Pension letter

[twoweeled]

I will be here forever

it'll fly by. Forever isn't that long.

 

[twoweeled]

As soon as our (Central States) pension cut is finalized (July 1st) everyone will be jumping on the "cut pensions" bandwagon. Having a Teamster based pension or a Company based one won't matter----everyone will want relief.

Yep! I agree. The only ones who won't experience a cut, are the Teamster officers at the top.

 

[twoweeled]

Should not cut anyone's pension. They need a bail out from the gvt

Although extremely iffy, that wouldn't be entirely impossible. The problem with that, is the powers in a position to push for that - really are not concerned with us getting a bail out. Their pensions will be just fine.

 

[twoweeled]

The people who set up pensions planned on you being dead within 5 or 10 years after collecting.

That's why we should retire asap. If you die in 5 years or less, they won. If you live for 30-40 years, you won!

 

[twoweeled]

Don't start shoveling dirt on me yet---I'm only 67.

LMAO! You're retired and happy - because you a funny guy too!!! LOL!!

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

We are having a meeting for active employees only on the 16th of October to go over the proposed changes to our pension plan. Representatives from the pension fund will be on hand to answer any questions that we may have. At the bottom of the letter that we received announcing this meeting asked that we be respectful to our guests. I guess there was a meeting earlier this year in Kingston in which the members ignored that advice.

I will update this thread based on what I learn at the meeting.

 

[3 done 3 to go]

We are having a meeting for active employees only on the 16th of October to go over the proposed changes to our pension plan. Representatives from the pension fund will be on hand to answer any questions that we may have. At the bottom of the letter that we received announcing this meeting asked that we be respectful to our guests. I guess there was a meeting earlier this year in Kingston in which the members ignored that advice.

I will update this thread based on what I learn at the meeting.

That is because none of the cuts should have happened. Retirees were also in attendance. Most of the commotion was about them getting a 50% reduction. Which the union didn't explain when the disservice first came out. So now it's 35%. Just the union not informing members. I guarentee you would have been screaming too. Had you been retired at that point

 

[By The Book]

That is because none of the cuts should have happened. Retirees were also in attendance. Most of the commotion was about them getting a 50% reduction. Which the union didn't explain when the disservice first came out. So now it's 35%. Just the union not informing members. I guarentee you would have been screaming too. Had you been retired at that point

If what you say is true, about the retiree reduction now 35%,that shows me they really don't have a plan at all. People got upset (rightfully so) so they drop the number?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

If what you say is true, about the retiree reduction now 35%,that shows me they really don't have a plan at all. People got upset (rightfully so) so they drop the number?

The number is actually 31% and was not changed. There was confusion as the 50% is for retirees from companies no longer in existence, referred to as orphans.

 

[What'dyabringmetoday???]

The number is actually 31% and was not changed. There was confusion as the 50% is for retirees from companies no longer in existence, referred to as orphans.

I believe some of the information you are providing is incorrect.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I believe some of the information you are providing is incorrect.

Please feel free to post the correct information.

 

[3 done 3 to go]

The number is actually 31% and was not changed. There was confusion as the 50% is for retirees from companies no longer in existence, referred to as orphans.

I feel if those companies no longer pay into the fund. The retirees should have been compensated by those companies. Not off other businesses that were successful. If UPS goes out too. Multi employer pensions are a ponzi scheme

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I have a question regarding the effect, if any, that these proposed cuts would have on QDRO's.

Let's use round numbers to make the math easier:

My ex is due to receive 16% of my monthly pension benefit upon my retirement. My current estimate is $5K. 16% of $5K is $800. This would reduce my benefit to $4,200.

The proposed cut for active employees is 20%, which would reduce my estimate to $4K. 16% of $4K is $640, reducing my pension benefit to $3,360.

My question, which I could not find any answers for through Google, is whether she would receive her cut unchanged or if she would also have her cut reduced by 20%.

Any on topic help would be appreciated.

 

[3 done 3 to go]

I would believe. The 20% union cut would be first. Then her cut would be after that. Your accountant should be able to answer this.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I would believe. The 20% union cut would be first. Then her cut would be after that. Your accountant should be able to answer this.

I'm hoping the plan trustees will address this at our meeting as I'm sure I'm not the only one who will have to deal with this.

 

[sox]

I have a question regarding the effect, if any, that these proposed cuts would have on QDRO's.

Let's use round numbers to make the math easier:

My ex is due to receive 16% of my monthly pension benefit upon my retirement. My current estimate is $5K. 16% of $5K is $800. This would reduce my benefit to $4,200.

The proposed cut for active employees is 20%, which would reduce my estimate to $4K. 16% of $4K is $640, reducing my pension benefit to $3,360.

My question, which I could not find any answers for through Google, is whether she would receive her cut unchanged or if she would also have her cut reduced by 20%.

Any on topic help would be

 

[sox]

You answered your own question. A competent attorney dealing with pensions these days would base it on a % basis. You said she's getting 16% of the benefit when you retire. I hope you used an attorney and didn't go the do it yourself route.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

You answered your own question. A competent attorney dealing with pensions these days would base it on a % basis. You said she's getting 16% of the benefit when you retire. I hope you used an attorney and didn't go the do it yourself route.

The QDRO is part of the divorce and is based on NYS law.

 

[By The Book]

The QDRO is part of the divorce and is based on NYS law.

You said your wife is getting 16% of your pension. Whatever your pension is at your retirement date your ex wife is getting 16% of that amount. She already is having her amount reduced by 20% if your trustees reduce yours by 20%. You want her to have hers reduced another 20%? Can't blame you for trying, I'm not giving you advice...I'm just replying.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

You said your wife is getting 16% of your pension. Whatever your pension is at your retirement date your ex wife is getting 16% of that amount. She already is having her amount reduced by 20% if your trustees reduce yours by 20%. You want her to have hers reduced another 20%? Can't blame you for trying, I'm not giving you advice...I'm just replying.

You misread my post.

My question was whether her 16% would be based off of the original $5,400 or off the reduced amount.