Management Retirement at 59

[BROWNHOG]

Your taxed on social security and medicare from the day you start working and part of what your taxed on goes to people who do nothing but are able.....welfare ? Got your info wrong

 

[co-chair]

you wonder why this contract is not settled yet. when us union boys see how they crap on there own mgt. what do you think they would do to us.just saw 2 full time sups quit . In the past 4 years seems like the sups are more pissed off and bad mouth the company more than us union boys .3 days to stop smoking or pay 150 a month more for ins no more ins for spouses after 2014 kick up retirement to 59 with no extra money based on last 10 years with 5 highest ending at 55 no future raises factored in after 55 .And in case you did not know all you newbees 2008 was was the cut off for pensions for non union so start stashing into 401k and ups stock thats all you you will have good luck. Jim Casey RIP you are in a better place trust me you have turned over in your grave many times over I am sure

 

[Catatonic]

you wonder why this contract is not settled yet. when us union boys see how they crap on there own mgt. what do you think they would do to us.just saw 2 full time sups quit . In the past 4 years seems like the sups are more pissed off and bad mouth the company more than us union boys .3 days to stop smoking or pay 150 a month more for ins no more ins for spouses after 2014 kick up retirement to 59 with no extra money based on last 10 years with 5 highest ending at 55 no future raises factored in after 55 .And in case you did not know all you newbees 2008 was was the cut off for pensions for non union so start stashing into 401k and ups stock thats all you you will have good luck. Jim Casey RIP you are in a better place trust me you have turned over in your grave many times over I am sure

Pretty much on target except for the childish last sentence.

Jim would probably be doing what UPS is doing now because UPS is reacting to FedEx business model and the modern way of doing business.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the unions for letting the jobs go overseas and letting other countries' goods flow into the US at lower prices ... or maybe it's the politicians.

​Key thing is, "Don't blame yourself or me".

 

[Bamboozled]

Everyone,

Depending on your location it appears different rumors have been spread in different areas. Perhaps to test the waters in different areas as if we are mice. For instance from one area of the country I have heard there may be changes to the pension but they will be a cut off date like anyone born after 1965 will be forced to stay until 59 and it may be a graduated change 55, then 57 and then 59. However the rumors from another area say anyone born after 1960 will have to stay until 59.

Here are my questions for the educated in Law:

Can they promise someone who started say 1983 when they were 20 years old a retirement at 55 and then change it when they are 50 once they already have 30yrs in? Keep in mind someone with less years (say 20 years) but they started later in life and are now 55, they can retire with less years of service just because they are older. Isn't that age discrimination? Isn't that why the original pension cutoff was changed from "born after 1978 and promoted after 2006" was changed to just promoted after 2008?

The problem is there are many different laws in many different states regarding this nonsense especially since Enron. I don't know what they all are I am sure somewhere there is one that is written that doesn't allow a company to promise something for an entire working life and then pull the carpet out from under them at the last stretch with complete disregard, especially when the CEO keeps getting record bonuses and record profits.

Actually they are not record profits. What they have done is taken everything from us and then placed it in the "Profit" category when all they did was steal it from the people who made it.

If anyone of importance is out there, if you want us to tighten our belt lead by example and start with yours. You cant cry poor and lavish yourselves with dividends and bonuses and expect anyone to believe it.

 

[SignificantOwner]

Pretty much on target except for the childish last sentence.

Jim would probably be doing what UPS is doing now because UPS is reacting to FedEx business model and the modern way of doing business.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the unions for letting the jobs go overseas and letting other countries' goods flow into the US at lower prices ... or maybe it's the politicians.

​Key thing is, "Don't blame yourself or me".

​I think Casey would have motivated the team to take on the competition, to be better, more aggressive. He always spoke frankly to management when times were tough. Management responded to him because he also rewarded the team when things turned around. Will we be rewarded financially if we work our rear ends off to better the competition? I haven't seen any evidence in the last 10 years to support an affirmative answer.

 

[Catatonic]

​I think Casey would have motivated the team to take on the competition, to be better, more aggressive. He always spoke frankly to management when times were tough. Management responded to him because he also rewarded the team when things turned around. Will we be rewarded financially if we work our rear ends off to better the competition? I haven't seen any evidence in the last 10 years to support an affirmative answer.

​Getting rewards through stock MIP after lean periods appears to be gone.
You will be rewarded when the stock increases in price and pays dividends.
That is the way management was rewarded in the past.
I never got any extra after lean periods except stock awards and stock price increase.

 

[SignificantOwner]

​Getting rewards through stock MIP after lean periods appears to be gone.
You will be rewarded when the stock increases in price and pays dividends.
That is the way management was rewarded in the past.
I never got any extra after lean periods except stock awards and stock price increase.

The past is past​. Management (other than a select few) is accumulating far fewer shares than in the past therefore the prospect of stock increases and dividends provide little motivation. Employee ownership is dead as a motivator.

 

[jeepguy63]

Everyone,

Depending on your location it appears different rumors have been spread in different areas. Perhaps to test the waters in different areas as if we are mice. For instance from one area of the country I have heard there may be changes to the pension but they will be a cut off date like anyone born after 1965 will be forced to stay until 59 and it may be a graduated change 55, then 57 and then 59. However the rumors from another area say anyone born after 1960 will have to stay until 59.

Here are my questions for the educated in Law:

Can they promise someone who started say 1983 when they were 20 years old a retirement at 55 and then change it when they are 50 once they already have 30yrs in? Keep in mind someone with less years (say 20 years) but they started later in life and are now 55, they can retire with less years of service just because they are older. Isn't that age discrimination? Isn't that why the original pension cutoff was changed from "born after 1978 and promoted after 2006" was changed to just promoted after 2008?

Im not a lawyer and I don't play one on tv. But, after two law classes at the grad level, and after reading on the subject, here is my two cents.

The continental can company screwed nonunion folks over just months prior to their eligibility for retirement benefits. They got sued and there was some kind of settlement. I believe the ERISA laws were written as a result of the "lack of laws protecting employees" as exposed by the continental can situation.

More recently, cases involving Verizon and IBM went all the way to the supreme court. Both companies won their case.

All that said- here is what ERISA says. A company can do anything it wants to its existing retirement benefits plans....AS LONG AS THE CHANGE TO THE PLAN IMPACTES EVERY PARTICIPANT IN THE PLAN IN THE SAME WAY.

So, Verizon eliminated their pension plans, paid every existing employee the net present value of their existing benefit, and changed their future plan to a 401k contribution only. No mor pension. The scotus upheld the change since it impacted every employee in the same way. Same deal at IBM.

So your question....can they do XXXX......? They can do anything they want.....as long as every participant in the plan is affected in the exact same way.

Hope it helps.....I am not a lawyer or a law student...... I just read.

 

[Catatonic]

Everyone,

Depending on your location it appears different rumors have been spread in different areas. Perhaps to test the waters in different areas as if we are mice. For instance from one area of the country I have heard there may be changes to the pension but they will be a cut off date like anyone born after 1965 will be forced to stay until 59 and it may be a graduated change 55, then 57 and then 59. However the rumors from another area say anyone born after 1960 will have to stay until 59.

Here are my questions for the educated in Law:

Can they promise someone who started say 1983 when they were 20 years old a retirement at 55 and then change it when they are 50 once they already have 30yrs in? Keep in mind someone with less years (say 20 years) but they started later in life and are now 55, they can retire with less years of service just because they are older. Isn't that age discrimination? Isn't that why the original pension cutoff was changed from "born after 1978 and promoted after 2006" was changed to just promoted after 2008?

The problem is there are many different laws in many different states regarding this nonsense especially since Enron. I don't know what they all are I am sure somewhere there is one that is written that doesn't allow a company to promise something for an entire working life and then pull the carpet out from under them at the last stretch with complete disregard, especially when the CEO keeps getting record bonuses and record profits.

Actually they are not record profits. What they have done is taken everything from us and then placed it in the "Profit" category when all they did was steal it from the people who made it.

If anyone of importance is out there, if you want us to tighten our belt lead by example and start with yours. You cant cry poor and lavish yourselves with dividends and bonuses and expect anyone to believe it.

I wonder if one can sue the schools because they got bamboozled out of an education?
​Just thinking.

 

[Bamboozled]

Jeepguy63,

Thank you for the law opinion. I guess that's why they eliminated the birth date on the pension cutoff. The only question left is will the powers that be, pull that trigger. How did IBM calculate the current value of their pensions? I am sure it was only a fraction of what a 20 year survivor would get.

Hoaxster,

I apologize for the rant. I am educated with a Computer Science degree. English Composition was my worst topic. You must remember we aren't all retired so we are posting while exhausted and half lit.

 

[Limper]

The past is past​. Management (other than a select few) is accumulating far fewer shares than in the past therefore the prospect of stock increases and dividends provide little motivation. Employee ownership is dead as a motivator.

Then what is the motivator? My supervisors are merely going through the motions. No one seems to care anymore,
just keep up "appearances". Initiative is all but gone. Unintended consequences?

 

[SignificantOwner]

Then what is the motivator?...

​Getting home and doing funner stuff!

 

[Catatonic]

Hoaxster,

I apologize for the rant. I am educated with a Computer Science degree. English Composition was my worst topic. You must remember we aren't all retired so we are posting while exhausted and half lit.

Rant Ok and the grammar too.
I was just doing a play on your name ... and your "belief" that companies follow through on their promises.

Carry on, you're doing fine.

 

[Yankfan]

Jeepguy63,

Thank you for the law opinion. I guess that's why they eliminated the birth date on the pension cutoff. The only question left is will the powers that be, pull that trigger. How did IBM calculate the current value of their pensions? I am sure it was only a fraction of what a 20 year survivor would get.

Hoaxster,

I apologize for the rant. I am educated with a Computer Science degree. English Composition was my worst topic. You must remember we aren't all retired so we are posting while exhausted and half lit.

This is my biggest fear. As it has been posted on this forum a few times, I think the fact that UPS posts the "current cash value" of your pension on the Total Rewards Portal gives some insight to the future. The "total compensation" tab grossly over-estimates our total compensation by including your POTENTIAL MIP figure (maximum) resulting in total compensation that that looks great on paper but is completely unattainable given the continuous erosion of the MIP plan. Obviously, this over-statement of total compensation is meant to fool the employee into feeling a little better about their pay.

HOWEVER, the company doesn't seem to take the same approach with the next tab. The next tab shows the "current cash value" of your pension which the company grossly UNDER-STATES - at a rate of about 15-20 cents on the dollar when compared to the value of purchasing a similar annuity on the open market. If the company was trying to demostrate the VALUE of your total compensation package, wouldn't it make sense to give a more accurate figure here. Wouldn't that perhaps help sway an employee to think that this job may be worth the hassle/headaches. Afterall, if a very sizeable pension nestegg was being built, I know it would give me a different perspective on my compensation.

So why does UPS grossly understate the current cash value of your pension if they are trying to show the VALUE of your total compensation? The theory is that this is the next management concession. That sometime in near future, UPS will come up with some formula (similar to the enhancement to the MIP formula that produced a below average MIP in a year of record profits) that will be used to buy-out our pensions and dissolve the plan. The formula will spit out a figure that will be slightly above the "current cash value" (about $72,000 for a 19 year FT supervisor) of your pension as stated by UPS, but will still be far below fair market value. This will allow UPS to spin the buyout as a "great deal for their employees" and then laugh all the way to bank.

I know this may seem far fetched to some, but how many of us would have said the same thing 5 years ago about the spousal exclusion? How many of us would have dismissed the thought of a year of record profits that resulted in a below average MIP as being impossible? Any thoughts that anyone has that refutes this theory would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Catatonic]

This is my biggest fear. As it has been posted on this forum a few times, I think the fact that UPS posts the "current cash value" of your pension on the Total Rewards Portal gives some insight to the future. The "total compensation" tab grossly over-estimates our total compensation by including your POTENTIAL MIP figure (maximum) resulting in total compensation that that looks great on paper but is completely unattainable given the continuous erosion of the MIP plan. Obviously, this over-statement of total compensation is meant to fool the employee into feeling a little better about their pay.

HOWEVER, the company doesn't seem to take the same approach with the next tab. The next tab shows the "current cash value" of your pension which the company grossly UNDER-STATES - at a rate of about 15-20 cents on the dollar when compared to the value of purchasing a similar annuity on the open market. If the company was trying to demostrate the VALUE of your total compensation package, wouldn't it make sense to give a more accurate figure here. Wouldn't that perhaps help sway an employee to think that this job may be worth the hassle/headaches. Afterall, if a very sizeable pension nestegg was being built, I know it would give me a different perspective on my compensation.

So why does UPS grossly understate the current cash value of your pension if they are trying to show the VALUE of your total compensation? The theory is that this is the next management concession. That sometime in near future, UPS will come up with some formula (similar to the enhancement to the MIP formula that produced a below average MIP in a year of record profits) that will be used to buy-out our pensions and dissolve the plan. The formula will spit out a figure that will be slightly above the "current cash value" (about $72,000 for a 19 year FT supervisor) of your pension as stated by UPS, but will still be far below fair market value. This will allow UPS to spin the buyout as a "great deal for their employees" and then laugh all the way to bank.

I know this may seem far fetched to some, but how many of us would have said the same thing 5 years ago about the spousal exclusion? How many of us would have dismissed the thought of a year of record profits that resulted in a below average MIP as being impossible? Any thoughts that anyone has that refutes this theory would be greatly appreciated.

The amount in Total Rewards caught my attention and was one of the motivating factors for my early retirement in Feb this year.
When I discussed this with higher ups, they seemed a bit confused ... out of the loop.
I think UPS is prepping to roll-over into 401k at some point but they probably will not do that until an annuity can replace the monthly pension payments with the amount UPS has in Total rewards. You could come close to that in 2007 but not even close since. My investigations revealed the amount in Total rewards is about 40% of what is needed.

 

[Yankfan]

The amount in Total Rewards caught my attention and was one of the motivating factors for my early retirement in Feb this year.
When I discussed this with higher ups, they seemed a bit confused ... out of the loop.
I think UPS is prepping to roll-over into 401k at some point but they probably will not do that until an annuity can replace the monthly pension payments with the amount UPS has in Total rewards. You could come close to that in 2007 but not even close since. My investigations revealed the amount in Total rewards is about 40% of what is needed.

So if I understand what you are saying, it is also your feeling that UPS will buy out the pension at some point in the future. However, with interest rates so low, the current return on annuities isn't enough to cover current pension obligations being paid out now? But if interest rates rise, this would result in a better payout by annuities, prompting UPS to produce a low-ball buyout program to dissolve the pension plan and get out from under future pension obligations while still being able to cover cost of current pension obligation by purchasing the higher yielding annuities? Is that an accurate summary of your thoughts?

Just a reminder, I would love for someone to give some insight as to why they think this WILL NOT HAPPEN - I could use some good news for a change.

 

[Catatonic]

So if I understand what you are saying, it is also your feeling that UPS will buy out the pension at some point in the future. However, with interest rates so low, the current return on annuities isn't enough to cover current pension obligations being paid out now? But if interest rates rise, this would result in a better payout by annuities, prompting UPS to produce a low-ball buyout program to dissolve the pension plan and get out from under future pension obligations while still being able to cover cost of current pension obligation by purchasing the higher yielding annuities? Is that an accurate summary of your thoughts?

Just a reminder, I would love for someone to give some insight as to why they think this WILL NOT HAPPEN - I could use some good news for a change.

Yep, that is my thoughts.
UPS will not make the move until public available annuities to replace the pension can be purchased at the price of the Total Rewards amount.
These annuities can be purchased with an IRA.
I helped my sister in November 2007 get an annuity with guaranteed 6.25% annual ROI.
​I've told her many times how lucky she was that she got the buyout at the time she did.

 

[Lineandinitial]

I have been wondering why my salary has been capped with no adjustment yet the amount of **** I am expected to do has no cap or seemingly no limits.
I actually know the answer, just feel better whining about it here.

 

[Yankfan]

Still waiting on someone to give some reasons why the pension buyout theory won't happen........Anybody........ Please

 

[Catatonic]

Still waiting on someone to give some reasons why the pension buyout theory won't happen........Anybody........ Please

​Because it is a theory?