Is Central States pension fund ready to go under?

[nospinzone]

In reply to JonFrum...
1. Our active participation in the various Teamsters-sponsored pension plans will stop as UPS stops contributing money on our behalf. Each of us will have our benefits calculated as of that moment and we will be eligible to receive benefits according to the rules in effect at that time. If there is a five year vesting requirement, then anyone with less than five vested years will forfeit all monies contributed on their behalf. Anyone who is short of any other pension milestone will forfeit the right to a pension based on that milestone. ………..

If the APWA causes UPS to withdraw from the funds, we will be cut off from all future pension credit accruals.

Each individual person would be affected differently depending on their vested time as described by Jon. A person who is a matter of months away from a vesting requirement would be sacrificing more than the person who reached a milestone a few months prior to a NLRB election. In the same light, a new hire would have much to gain by choosing the APWA single employer plan. UPS’rs with long careers/pensions are restricted in their pension benefits dependent on the health of the Teamster funds. People are going to take a financial hit either way you look at this. If we stay with IBT, the younger guys are being cheated out of what they could be getting, and if we switch to APWA, those short of vested milestones will lose a few years of credit that’s not vested….. mind you this is credit towards reduced benefits in most of the Teamster funds.


2. You may have heard that single-employer funds have much better insurance than multi-employer funds. Suposedly, a single-employer fund such as the APWA would create for UPSers only, would have it's monthly benefits insured up to $4,125 per month should the plan fail. While a Teamsters-sponsored multi-employer plan only has insurance of $1,072 per month. The government requires the single-employer funds to be more heavily insured because they fail at a rate of 100 times that of multi-employer funds. They are totally dependant on one employer, and when it fails, the fund fails. That's why you are always cautioned: Don't put all your eggs in one basket. The multi-employer funds, in effect, have much of their "insurance" built in to them as a result of their diversified employer contribution base. I've explained this and more in another thread . . .

Jon said that single employer plans, such as the APWA, “are totally dependant on one employer, and when it fails, the fund fails.” Do you foresee United Parcel Service encountering severe financial instability in the near future? They have managed to weather tough times such as the Great Depression, Black Friday, etc…. If there is information that you believe makes this possibility a sincere and present danger, please share.

JonFrum also said… “The multi-employer funds, in effect, have much of their "insurance" built in to them as a result of their diversified employer contribution base.” How much “insurance” do the IBT multiemployer plans have left in them? UPS is the insurance plan for the IBT plans!

3. But here I want to explain that the often-cited figure for single-employer plans only applies if you are 65 years of age! The coverage is significantly less if you are younger than 65, as almost all of us are. See this table of coverage to see how much less . . .
Maximum monthly guarantee tables (PBGC.gov)
Note that the coverage is reduced even further if the Surviving Spouse option is taken.

Benefits from the PBGC for multiemployer plan are calculated based on service years and contribution accrual rates. This insurance maxes out at the number quoted by JonFrum.. $1,072 per month. Single employer insurance is paid on a age-based table that begins at $1,031 monthly at age 45 and increases each year on the average of 5-8%. By the time you reach age 65, PBGC would pay out $4,125 monthly or $3,712.50 if you choose the joint/50% spouse option. So I still don’t see how IBT is a better option from the PBGC insurance coverage.

And again, what catastrophic event are we expecting that would force UPS to fold after celebrating 100 years of service??

4. The new APWA pension plan will not carry any PBGC insurance for the first five years, since no benefits will be paid for the first five years, (if I'm interpreting their sketchy pension plan description accurately.) These years will be the most turbulent as the APWA attempts to get its house in order and the Teamsters and Teamsters-sponsored funds retailate with campaigns and lawsuits.

PBGS insurance is once again irrelevant unless we expect UPS to fold in the next five years. I expect, as you also do, that Teamsters will not go quietly into the night after an APWA NLRB win. There will be campaigns to convince UPS’rs to return to the IBT. My opinion about that is, if you don’t have the fortitude and spine to stick with the APWA the first few years, don’t sign the card now. If you feel that you will waiver the first time there is a bump in the road with the APWA, or if you will run back to the IBT the first time they put out a seemingly convincing flyer or PR campaign, stay with that blue and gold security blanket that is snuggly covering your eyes.

As far as the lawsuits, IBT will have to reverse precedence with regards to transfer of pension fund assets. Please see the forum “APWA: unanswered questions”

5. UPS will also be hit with a huge bill from each of the pension plans that is less than 100% funded, to cover its Withdrawal Liability. UPS will regard these payments as no different in kind than it's normal payments that it has been making to the funds on our behalf all along. They will claim in negotiations that any new contributions the APWA expects them to make to a new APWA plan will be on top of the Withdrawal Liability contributions they are already legally required to make to the old Teamsters plans.

I’ve reviewed the ERISA on this subject. Unfortunately “War and Peace” reads easier than ERISA. I think JonFrum and I are on even ground with respects to UPS’s responsibility to old IBT plans. They are responsible for benefits promised through the IBT up till the CBA change. Judge Moran will not excuse UPS from those old liabilities. However, any contracts and benefits negotiated by the APWA will cover future work and benefits. Any prior obliglations and liability that UPS is responsible for is between UPS and IBT. APWA will not allow these old liabilities to effect proper and appropriate compensation/benefits for work that has yet to be performed--- ie… all labor negotiations after the CBA change.

 

[Bill]

The pension benefits of non-UPSers are largely paid from the following sources:

The years of contributions their employer paid in to the fund on their behalf.

The years of "excess" contributions their employer paid in to the fund on their behalf, over and above the level necessary to earn each year's full pension credit. [ In the New England fund, for example, we need 1800 hours of contributions per year to earn a full year's pension credit for that year. But an employer might contribute up to 2080 hours on our behalf if we typically work 40 hours a week. The money contributed for hours over 1800 up through 2080 is what I call "excess". ]

The years of contributions, both regular and "excess" that all their other employers contributed on their behalf. [ Some employees move from one employer to another during the course of their working career. Indeed, this is the very reason multi-employer pension plans were started: so workers in the trucking and construction industry especially could have a retirement program even though they moved from job to job, and their employers sometimes went out of business. ]

The years of contributions from all the employers the employee worked for that were forfeited by all his fellow employees who never achieved Vesting Status. [ Like when a non-UPSer worked at one or more companies, and some of his fellow employees never worked long enough to become Vested. Currently Vesting requires five years; in the past it required ten years! Lots of contributions were abandoned, especially under the ten-year vesting rule. These funds remain in the fund and become available to pay benefits to those who do manage to get vested and eventually retire. ]

The contributions contributed over the years on behalf of employees who did not meet a particular plan qualification and had to settle for a lesser benefit. [ A non-UPSer might be aiming for a 25-and-out or a 30-and-out but fall a few months, or years, short. He would have to settle for a pension calculated using an inferior formula. The difference between the inferior formula and the regular formula is another type of "excess" contribution that is available to pay pensions of those employees from those other companies. ]

Any self-contributions made by the non-UPS employees into the pension fund, (where permitted.)

The investment earnings made by the fund over the years on all these non-UPS employer contributions.
- - - - -
In the early days, pensions were very modest, and even the few who were entitled to them, often had to wait until they aged sufficiently to actually begin collecting benefit checks. A small pension becomes even smaller if you "retire" from covered employment in your twenties, thirties, forties or fifties, but have to wait until, say, age 65 to begin receiving benefit checks. Inflation takes its toll all the while.

Benefit levels are tied to years of contributions and to the size of the contributions, so those with fewer years of service and smaller hourly contribution rates get much smaller benefit checks.

A retiree who's employer has gone out of business is called an "orphan retiree." The benefit checks of these non-UPSers are paid out of all of the above funds, not out of present employer contributions. Even if their employer were still in business and contributing, it would be past contributions made during the employee's working career that would fund his retirement benefits, not current contributions. Current contributions are already earmarked to cover the actively employed members on who's behalf the contributions are made. [ Social Security pays current retirees out of current contributions. Multi-employer pension plans pay current retirees out of past contributions made over the years on their behalf. A very big difference. ]

I've never denied that there is some subsidy of Non-UPSers by UPSers, but it can't possibly be anywhere near the 60% APWA supporters claim. Usually if a UPSer doesn't get back all that was contributed by UPS on his behalf, it's either because the UPSer failed to get vested, or failed to meet various other plan requirements, and thus forfeited some, or all, of his contributions.

If UPS contributes $214 a week into the pension fund for each of us, why are we receiving only $90 credit per week? Where does the rest of our money go? If this is not subsidizing the Teamsters, then maybe you can explain it without writing a book.
Also, you mentioned that if the IBT pension fund went bankrupt, we would receive $1072 a month or $4125 if we were a single employee pension plan under the APWA. Under the tutelege of the Teamsters, the pension plan is destined to fail as it is currently only 47.2% funded according to the latest annual report from Central States. The fund has 18.7 billion dollars in assets, but 39.6 billion dollars in liabilities. There is a shortage of 21 billion dollars. This should be alarming to everyone, and maybe open your eyes finally. Maybe this is the reason the Teamsters won't let you retire. They get to keep our money longer. You can find this information on Schedule B (form 5500). If the APWA ran the pension plan, they would have to pay more for insurance as a single pension plan, but more than enough money would be available to do so, as UPS contributions would not go toward other employees in other companies. Even if the APWA failed, we would get $4125 per month, which is still superior to the pension the Teamsters want to give us. It is a win-win situation.

 

[Bill]

Let us get out the whole story if the Central States fund goes into the tank. AWPA indicated that it would have to get it's hands on the teamster controlled pension plans to provided their pie in the sky benefit. What happens if they are successful and UPS withdraws it's financial requirement. It will for sure go under and be taken over by the feds, the payout is only 1,000 dollars per retiree under the pension insurance. So all you guys with 20+ years are basically going to start over again under their so called plan, so good luck with working at UPS for 50 years because that is what it is going to take for you to afford to retire.

There is a positive spin on this, it is that these attorneys who started this so called union see something on the horizon. If there was not money to be made why would they bother. Is it possible that this underfunding will correct itself in the future.

No, the underfunding can not correct itself at this point as the fund is only 47.2% funded. You can find this information in the annual report from Central states, form 5500, schedule B, line 2c. Before you or anyone else makes stupid statements, please have some facts to back up what you say. I have been on this forum for months now, and I continuously give you the facts and tell you where you can verify it, but all you anti-APWA people do is spew propaganda that the Teamsters tell you. Ask the Teamsters to show you proof of the garbage they spew and then come back at me with this information. The Teamsters want you to believe them, no questions asked. The Teamsters are telling everyone that the Central States pension is 60% funded, but the reality is that is only 47.2% funded. Either way, the fund is beyond the point of no return.

 

[brett636]

No, the underfunding can not correct itself at this point as the fund is only 47.2% funded. You can find this information in the annual report from Central states, form 5500, schedule B, line 2c. Before you or anyone else makes stupid statements, please have some facts to back up what you say. I have been on this forum for months now, and I continuously give you the facts and tell you where you can verify it, but all you anti-APWA people do is spew propaganda that the Teamsters tell you. Ask the Teamsters to show you proof of the garbage they spew and then come back at me with this information. The Teamsters want you to believe them, no questions asked. The Teamsters are telling everyone that the Central States pension is 60% funded, but the reality is that is only 47.2% funded. Either way, the fund is beyond the point of no return.

How about you post a link, I have half a notion to believe you are pulling those numbers from your ass.

 

[Bill]

How about you post a link, I have half a notion to believe you are pulling those numbers from your ass.

You have half a notion as well as half a brain. This is public record, and the Central States annual report, form 5500, signed by the actuary Darren French on 9/14/2006. Anyone can obtain a copy, but you would rather show your ignorance instead of doing any research. The truth hurts. 47.2% tells the whole story. Keep on believing the Teamsters propaganda and take their word without questioning them. You do alot of writing on this forum, but unfortunately none of it makes any sense. You are the typical pro-Teamster who spew utter nonsense in order to mislead the masses, and have no facts to back up what you write. When I have confronted you in the past, you have changed your story. What are the Teamsters doing to fix the pension problem? I don't expect an answer from you, because the Teamsters have no answer to this simple question.

 

[JonFrum]

TDU has redesigned its website and has a number of new informative articles. This one . . .
Central States Fund Expands to $21 Billion | Teamsters for a Democratic Union
on the financial state of Central States says, in part,
"In December, the fund informed all Locals that all new contracts negotiated must contain eight percent annual increases in pension contributions, or those members will be kicked out of fund participation.
This mean that in the UPS contract there must be pension contributions of at least 40¢ per hour the first year, then 50¢, and then 60¢ by the fifth year if the contract is that long. These are minimums required to stay in the fund, not to restore benefit cuts."

NOSPINZONE, my understanding is Withdrawal Liability will be owed to the Fund, ( and to all the other funds, except the Western Conference fund) the minute UPS stops contributing to the Fund. Period. It's automatic. And a change in Exclusive Bargaining Agent from the IBT to the APWA would trigger it. As the above quote seems to say, even if the Teamsters remain Exclusive Bargaining Agent, UPS must increase its future contributions by 8% or it will be thrown out of the Fund by the Trustees and Withdrawal Liability will be triggered. Withdrawal Liability is owed to the Fund, not to the IBT, or to the individual participants. That's why I don't understand what you are saying when you seem to imply that Withdrawal Liability is not necessarily due, and that Judge Moran has something to do with it. He is only a judge. A judge can't compel UPS to stay in a fund against its will, nor can a judge issue orders that contradict The Law. But since I haven't seen Judge Moran's memorandum and order of November 17, 2003, you'll have to post a link to it so I can look it over.

This is a problem I'm having repeatedly with APWA supporters: they keep referencing documents that I haven't seen. I called on the APWA months ago to publish online all of its documents but it never did. I asked for the bylaws, detailed contract proposals, and pension and H&W plan descriptions, and so on. Early on, I signed up for information and a newsletter on the APWA website but I never got any information, just a monthly one page email "newsletter" from Danny Eason that had very little useful content. The APWA website hasn't been updated or expanded much so it's difficult to know what the APWA's positions and intentions really are. It's impractical, and should be unnecessary of me, to generate a thousand email inquiries to Van or Danny asking for rulings on each of the hundreds of paragraphs in a typical collective bargaining agreement, pension plan, health and welfare plan, card check campaign, NLRB election, etc. Why should I, and everyone else, have to pull teeth to get this information when it should be freely available on the website.
- - - - -
Originally, in connection with the UPS proposal to take over our pensions in 1997, TIEGUY was saying single-employer pension plans were superior to multi-employer plans in part because the PBGC insures their benefits to a higher level, almost four times as high. I pointed out that we shouldn't be focused on PBGC insurance as a selling point, because the only time it comes into play is if the plan fails, and you are in dire straights. One would not plan on such a disaster, so the level of insurance coverage should be way down on one's list of things to consider. Besides the PBGC Single-Employer Insurance Plan is itself all but bankrupt, and will only get worse by the time you actually need it in the future.

Now we see that the Single-Employer coverage is dramatically reduced for anyone retireing before age 65. Ironically, Central Staters (rightly) complain that they are being made to deliver packages until age 65, yet the "selling point" of $4,125 coverage only applies if you do, in fact, wait until age 65 to start collecting benefit checks. The coverage is not only reduced if the surviving spouse option is selected, but is also reduced because some types of benefits are not covered, especially recent plan improvements. Coverage is zero for the first five years, but even after that it is only the actual payouts that are covered, not the plan's assets. So in effect, you don't have any coverage at all until you actually start receiving benefit checks. And for almost everyone, the covered amount will be significantly lower than the frequently cited $4,125.

APWA should run the numbers and generate a chart of the likely coverage that would be provided to people of various ages, under various conditions. The amounts might be only twice the Multi-Employer levels, or there abouts. But remember, Single-Employer plans have a documented history of failing at a rate of 100 times that of Multi-Employer plans. (That's why Congress sets their premimums and coverage levels higher, to make them artificially appear safe.) So the Single-Employer plans have a somewhat better nominal level of coverage, but they are a great deal worse if you consider that the coverage is a hundred times more likely to be needed, and when it is, the PBGC may go belly-up anyway.

I know it's hard to think of a UPSers-only fund as failing. UPS doesn't seem to be on the verge of bankruptcy. But history is full of examples of successful companies that were doing fine one day, then were bankrupt ten years later. UPS, is heavily dependent on oil for its ground and air operations. It's dependent on its airline at a time when the oil and airline industries are vunerable to terrorism and it's financial effects. (Didn't the Twin Towers actually fall on a UPS facility?) UPS is cutting and squeezing to meet the competition. It's implementation of PAS is shocking. It has just experienced several of the mildest winters in recorded history; things will likely only get worse in future winters. Remember OPL; and that plan to not deliver packages to out-of-the-way stops, because they were, well, out-of-the-way? Remember the plan to install seats in the planes on weekends and rent them out for charters, then rip the seats out for the workweek? Notice how they treat their people --- labor and management. Notice how the competion is expanding? How UPS won't wash its package cars (traveling billboards for the company), but will spent millions on TV ads and slogans, and sponsorship of autoracing that glorifies reckless driving, neither of which gets a single package delivered. Then their is the pitiful part-time wage situation and the high turnover problems it causes. And The Market's evaluation of the company as expressed in its languishing stock price. I could go on. The point is you can't be too sure UPS will be around for the next 100 years. For that matter, UPS is 100 years old, but only in a technical sense. The first half century or so really shouldn't count for most purposes.

Questions:
If the APWA is certified as our exclusive bargaining agent at the same moment the Contract expires, July 31, 2008, will we be "at will" employees without a contract for months until a new one is subsequently negotiated and approved?

If the APWA is certified months earlier than 7/31/08, what happens to the existing contract? It would have several months to run but since it is a contract between UPS and the Teamsters, and the Teamsters would now be out of the picture, would the contract be null and void? I find it hard to imagine that the contract could remain in force since it is filled with references to the Teamsters, such as to Teamster pension and H&W plans, Teamster grievance panels, Teamster seniority, etc.

APWA and its supporters repeatedly claim the Teamsters are diverting (stealing?) 60% of the money UPS contributes on our behalf to the various pension plans and using it to subsidize the retirement of non-UPSers. Yet no one has ever responded to my request for proof that this looting is taking place. All I ever see is endless repetition of the charge as if it is self-evident. Take Central States: If you also claim that 25 or 30% or so of plan assets were lost by mismanaged investments, then shouldn't you subtract the investment losses from the 60% figure? If money was lost in the stock market, it's gone. How can it be used by the Teamsters, (more acurately, by the Teamsters/Management Joint Board of Trustees) to subsidize the retirement of non-UPSers? I maintain this observation alone cuts your 60% subsidy figure about in half, and my earlier observations that the retirement benefits of non-UPSer retirees are largely paid for by their one, or more, employer's many years of contributions, reduces it a lot further.

If someone is just short of 5-year Vesting in a Teamsters-sponsored plan and is voluntarily or forceably transfered to an APWA pension fund, will they not need nearly ten years to get Vested (almost five years in the old plan, plus, starting from scratch, five years in the new plan)?

Whew. You guys are wearin' me out.

 

[brett636]

You have half a notion as well as half a brain. This is public record, and the Central States annual report, form 5500, signed by the actuary Darren French on 9/14/2006. Anyone can obtain a copy, but you would rather show your ignorance instead of doing any research. The truth hurts. 47.2% tells the whole story. Keep on believing the Teamsters propaganda and take their word without questioning them. You do alot of writing on this forum, but unfortunately none of it makes any sense. You are the typical pro-Teamster who spew utter nonsense in order to mislead the masses, and have no facts to back up what you write. When I have confronted you in the past, you have changed your story. What are the Teamsters doing to fix the pension problem? I don't expect an answer from you, because the Teamsters have no answer to this simple question.

Pro-Teamster? Bwhahaha, you fool, show me one post I have written praising the teamsters. Just because I don't support your BS doesn't mean I support the teamsters BS. I just support the lessor of the two evils. Now post a link to your information or shutup because its obvious your statements have no real substance.

 

[sawdusttv]

Brett,

Man your thick headed!
He just gave you the info on how to obtain the report. Public record!!!!!!!!
Contact CS and request a copy of the report and they will send you one.

 

[mittam]

JOnfrum, the by-laws and constitution were ratified by APWA members, the APWA also has the medical company and financial company ready to go, unfortunately with teamster pressures on those companies they will not divulge the info on them. the bylaws and such are in place and those that are members can get copies of them if they like.the website updates haven't occurred for the same reasons as above, they know that the teamsters monitor their site and do not want to give out too much info. The phone numbers are there to let you call them if you have questions.To answer about looting taking place, I guess only the officials collecting the pension monies know exactly where it goes. There is 60 % of what we get each week going elsewhere, see the McDivett report, the statements John McDivett made before the supreme court on the state of multi-employers pensions. He stated there that UPS people only get 40% of the pension monies put into the cs pension fund. I also would like to know where the other 60% goes. At this point we can only guess. I am sure however it does not go to the 2 and 3 pensions that teamster officials collect upon retiring. Generating a chart for the retirement can only be done hypothetically taking a fund and going back 20 or 30 years. This is the way any financial advisor will do it if you go to one and want to start a fund.They can lose their securities license for projecting. We will have a contract whether it is before or after the current one. We will not work without a contract. This is a new union starting up and people have the chance to vote it in, therefore it is not a desertification vote and we will have representation and a contract from the start.

 

[brett636]

Brett,

Man your thick headed!
He just gave you the info on how to obtain the report. Public record!!!!!!!!
Contact CS and request a copy of the report and they will send you one.

I'm too lazy to do that. This is the day of the internet and this information should be somewhere online. If he can't provide a link then I cannot believe him. I'm not even part of central states so in the end I don't care.

 

[wildgoose]

I'm too lazy to do that. This is the day of the internet and this information should be somewhere online. If he can't provide a link then I cannot believe him. I'm not even part of central states so in the end I don't care.

i`m a little confused on you not being in Central states so in the end why do you fight all the information that is presented to you ? You don`t really care ? The way i look at it why not let central states receipients break away and let the APWA take care of us with our funds ! Heck there are many other funds under teamsters whats one less screwed up fund to worry about ? Problem solved. No more chasing your tail in here Brett Those happy with the teamsters they can stay in their fund. Sorta like our own Margarittaville ! We`ll take care of ourselves !

 

[Cole]

i`m a little confused on you not being in Central states so in the end why do you fight all the information that is presented to you ? You don`t really care ? The way i look at it why not let central states receipients break away and let the APWA take care of us with our funds ! Heck there are many other funds under teamsters whats one less screwed up fund to worry about ? Problem solved. No more chasing your tail in here Brett Those happy with the teamsters they can stay in their fund. Sorta like our own Margarittaville ! We`ll take care of ourselves !

We can only be under a single bargaining unit, so it' all or none.

I think it was Brett that said he would go with the machinists union before the APWA, when I posted about the mechanics at UPS in the machinists union, so he' not so much backing the Teamsters as not wanting to start a Union from scratch, or so it's seems to me.

As far as the CS funds, and those that we are entitled to, no doubt the APWA would have to file a major lawsuit, and CS would have only one appeal if I am correct, so that could take about 2 yrs, which isn't that bad.

 

[Bill]

We can only be under a single bargaining unit, so it' all or none.

I think it was Brett that said he would go with the machinists union before the APWA, when I posted about the mechanics at UPS in the machinists union, so he' not so much backing the Teamsters as not wanting to start a Union from scratch, or so it's seems to me.

As far as the CS funds, and those that we are entitled to, no doubt the APWA would have to file a major lawsuit, and CS would have only one appeal if I am correct, so that could take about 2 yrs, which isn't that bad.

I would not go with anything that Brett says. He keeps contradicting himself and gives only his opinions and hearsay on this forum.
You are correct in saying that a lawsuit would take about 2 years to retrieve the portion of CS money that is destined to go to UPS employees.

 

[Bill]

I'm too lazy to do that. This is the day of the internet and this information should be somewhere online. If he can't provide a link then I cannot believe him. I'm not even part of central states so in the end I don't care.

You might not care now, but you will when Central states drags your pension plan down. See the new thread I started : Central states pension plan going to drag down other pension plans. The fact is that the Western conference was 100% funded, but they recently took a 30% cut to help fund central states. Next year, your pension plan could be next to be hit with a cut. Then we will see if you still don't care.

 

[krash]

I would not go with anything that Brett says. He keeps contradicting himself and gives only his opinions and hearsay on this forum.
You are correct in saying that a lawsuit would take about 2 years to retrieve the portion of CS money that is destined to go to UPS employees.

Unlike your post full of misinformation

 

[satellitedriver]

How about you post a link, I have half a notion to believe you are pulling those numbers from your ass.

I thought you were the one that gave me the advice that,"Knowledge is power". Knowledge of simple facts that are public record must not apply to your sense of power.

 

[satellitedriver]

Unlike your post full of misinformation

What misinformation?

 

[Delivered]

How about you post a link, I have half a notion to believe you are pulling those numbers from your ass.

Its only 160 pages have fun reading. You really should believe us guys who are in it. Us central states guys have no reason to lie. We are getting screwed and it's getting worse every single day.

 

[Delivered]

How about you post a link, I have half a notion to believe you are pulling those numbers from your ass.

I hope your Vision Benefits haven't been cut yet, You got lots of reading ahead of you.....

 

[Delivered]

How about you post a link, I have half a notion to believe you are pulling those numbers from your ass.

UPS drivers are in class 18. This shows you that we are restricted in our work after we retire that makes as much sense as the UPS PAS system.