Pension Protection Act

[wkmac]

"the voice of the worker in this debate is somewhat ignored because they don't bear a financial risk in funding these plans."

I agree with what you say but this is a perception I happen to toldly disagree with that the worker has no risk. I believe and see the money placed into our H&W fund as a part of our total compensation package just as much as our hourly wage is or even the money for Social Security. You don't phsyically see or hold the tax dollars withheld for taxes but it's just as much your money as anything else.

It so happens the way the system is setup we are kept disconnected from these funds and become tainted to percieve them as some freebie or give-a-way totally bargained by the union or given out of the goodness of the company's heart. We've also become lazy and irresponsible, all of us including me, and this is why CS for example got in the shape it was in. We just got the idea it was somebodyelse's job to mind the store.

When any company decides to hire on an employee it's just not the hourly wage itself that is a concern but all the costs of that employee. If that employee can not earn the total comp. package set aside for them from top to bottom then that employee is not added. It's our money folks, top to bottom. Don't lose sight of that!
JMO.

 

[my2cents]

Excellent points wkmac. You're right. It our money, but we don't manage it or make contributions to it. That was the gist of what I was saying. I totally agree with you in the regard that many simply take these plans for granted and assume everything will take care of itself.

 

[sawman]

Any more cuts to the CS plan and we would be better off in the PBGC fund.

I guess if they do away with lump sum pay outs this would hurt some people such as the Chicago fund that bosts a lump sum pay out plus a retirement check.

So, the new rules will not only damn those of us in struggling funds, but hurt other strong funds as well.

 

[wkmac]

sawman,
Chicago fund is seperate from CS and last I heard doing very well. Far from where CS finds itself now. Good for them.

"make contributions to it...."

Yes and No M2C. We don't take the money ourselves and make the contribution but like you said it's our money and a 3rd party does this for us. I've always be an advocate of listing all monies paid to us or on our behalf on the check advice. I'm even talking the other percentage of SS and medicare the company pays as a match. Our labor earns that money and the company cost justifies our employment when paying that money. If our labor didn't we'd not be here.

I also believe showing the total cost or compensation, whichever way you want to look at it, you'd begin to realize just how little of the total money spent for your labor you get and then some folks would start number crunching and I'd bet I'd not be so lonely in some of the things I suggest. Just a guess grant you but I'd sure love to find out. Regardless, you can bet you'd see massive pressure on CS and the union leadership when the covered employees saw every week just how much goes out to cover that cost. Might even see some further pressure on the company as folks learned UPS has a trustee on the CS board.

 

[sawman]

wkmac,
I know the Chicago fund is doing well. But if I'm not mistaken they get a lump sum pay out at retirement, plus a monthly check.

If this new bill is passed it will do away with all lump sum distributions.

 

[my2cents]

Sawman,

Lump sum distributions will only be prohibited in red zone plans which are in reorganization. If a plan is in the yellow zone, there may be restrictions on how lump sums are handled, although its not clear to me how this would work. Plans above 80% can still pay lump sums in H.R. 2830. If you are interested in reading interesting testimony on this subject, read the actuary from Milliman's statements.

Wkmac,

I created my own spreadsheet which tells me the dollar value of UPS contributions made on my behalf over my entire employment history. At least in my case anyway, I'm fully aware of the total cash value of company contributions over the years.

 

[ok2bclever]

I also keep track of all financial aspects of working for UPS and UPS does a great job of making those figures available to their employees.

It's just most of this stuff causes most employee's eyes to glaze over and the only thing they are interested in is how much they have available to spend this Friday.

Group ignorance and apathy are the fundamental cornerstones of all the various financial and representational abuse we are subject to and frankly, the future still looks bright for any who would use these tools against us.

Even with all the public information and rumoured threats that have reached Joe driver I bet not 3 in 100 could tell you how much the company contributes in their name as part of the compensation package a week.

 

[my2cents]

Subcommittee Passes Comprehensive Pension Reforms to Protect Workers, Retirees, & Taxpayers

WASHINGTON , D.C. In the first major step toward fixing outdated worker pension laws, the House Employer-Employee Relations Subcommittee today approved the Pension Protection Act (H.R. 2830), comprehensive pension reform legislation intended to protect the interests of workers, retirees, and taxpayers. The bill was approved by voice vote; a full committee vote is expected next Wednesday.

Above is an excerpt from today's House press release.

On a related note, I recently received a brochure from the UPSPAC, which lists pensions as a key issue for 2005. Moreover, the brochure states of the 21 multiemployer pension plans, which UPS contributes to, 10 of those plans are less than 75% funded.

 

[teddyr]

Go to upsers.com and read their version of Multi employer pension plans.

 

[my2cents]

Good idea. The site also posted a spreadsheet to debunk the TDU story on UPS's Congressional testimony last year.

 

[ups79]

Sawman:could you please tell all of us what that lump sum payout is worth?

 

[wkmac]

I agree to use the current hourly contribution rate calculated for 30 years is misleading. What should have happened would have for been for McDevitt to use a formula for a current employee with 20 years, an employee with 10 years and then a new employee looking at 30 years just to show the examples.

An employee with 20 years was paying $1.37 per hour at the start of their UPS career and if that contribution had stayed the same for 30 years with a growth of the 7.5% used by McDevitt you'd have $303k at the end of 30 years.

A 10 year employee started at $2.50 per hour and after 30 years at 7.50% annual growth they'd have $564k in 30 years.

Both these cases use a stagnant contribution rate of whatever it was when they began their career. This is not totally accurate because in fact the rate has gone up over time from contract to contract but it would be more real world than the example McDevitt used IMO.

As for the hourly rates I used they came from the TDU article that M2C linked. I'm giving them the benefit of doubt these figures are correct. Anybody got another way to look at this I'm open to it and encourage it.

 

[wkmac]

ups79,
I've heard rumors to suggest something to the effect of several thousand dollars, one rumor had it like $1000 per year of service but whether all that is true or not who the heck knows. I'm waiting for the rumor that some fund gives each retiree 30 minutes in Ft. Knox and they get whatever gold they can carry out in that timespan! Sign me up! LMAO!!!

It's the IBT version of the 2 minute grocery grab for free!

 

[my2cents]

Another hearing on H.R. 2830 is scheduled for next week on June 29, which is a Wednesday.

 

[sawman]

UPS79,

I don't know right off hand what the Chicago funds lump sum pay out is, but it is my understanding that they get a one time lump sum at retirement and then draw there monthly retirement check. This is great for them! My point is, if there fund can give this type of retirement pay out on what UPS is putting into there fund, Don't you think that all UPs retirees should be able to draw that kind of retirement, since UPS is paying in the same for all of us?

From what I have read about this new bill, it will give companies and retirement funds relief, and stick it to the participants.

 

[ups79]

sawman:can you at least tell me which of the two locals out of chicago is paying out a lump sum and when did it begin?

 

[wkmac]

From what I have read about this new bill, it will give companies and retirement funds relief, and stick it to the participants.

When have the corridors of power in Washington DC not done things that stick it to the average Joe and Sally while protecting the influencial and connected? We will sit back and be sold the line that all is well by both the company and the union when legislation is passed (the legislation they both want) and then one day the cows will come home and here we go again.

Relax, kick back, have more wine and circus, we will take care of you!

 

[sawman]

UPS79,
I can not remember where I read it, it was a few months ago. Let me do some research. I'll try and find the article.

wkMac, you're right on target. This is why I can not for the life of me understand why the hourlies are so reluctant to take matters into our own hands. Do the hourly employees not see that we could have just about whatever we want, if nothing else, just by shear numbers, if we stop lissoning to the company and the union bull, and stick together with demands for pension reform.

I know that some of you don't support the APWA, but the fact is that the APWA is a group of Hourly employees that are trying to do just that. Bring all the hourlies together to remove the greedy hands of the Teamster and company, and use the power of numbers to gain control of our own futures.

 

[sawman]

One more thing!

There are some of you that have said that you don't like or trust the people that are running the APWA.
You're missing the boat again.
These people are the founders of the APWA idea, they are not dictators that will run the show forever.
The idea of the APWA is sound and the hourlies can make it whatever we want, and but whoever we want in charge. There is never going to be someone that everyone likes, but the majority rules, and if anyone knows someone who could do a better job for us, lets come together and elect them. But, it can't be done from the sideline.

 

[ups79]

sawman:so I can assume this is another hearsay statement made by the "sawman". you seldom have answers, you continue to spurt out statements you cannot state as factual. I think once again you are either being misled or are trying to mislead.