real reason for the “97” strike, the Company was going to use the Central’s future underfunding as an excuse to take over every “Monetary Contribution Plan” that they were contributed to like the West and DC. They got half of their goal when the Union agreed to let UPS out of their pension obligations under the Central in 2008. Their ultimate goal was to get Western’s, probably a pipe dream by now. [/QUOTE]

Verification