dannyboy
From the promised LAND
One of the biggest problems in healthcare is the illegal population that gets it free now anyway, while those of us who pay for their upkeep pay for our insurance.
Too many hospitals have gone under, and too many more have to charge you and I much more than it should, to cover the costs of the deadbeats.
d
Too many hospitals have gone under, and too many more have to charge you and I much more than it should, to cover the costs of the deadbeats.
d
susiedriver
Well-Known Member
Are you sure about that Danny? I'm not saying you are wrong, but usually you talk without any facts to back up what you saying. Do you have any facts, or are you just going off on the 'deadbeats'?dannyboy said:
traveler
Where next? Venice
moreluck,
You sure are right and I did understand what you were saying about folks leaving us at 61 or 62. Had two very good friends die this year (61 and 68 years old).
Since you never know I feel the need to live life to the fullest each day so: 
Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
You sure are right and I did understand what you were saying about folks leaving us at 61 or 62. Had two very good friends die this year (61 and 68 years old).
Since you never know I feel the need to live life to the fullest each day so: Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
ok2bclever
I Re Member
<!--StartFragment --> That was meant tongue in cheek, moreluck.
I have had friends leave this earth from age three on.
I have found it more disconcerting when it was the same age as I am throughout that time, always a grief though.
Even though there is much that could be far better in the world and even in our individual lives, there is still much to give thanks for as well.
Enjoy the traditional things you always do on this day, but take a couple of minutes at some point to truly dwell on those things you have to be thankful of in your life.
You will find there are more than you realized if you take the time to give it some thought.
Again, Happy Thanksgiving to all of you.
I have had friends leave this earth from age three on.
I have found it more disconcerting when it was the same age as I am throughout that time, always a grief though.
Even though there is much that could be far better in the world and even in our individual lives, there is still much to give thanks for as well.
Enjoy the traditional things you always do on this day, but take a couple of minutes at some point to truly dwell on those things you have to be thankful of in your life.
You will find there are more than you realized if you take the time to give it some thought.
Again, Happy Thanksgiving to all of you.
ok2bclever
I Re Member
I see bush was saying today that too many companies are not putting away enough money to protect the retirement benefits of their workers.
He isn't lying.
An article co-written by the current US secretaries of Commerce and Labor said legislation emerging from Senate negotiations would relax rather than strengthen funding rules for pensions.
"Unless these bills are strengthened, they could result in weaker pension funding that increases the potential that workers will lose benefits and taxpayers will have to bail out the pension insurance program"
"It's no secret that some companies don't want to pay more to support their pension promises," the article by Chao, Snow and Gutierrez said. "It's also no secret that labor unions would rather bargain for new wages than ask companies to fund benefits their members already have."
Agree with both of those statements.
It appears the pension legislation affecting us so far only attempts to give some breathing room (no idea whether even that will be effective as the language is confusing and in some ways appears more likely to cause funds like the CSPF to fold than fix) with absolutely no efforts to fix the root causes.
He isn't lying.
An article co-written by the current US secretaries of Commerce and Labor said legislation emerging from Senate negotiations would relax rather than strengthen funding rules for pensions.
"Unless these bills are strengthened, they could result in weaker pension funding that increases the potential that workers will lose benefits and taxpayers will have to bail out the pension insurance program"
"It's no secret that some companies don't want to pay more to support their pension promises," the article by Chao, Snow and Gutierrez said. "It's also no secret that labor unions would rather bargain for new wages than ask companies to fund benefits their members already have."
Agree with both of those statements.
It appears the pension legislation affecting us so far only attempts to give some breathing room (no idea whether even that will be effective as the language is confusing and in some ways appears more likely to cause funds like the CSPF to fold than fix) with absolutely no efforts to fix the root causes.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Oh God, another link! LOL!
OK2BC,
This morning I heard a report on local radio about some new British law that requires all british citizens to put 4% of income into a private personal retirement account and requires employers to match. Now the story lacked a lot of detail like is this proposed or is it actual law and it also said something about limits of fees and maybe even areas of investing. I've done some searching and so far found nothing but I'll keep looking to see what I find on this. On the one hand and admittedly not having all the details, this does sound somewhat good if in fact it is a truly private account that the employee owns and is portable and out of the hands of parties like employers and other work related fudciary agents associated with the work environment.
On the otherhand I'm not wild about gov't mandates by law but it's coming to a point where the only choices will be the worst of 2 or 3 evils. I do like the fact, as I understand it from the report that the account is in the hands of the employee (his/her actions with it are limited by law to some degree so you can't get stupid with it) this account seems beyond the hands of any work related parties. That level of independence IMO is a good thing. Hats off to the British if what and how I heard this is true! If I find anything on this I'll either post it or PM you the details.
OK2BC,
This morning I heard a report on local radio about some new British law that requires all british citizens to put 4% of income into a private personal retirement account and requires employers to match. Now the story lacked a lot of detail like is this proposed or is it actual law and it also said something about limits of fees and maybe even areas of investing. I've done some searching and so far found nothing but I'll keep looking to see what I find on this. On the one hand and admittedly not having all the details, this does sound somewhat good if in fact it is a truly private account that the employee owns and is portable and out of the hands of parties like employers and other work related fudciary agents associated with the work environment.
On the otherhand I'm not wild about gov't mandates by law but it's coming to a point where the only choices will be the worst of 2 or 3 evils. I do like the fact, as I understand it from the report that the account is in the hands of the employee (his/her actions with it are limited by law to some degree so you can't get stupid with it) this account seems beyond the hands of any work related parties. That level of independence IMO is a good thing. Hats off to the British if what and how I heard this is true! If I find anything on this I'll either post it or PM you the details.
dannyboy
From the promised LAND
So OK, who's fault is it that the teamsters funds are under funded? The company agrees to fund whatever is negotiated on our behalf by the union. No more, no less.
Remember, union dues are tied to your wage, not your retirement. IF you dont get raises, neither does the union.
That is why I suggest that instead of painting the companies as evil because they do not volunteer to pay more than is negotiated, maybe we need to clean house at the union and move forward with a program that has the welfare of the membership in mind instead of the union itself.
d
ok2bclever
I Re Member
You and tie have used the term evil regarding UPS, repeatedly in trying to tie it to my conversations regarding the company.
I find that irritating.
I NEVER use the term evil regarding UPS.
That is so over the top in my opinion.
I do not consider UPS evil.
Just a really efficient corporations with all the downsides that that incorporates (pun intended) towards the workers as well as the upsides.
So if you wish to use continue to use the word evil in relationship to UPS in the future realize that it is you using it.
I'd suggest not using it, but it's just a suggestion.
As far as who is at fault.
I believe it's the Teamsters and UPS.
Not just the Teamsters, not just UPS.
The Teamsters and UPS.
For some reason several here get upset when something is said about UPS that isn't wine and roses.
I give UPS credit for the acumen to know what is needed to adequately fund our retirement and how (and the partial blame for not taking care of this).
I would like to give the Teamsters the same credit of acumen, but I am less than impressed with them on the whole.
That does not release them from the blame though.
I do also blame myself (we, the workers) for not investigating this thoroughly from the beginning and demanding more accountability of both our company and our union for their promises over the decades regarding the pension.
We just blindly assumed they knew what they were doing and promising and figured they'd take care of it and us.
It appears we were assuming wrongly.
As for the bush quote, I just thought it was nice that a very pro-business president was stating publicly that many companies were underfunding pensions.
I find that irritating.
I NEVER use the term evil regarding UPS.
That is so over the top in my opinion.
I do not consider UPS evil.
Just a really efficient corporations with all the downsides that that incorporates (pun intended) towards the workers as well as the upsides.
So if you wish to use continue to use the word evil in relationship to UPS in the future realize that it is you using it.
I'd suggest not using it, but it's just a suggestion.
As far as who is at fault.
I believe it's the Teamsters and UPS.
Not just the Teamsters, not just UPS.
The Teamsters and UPS.
For some reason several here get upset when something is said about UPS that isn't wine and roses.
I give UPS credit for the acumen to know what is needed to adequately fund our retirement and how (and the partial blame for not taking care of this).
I would like to give the Teamsters the same credit of acumen, but I am less than impressed with them on the whole.
That does not release them from the blame though.
I do also blame myself (we, the workers) for not investigating this thoroughly from the beginning and demanding more accountability of both our company and our union for their promises over the decades regarding the pension.
We just blindly assumed they knew what they were doing and promising and figured they'd take care of it and us.
It appears we were assuming wrongly.
As for the bush quote, I just thought it was nice that a very pro-business president was stating publicly that many companies were underfunding pensions.
Last edited:
dannyboy
From the promised LAND
Actually, I could not agree more.
As to the evil corporations, that is the way most people think of corporate America. And while some do deserve the rap, most dont. With health care and the cost of living going up, what started out as enough just is not enough anymore.
And the blame on many pensions is on the pensioner, for not keeping track of what the companies, and in our case the unions, were doing behind our backs, or in front of our faces.
d
As to the evil corporations, that is the way most people think of corporate America. And while some do deserve the rap, most dont. With health care and the cost of living going up, what started out as enough just is not enough anymore.
And the blame on many pensions is on the pensioner, for not keeping track of what the companies, and in our case the unions, were doing behind our backs, or in front of our faces.
d
ok2bclever
I Re Member
I received the 2004 Annual Report from CSPF today.
It states at the end of 2004 the plan had a positive gain (after all expenses) of almost a billion dollars (992, 397,130) for the year to an asset level of $18,717,532,696 as of December 31st, 2004 with $890,489,686 paid out in benefits.
It also stated (without any details of percentage, stats, etc) that the plan was funded enough to continue to qualify for the "minimum funding standards of ERISA" .
This of course means at the close of 2004.
What changes the politicos cause in these "funding standards", etc and how this will affect the fund, who knows.
Using some really crude and basic math if the fund has almost 19 billion and pays out less than a billion a year it could theoretically continue to pay out existing levels of benefits for 21 years.
That doesn't include further accrued interest and employer contributions which would cause it to be able to last that much longer.
In fact, it states employer/employee contributions for the year were just over a billion.
In other words, more employer and employee contributions alone went in, than benefits that went out.
That would make me think the fund could go on indefinitely as is, but that isn't the picture being painted by all sources, so the simple math must have some serious flaws or missing factors involved.
I would guess it's primarily the forecasted massive increase in the amount of employees retiring in the next decade from the baby boom generation, but I am uncertain if it's even that simple.
It does beggar the question if the pension falls below the "minimum funding standards" (current or changed) and we participants are dropped on the government dole at one/third our promised retirement monthly rate . . . what happens to that 19 billion?!?
Does the government get it, or what?
I mean, they talk about the fund possibly defaulting on the minimum funding standards in the imminent future, but the math shows we could get paid our full benefits for at least decades as is.
I could live with that (in fact, probably die with that).
Missing something here, obviously.
My2cents, wkmac, any thoughts, ideas?
It states at the end of 2004 the plan had a positive gain (after all expenses) of almost a billion dollars (992, 397,130) for the year to an asset level of $18,717,532,696 as of December 31st, 2004 with $890,489,686 paid out in benefits.
It also stated (without any details of percentage, stats, etc) that the plan was funded enough to continue to qualify for the "minimum funding standards of ERISA" .
This of course means at the close of 2004.
What changes the politicos cause in these "funding standards", etc and how this will affect the fund, who knows.
Using some really crude and basic math if the fund has almost 19 billion and pays out less than a billion a year it could theoretically continue to pay out existing levels of benefits for 21 years.
That doesn't include further accrued interest and employer contributions which would cause it to be able to last that much longer.
In fact, it states employer/employee contributions for the year were just over a billion.
In other words, more employer and employee contributions alone went in, than benefits that went out.
That would make me think the fund could go on indefinitely as is, but that isn't the picture being painted by all sources, so the simple math must have some serious flaws or missing factors involved.
I would guess it's primarily the forecasted massive increase in the amount of employees retiring in the next decade from the baby boom generation, but I am uncertain if it's even that simple.
It does beggar the question if the pension falls below the "minimum funding standards" (current or changed) and we participants are dropped on the government dole at one/third our promised retirement monthly rate . . . what happens to that 19 billion?!?
Does the government get it, or what?
I mean, they talk about the fund possibly defaulting on the minimum funding standards in the imminent future, but the math shows we could get paid our full benefits for at least decades as is.
I could live with that (in fact, probably die with that).
Missing something here, obviously.
My2cents, wkmac, any thoughts, ideas?
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Haven't seen the report yet as it's not arrived but does sound positive based on what you said. Still some concerns and we should be more attentive in the future but a positive step nonetheless! Thanks for reporting that. I posted another response but something having out on the nural highway! 
I may add more when I see the report myself. Permission to advise and extend my remarks Mr. Speaker?
LOL!
I may add more when I see the report myself. Permission to advise and extend my remarks Mr. Speaker?
LOL!
OK2BC,
Did they send you a Form 5500 report with attached financial statements? Just curious what they sent you. It's hard for me to comment on the 2004 report because I only have the 2002 version for CSPF. I would have to order a copy from the DOL to see what you are talking about.
On a side note, the New England Fund finally mailed out their financial reports, which only took 5 months for data which is now well over a year old.
Did they send you a Form 5500 report with attached financial statements? Just curious what they sent you. It's hard for me to comment on the 2004 report because I only have the 2002 version for CSPF. I would have to order a copy from the DOL to see what you are talking about.
On a side note, the New England Fund finally mailed out their financial reports, which only took 5 months for data which is now well over a year old.
ok2bclever
I Re Member
No, it's the reader's digest version they send out once a year a year late, two pages, double sided, but not fully used.
Not the full Form 5500.
Not the full Form 5500.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
ok & m2c,
This morning on the tube I ran across a program on C-Span taped earlier this week at the Aspen Institute on pensions and savings for/by workers. They had persons like former IRS Commissioner Fred Goldberg to officials from H&R Block, Goldman Sachs, Pension Rights groups, Congress Pension and Tax Committee counsels, and just as important voices. There were even a couple of reps. from employer type advocacy groups. I came into it well into the program and was only able to watch about 20 minutes because I had to leave for another committment but the discussion centered on pension and private accounts like 401k's etc. From what I heard by a variety of persons of varying interests they seemed to suggest that in fact the whole pension structure as we know it is dying and being replaced by private held accounts. The question or concern and quite valid I might add was in the transition you didn't destroy the former before the latter was well in place for all. In other words as I've heard it described before, you decide you're going to build a new house but before you get the first wall up, you tear down the one you live in currently. May be good motivation to move forward but puts the pressure on to get something in place and not always the right thing. This is a very legit concern too.
A couple of ideas thrown around was one of mandating employees take part in these private vehicles. The Senate and House counsels spoke up regarding this and in fact mandating has been considered and is being looked at. From the names mentioned of Senators, this idea is not a one party thinking but is bi-partisan. With the mandates would also come Congressional oversite of for example 401k's that would vastly restrict where that money could be invested. Another area of discussion had to do with structuring the tax code to promote more savings on the part of the individual. The H&R Block guy had a real unique idea in that the current tax code promotes large scale overwithholding in that the average refund check is over $2100. He suggested restructuring the tax code where over withholding wasn't the preferred way and that this excess could be better utilized funding retirement and savings account instead of being used to foster consumer goods and services bottomlines via that refund check. I felt that thought had some merit worth consideration. Of course, those who for whatever reason weren't in a position to do this were also discussed as to how to fund their retirements as well. The H&R Block guy or maybe it was someone else said this mechanism may prove a better transitional method of funding private accounts than to start taking away SS dollars as we approach the babyboomers retiring. You know my feelings on SS but I thought that was an idea worth consideration as well.
There was some talk of pensions but I think that was wrapping up as I tuned in. What I could tell from the tone was everyone pretty much agreed the employer pension was a dying beast and ironically it was the tax code that helped this. 401k, which is a IRS code section hence the name, was the vehicle that helped to start this trend according to this panel of experts. They did a lot of focus on the tax code and they see this as the mechanism for shaping economic policy. We tend to think of taxes as a way for gov't to pay for services and that is true but it's also as much a means of shaping fiscal public policy for the national economic health as it is the former. In 1913' our gov't created the Federal Reserve as a means of planning and controlling the economic & currency needs of this country but in the same year we also had the income tax imposed and there is a connection. Over the succeeding years it's been a game of playing policy maker to see how and who will control the game. A chief tool or weapon, pick your poison, is the taxing powers and thus the hard focus on tax policy. This may play again over the weekend so if you get the chance check it out.
Let me get a bit conspiratorial for a minute. I'm not so sure Washington wants to fix pension and SS problems and it's the workforce and taxation that I think suggests this. Over the last couple of decades, if you take the immigrant/alien influx out of the American picture, the actual core American population has in fact declined. Couple that with the large babyboomer generation in the on-deck circle to retire and you have a potential crisis brewing. On the one hand you have gov't who needs a expanding economy to pay for our unending appetite for all things gov't but at the same time you need a workforce capable of not only filling the needs of this economic machine with workers but the gov't needs the taxpayers as well. Both edges of this sword are equally sharp. The workforce is about to take a huge hit with a large chunk of workers about to call it a day and to make matter worse be a huge draw on that "all things gov't" idea. How would one put off the potential calmity that such actions would bring on? Those nice pensions not being so nice after all would be one. Sure you may leave company #1 at 60 with the nice gold watch but you take a couple of weeks off for you and your better half to take that once in a lifetime trip and then firstday back is the firstday of your new and next career working for another gold watch. I saw a recent report where over the next decade over 10 million jobs will go unfilled because of lack of workers in this country. What would this suggest about any real effort of securing the borders? Or for that fact moving jobs out of the country? Some jobs may be about money and some may be about qualified workers to begin with as it pertains to jobs leaving the USA.
How would you keep current workers in the market so that this 10 million impact might be reduced? How would you keep workers in the workplace so that some who would qualify for SS might push that draw off into the future several more years while at the same time continue to pay SS taxes thus helping the system take in more? What if the age for earliest draw on your IRA or 401k were raised to match the qualifying for drawing SS? It has been discussed. If to many people draw SS then the excess funds now used by Congress to fund other things like political promises to the home district power brokers that got them elected in the first place would dry up and how then would Sauron rule with no ring and these Orc armies sustain themselves? Could we be facing not a problem but a developed and planned circumstance? Sure, I agree it's X-Files talk but mankind's political history is littered with the dead bodies of such conspiracies and intrigue.
While on taxes I think the President's Tax Council is a joke but over the last couple of years there has been an effort to get into law was is known as the Fair Tax which is a national sales tax. On the one hand some of the financials being throw around look great and would also suggest that in recent years when the gov't had shortfalls, with the sales tax idea there would have been a surplus. That part is true but what you can't control with a national sales tax is what people will do with their money and that is the real hangup of the whole idea. This system of taxes allows the indivdual to decide economic policy instead of Washington but our economic system will only work with a planned tax system not an unplanned and controlled like a National Sales tax. It's like having massive amounts of cancer in the body but only treating the small skin cancer on the arm thinking this will be the sure all of cure all. The patient will still likely die.
Like UPS, Uncle Sammy has a master business plan and no matter what that plan must succeed in order to be successful in their eyes. Protect and promote the plan at all costs. This takes lots of planning and controlling or eliminating the unwanted varibles in life that crop up. With the current system Congress can play political games and favorites and via policy promote one aspect of American life while on the other side demote another. All this done via the taxing powers. Orwell's 1984' has been in our laps the whole time we just don't want to admit it. The National Sale tax idea strips Congress, Washington and the lobbyist some of the powers that give the ability to shape and manipulate the American public and therefore it has no chance as much as on that one aspect alone I'm all for it. Sometimes in order to tear down a castle all you have to do is knock down one support support instead of knocking over the entire North wall. Taxes are a necessity but I believe they have become a political weapon rather than an instrument of promoting true public good.
Lastly and on the fair tax to suggest a corp/gov't alliance behind the scenes concerning our tax system, ironically it's Home Depot who spoke out about the Fair Tax idea and they were opposed to it. Basically they said it would threaten consumerism and thus their bottomline. K Street has guns aimed at any effort to massively change tax policy and therefore any effort to promote savings among the average folk will be at threat from them. K Street controlled Bush's so-called Tax Council and the finished product appears to be nothing more than the same ole' same ole. The 82' TEFRA Act and the restructured Code of 1986' were both hailed as leading edge positive changes but at the end of the day it was absolutely meaningless and useless except to the few choosen to benefit from the well placed provisions in the tax code. I have no doubt when we look back in the years ahead at Bush's council we too can take solice in another opportunity lost to the powers of K Street.
To me this sez a ton about Sauron and the Orc Army that runs this country and has since the early part of the last century!
BTW: If you learn about Washington DC and who resides on K Street you'll understand the importance of it's mention. c ya!
This morning on the tube I ran across a program on C-Span taped earlier this week at the Aspen Institute on pensions and savings for/by workers. They had persons like former IRS Commissioner Fred Goldberg to officials from H&R Block, Goldman Sachs, Pension Rights groups, Congress Pension and Tax Committee counsels, and just as important voices. There were even a couple of reps. from employer type advocacy groups. I came into it well into the program and was only able to watch about 20 minutes because I had to leave for another committment but the discussion centered on pension and private accounts like 401k's etc. From what I heard by a variety of persons of varying interests they seemed to suggest that in fact the whole pension structure as we know it is dying and being replaced by private held accounts. The question or concern and quite valid I might add was in the transition you didn't destroy the former before the latter was well in place for all. In other words as I've heard it described before, you decide you're going to build a new house but before you get the first wall up, you tear down the one you live in currently. May be good motivation to move forward but puts the pressure on to get something in place and not always the right thing. This is a very legit concern too.
A couple of ideas thrown around was one of mandating employees take part in these private vehicles. The Senate and House counsels spoke up regarding this and in fact mandating has been considered and is being looked at. From the names mentioned of Senators, this idea is not a one party thinking but is bi-partisan. With the mandates would also come Congressional oversite of for example 401k's that would vastly restrict where that money could be invested. Another area of discussion had to do with structuring the tax code to promote more savings on the part of the individual. The H&R Block guy had a real unique idea in that the current tax code promotes large scale overwithholding in that the average refund check is over $2100. He suggested restructuring the tax code where over withholding wasn't the preferred way and that this excess could be better utilized funding retirement and savings account instead of being used to foster consumer goods and services bottomlines via that refund check. I felt that thought had some merit worth consideration. Of course, those who for whatever reason weren't in a position to do this were also discussed as to how to fund their retirements as well. The H&R Block guy or maybe it was someone else said this mechanism may prove a better transitional method of funding private accounts than to start taking away SS dollars as we approach the babyboomers retiring. You know my feelings on SS but I thought that was an idea worth consideration as well.
There was some talk of pensions but I think that was wrapping up as I tuned in. What I could tell from the tone was everyone pretty much agreed the employer pension was a dying beast and ironically it was the tax code that helped this. 401k, which is a IRS code section hence the name, was the vehicle that helped to start this trend according to this panel of experts. They did a lot of focus on the tax code and they see this as the mechanism for shaping economic policy. We tend to think of taxes as a way for gov't to pay for services and that is true but it's also as much a means of shaping fiscal public policy for the national economic health as it is the former. In 1913' our gov't created the Federal Reserve as a means of planning and controlling the economic & currency needs of this country but in the same year we also had the income tax imposed and there is a connection. Over the succeeding years it's been a game of playing policy maker to see how and who will control the game. A chief tool or weapon, pick your poison, is the taxing powers and thus the hard focus on tax policy. This may play again over the weekend so if you get the chance check it out.
Let me get a bit conspiratorial for a minute. I'm not so sure Washington wants to fix pension and SS problems and it's the workforce and taxation that I think suggests this. Over the last couple of decades, if you take the immigrant/alien influx out of the American picture, the actual core American population has in fact declined. Couple that with the large babyboomer generation in the on-deck circle to retire and you have a potential crisis brewing. On the one hand you have gov't who needs a expanding economy to pay for our unending appetite for all things gov't but at the same time you need a workforce capable of not only filling the needs of this economic machine with workers but the gov't needs the taxpayers as well. Both edges of this sword are equally sharp. The workforce is about to take a huge hit with a large chunk of workers about to call it a day and to make matter worse be a huge draw on that "all things gov't" idea. How would one put off the potential calmity that such actions would bring on? Those nice pensions not being so nice after all would be one. Sure you may leave company #1 at 60 with the nice gold watch but you take a couple of weeks off for you and your better half to take that once in a lifetime trip and then firstday back is the firstday of your new and next career working for another gold watch. I saw a recent report where over the next decade over 10 million jobs will go unfilled because of lack of workers in this country. What would this suggest about any real effort of securing the borders? Or for that fact moving jobs out of the country? Some jobs may be about money and some may be about qualified workers to begin with as it pertains to jobs leaving the USA.
How would you keep current workers in the market so that this 10 million impact might be reduced? How would you keep workers in the workplace so that some who would qualify for SS might push that draw off into the future several more years while at the same time continue to pay SS taxes thus helping the system take in more? What if the age for earliest draw on your IRA or 401k were raised to match the qualifying for drawing SS? It has been discussed. If to many people draw SS then the excess funds now used by Congress to fund other things like political promises to the home district power brokers that got them elected in the first place would dry up and how then would Sauron rule with no ring and these Orc armies sustain themselves? Could we be facing not a problem but a developed and planned circumstance? Sure, I agree it's X-Files talk but mankind's political history is littered with the dead bodies of such conspiracies and intrigue.
While on taxes I think the President's Tax Council is a joke but over the last couple of years there has been an effort to get into law was is known as the Fair Tax which is a national sales tax. On the one hand some of the financials being throw around look great and would also suggest that in recent years when the gov't had shortfalls, with the sales tax idea there would have been a surplus. That part is true but what you can't control with a national sales tax is what people will do with their money and that is the real hangup of the whole idea. This system of taxes allows the indivdual to decide economic policy instead of Washington but our economic system will only work with a planned tax system not an unplanned and controlled like a National Sales tax. It's like having massive amounts of cancer in the body but only treating the small skin cancer on the arm thinking this will be the sure all of cure all. The patient will still likely die.
Like UPS, Uncle Sammy has a master business plan and no matter what that plan must succeed in order to be successful in their eyes. Protect and promote the plan at all costs. This takes lots of planning and controlling or eliminating the unwanted varibles in life that crop up. With the current system Congress can play political games and favorites and via policy promote one aspect of American life while on the other side demote another. All this done via the taxing powers. Orwell's 1984' has been in our laps the whole time we just don't want to admit it. The National Sale tax idea strips Congress, Washington and the lobbyist some of the powers that give the ability to shape and manipulate the American public and therefore it has no chance as much as on that one aspect alone I'm all for it. Sometimes in order to tear down a castle all you have to do is knock down one support support instead of knocking over the entire North wall. Taxes are a necessity but I believe they have become a political weapon rather than an instrument of promoting true public good.
Lastly and on the fair tax to suggest a corp/gov't alliance behind the scenes concerning our tax system, ironically it's Home Depot who spoke out about the Fair Tax idea and they were opposed to it. Basically they said it would threaten consumerism and thus their bottomline. K Street has guns aimed at any effort to massively change tax policy and therefore any effort to promote savings among the average folk will be at threat from them. K Street controlled Bush's so-called Tax Council and the finished product appears to be nothing more than the same ole' same ole. The 82' TEFRA Act and the restructured Code of 1986' were both hailed as leading edge positive changes but at the end of the day it was absolutely meaningless and useless except to the few choosen to benefit from the well placed provisions in the tax code. I have no doubt when we look back in the years ahead at Bush's council we too can take solice in another opportunity lost to the powers of K Street.
To me this sez a ton about Sauron and the Orc Army that runs this country and has since the early part of the last century!
BTW: If you learn about Washington DC and who resides on K Street you'll understand the importance of it's mention. c ya!
wkmac
Well-Known Member
IBT "Teamwork" Fall 2005' Issue
Starting on page 6 thru page 12 covers Central States Pension Fund. Worth the read IMO. Some good news and some not so good as well as some interesting facts and timeline about the fund and it's retirees.
As for the good and bad on CSPF, here's an example from page 7:
"Although 2003' and 2004' were excellent years for investments, there is a long way to go before the 2000'-2002' losses can be made up. In the five years from 2000'-2004', the fund's actual return on investments was 22.7%. Meanwhile, the actuaries assumed "rate of return," the projected rate needed to meet future needs, was 46.9% for those five years. At the end of 2004', the spread between the Pension Fund's actual returns and what the actuaries calculate is needed, was 24.2%, a dramatic turnaround from the shortfall at the end of 2002'."
According to the article, 2004' ended with investment returns of 14.3% which increased the funds assets by $990mil and this is positive but it's offset by the reality the fund is in an operating deficit and in 2004' the Fund paid out $1.3bil more in benefits than it collected in contributions. Another item covered was that negotiators of UPS, NMF and Carhaul per IBT's request agreed to reallocate the $0.60 per hour health benefit increase scheduled for August 1, 2004 and August 1, 2005 to the pension fund. This $1.20 per hour reallocation will contribute roughly $200mil per year beginning in 2006' and by 2009' will have contributed close to $1bil in additional contributions to the pension fund. Based on the article it would appear the conversions by Central States of 70% of it's of it's PPO business to Blue Cross and Blue Shield and another 10% to Medical Mutual of Ohio help with major saving which I would guess put the IBT in position to ask the 3 major parties to the various contracts for the reallocation of health benefits increases to the pension fund.
There's much more covered in the article and I encourage every UPSer covered by CSPF to take the time to read this article.
Starting on page 6 thru page 12 covers Central States Pension Fund. Worth the read IMO. Some good news and some not so good as well as some interesting facts and timeline about the fund and it's retirees.
As for the good and bad on CSPF, here's an example from page 7:
"Although 2003' and 2004' were excellent years for investments, there is a long way to go before the 2000'-2002' losses can be made up. In the five years from 2000'-2004', the fund's actual return on investments was 22.7%. Meanwhile, the actuaries assumed "rate of return," the projected rate needed to meet future needs, was 46.9% for those five years. At the end of 2004', the spread between the Pension Fund's actual returns and what the actuaries calculate is needed, was 24.2%, a dramatic turnaround from the shortfall at the end of 2002'."
According to the article, 2004' ended with investment returns of 14.3% which increased the funds assets by $990mil and this is positive but it's offset by the reality the fund is in an operating deficit and in 2004' the Fund paid out $1.3bil more in benefits than it collected in contributions. Another item covered was that negotiators of UPS, NMF and Carhaul per IBT's request agreed to reallocate the $0.60 per hour health benefit increase scheduled for August 1, 2004 and August 1, 2005 to the pension fund. This $1.20 per hour reallocation will contribute roughly $200mil per year beginning in 2006' and by 2009' will have contributed close to $1bil in additional contributions to the pension fund. Based on the article it would appear the conversions by Central States of 70% of it's of it's PPO business to Blue Cross and Blue Shield and another 10% to Medical Mutual of Ohio help with major saving which I would guess put the IBT in position to ask the 3 major parties to the various contracts for the reallocation of health benefits increases to the pension fund.
There's much more covered in the article and I encourage every UPSer covered by CSPF to take the time to read this article.
NoBrownForMe
Well-Known Member
Facts:
Here's just a taste, a fraction, of what I found on the Internet regarding UPS:
Data compiled from Department of Labor, various media stories and the AFL/CIO Website (YOUR UNION)
INJURY STATISTIC'S
* On average one UPS employee is killed on the job each month
* Over 60,000 UPS employees are injured on the job annually
* Thousands of injuries go unreported due to threats and intimidation from UPS management
* According to the National Academy of Science: The national injury rate is 8 injuries per 100 employees, or 8:100
* UPSs injury rate is 15:100 employees
* Into the 90s UPS was the highest fined company by OSHA with over 1300 citations, 1/3 of those were serious in nature
* In 1994 in order to avoid a contempt ruling in Federal court UPS was fined $3 million for their repeated failure to comply with the Government mandated Hazardous Material Spill Program
* According to a Cornell University study-Former UPS workers missed an average of 275 workdays A PIECE due to injuries sustained at UPS
* UPS pays out over $1 million A DAY in worker compensation claims
* OSHA receives more complaints from workers at UPS than from any other company
* UPS has an occupational injury rate 3 times that of the transportation industry
* UPS has one of the worst HAZMAT violation records in the industry
* Young, new workers are becoming disabled for life at an alarming rate from injuries received while at UPS
* UPS drivers lead the industry in alcohol and substance abuse associated with stress at UPS
* UPS drivers rank in the top 9% of most stressed adults in the nation
* 1.8 million worker suffer workplace injuries, 600,000 of those injuries are ergonomic related such as repetitive motion, and carpal tunnel syndrome
* Between 1972 and 1996 UPS spent over $4.6 million for fines levied against them
* 85% of the injuries at UPS are ergonomic in nature
*UPS raised the weight limit of its packages from 50lbs to 150lbs, which injury rates increased as well
* The average value of a UPS workers life is $5,000, standard OSHA fine
* In Chicago a brand new employee (described as barely more than a "boy") serving his 30 day probation died of heat exhaustion while unloading a truck during one of Chicago's heat waves. He was required to meet the standard of unloading 2000 packages per hour in order to make probation. OSHA fined the company $5000.
* Packages presently can weigh up to 150 pounds each. The company has refused to bargain over weight limits, reserving the right to require drivers to unload alone packages that could run 200 or more pounds. When challenged, management told the union that if the driver needed help, s/he could ask the customer to assist. Young, inexperienced workers are becoming disabled for life from injuries received at UPS, often their first real job.
* UPS has consistently stonewalled union demands for appropriate safety equipment such as decent seatbelts, seats, and tires, and has refused to retire from their fleet trucks that have only single cylinder brakes.
* The EEOC has filed a class action suit against UPS for violating the rights of disabled workers. Workers who suffer eye injury are entitled to be transferred to other jobs, but UPS has refused or failed to accommodate their disabilities.
* UPS has a rate of occupational injury that is three times that of the transportation industry.
* The National Coalition on Ergonomics, an employer association has worked to prevent OSHA from adopting standards intended to cut down on repetitive motion injuries. Among the main corporate opponents of sensible repetitive motion injury regulations has been UPS, which is among the leading violators of OSHA regulations.
* The average penalty for a serious violation is $709, according to "Death on the Job: The Toll of Neglect," a new report by the AFL-CIO.
Political influence vs. safety statistics:
*Ergonomic injuries account for all serious workplace injuries and cost society approximately $50 billion each year
*Ergonomic injuries affect women the most who make up less than 50% of the workforce, but account for 1/3 of the total workplace injuries
* UPS facility in Lenexa Kansas was fined $140,000 by OSHA for deplorable working conditions that were resulting in an injury rate of almost 20:100 employees, thus began UPSs venture into the ergonomic arena battling OSHA, and the public interest
*UPS sued OSHA in Federal court over the Lenexa Kansas citation, and the Federal judge ruled that since no ergonomic standard existed for workers all citations were dropped, and OSHA began working on ergonomic standards
*Teamster General President James P. Hoffa joins UPS in refusing to address skyrocketing injury rates (refer to news article enclosed)
*Teamster General President James P. Hoffa appoints OSHA killer hired gun, Joseph DiGenova, to the IRB overseeing union corruption, which the position is paid for by members dues money to the tune of $100,000 a year plus a union retirement
*UPS was found to have illegally contributed to James P. Hoffas election campaign in 1996
*Teamsters General President James P. Hoffa was a former labor attorney representing UPS and ATA member, Yellow Freight against UPS employees
*UPS hired Eugene Scalia, son of U.S Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, as a lobbyist to defeat ergonomics
* UPS attempted to endow a chair at the University of Washington and fill it with their bought M.D, and hired consultant, Stanley Bigos, who testified against the ergonomics standard in the House\
* UPS and their Coalition is lobbying for the for the application of cost benefit analysis or worker death to cost to profit ratio
*UPS claimed publicly that the national ergonomic standard would cost its shareholders $3 billion
*UPS was the top contributor in the 2000 US Presidential Election- transportation sector: UPS $3,135,569
*Ergonomic injuries affect mainly lower wage scale workers, which is comprised mostly of minority and female workers
*UPS was the #1 political contributor while being a member of the NAMCE, the 300 company coalition headed by UPS
*UPS hires former OSHA head, DOROTHY STRUNK, as a consultant to attack and defeat the very language she drafted to protect workers from ergonomic injuries. Shes paid over $60,000 as a UPS lobbyist (see documents enclosed)
*President Bush (00) returns the favor to UPS and defeats the ergonomic bill affecting millions of American workers.
UPSs SOCIAL AND BUSINESS PRACTICES
* Annual turnover rate at UPS is 400%
* UPSs association with National Welfare to Work campaign has hired more than 50,000 welfare recipients since the program began in 1997. Very few of those people remained by years end respectively.
*UPS receives incentives for hiring these people into poverty jobs
*Average weekly salary of the welfare to work employees was $104 after taxes per week. ($8.00 hr X 3.0 hour guarantee X 5 days 25% with holdings and - $25 in union dues)
*Work place abuse, unsafe working conditions, and no hope for a FULL TIME job cited as reasons for leaving UPS
*UPS is routinely sued by the EEOC and various other Civil and Human rights agencies for violations, and discrimination
* RAINBOW PUSH Coalition is well known for attacking companies who violated minoritys civil rights, but it seems that UPS is a trading partner on their Board, and now has nothing to worry about from RAINBOW PUSH
*UPSs main public relations firm, Edelman Public Relations Worldwide, is the volunteer firm for the UN Global Compact. The Compact is hoped to be a PR coup for companies with tarnished public images to show to show their support for democracy and human rights without ACTUALLY having to change their practices
*UPS is being sued in two separate class actions from previous customers who were over charged for insurance, which stems from UPSs $1.8 billion tax evasion suit
* UPS was sued in two separate suits involving wage fraud regarding meal issues of drivers in New Jersey and Washington state, which have cost UPS employees an estimated $3 billion
*Monopolistic practices: UPS is routinely suing foreign governments for unfair, and monopolistic practices, while expanding exponentially around the world, and at the same time keeping foreign companies out of the American market
*Workers at UPS who report unsafe working conditions, unsafe and illegal equipment, payroll fraud, and corruption are harassed and discharged often without help from the Hoffa controlled Teamsters union clearly in violation of Federal law.
And there's more where that came from...
Here's just a taste, a fraction, of what I found on the Internet regarding UPS:
Data compiled from Department of Labor, various media stories and the AFL/CIO Website (YOUR UNION)
INJURY STATISTIC'S
* On average one UPS employee is killed on the job each month
* Over 60,000 UPS employees are injured on the job annually
* Thousands of injuries go unreported due to threats and intimidation from UPS management
* According to the National Academy of Science: The national injury rate is 8 injuries per 100 employees, or 8:100
* UPSs injury rate is 15:100 employees
* Into the 90s UPS was the highest fined company by OSHA with over 1300 citations, 1/3 of those were serious in nature
* In 1994 in order to avoid a contempt ruling in Federal court UPS was fined $3 million for their repeated failure to comply with the Government mandated Hazardous Material Spill Program
* According to a Cornell University study-Former UPS workers missed an average of 275 workdays A PIECE due to injuries sustained at UPS
* UPS pays out over $1 million A DAY in worker compensation claims
* OSHA receives more complaints from workers at UPS than from any other company
* UPS has an occupational injury rate 3 times that of the transportation industry
* UPS has one of the worst HAZMAT violation records in the industry
* Young, new workers are becoming disabled for life at an alarming rate from injuries received while at UPS
* UPS drivers lead the industry in alcohol and substance abuse associated with stress at UPS
* UPS drivers rank in the top 9% of most stressed adults in the nation
* 1.8 million worker suffer workplace injuries, 600,000 of those injuries are ergonomic related such as repetitive motion, and carpal tunnel syndrome
* Between 1972 and 1996 UPS spent over $4.6 million for fines levied against them
* 85% of the injuries at UPS are ergonomic in nature
*UPS raised the weight limit of its packages from 50lbs to 150lbs, which injury rates increased as well
* The average value of a UPS workers life is $5,000, standard OSHA fine
* In Chicago a brand new employee (described as barely more than a "boy") serving his 30 day probation died of heat exhaustion while unloading a truck during one of Chicago's heat waves. He was required to meet the standard of unloading 2000 packages per hour in order to make probation. OSHA fined the company $5000.
* Packages presently can weigh up to 150 pounds each. The company has refused to bargain over weight limits, reserving the right to require drivers to unload alone packages that could run 200 or more pounds. When challenged, management told the union that if the driver needed help, s/he could ask the customer to assist. Young, inexperienced workers are becoming disabled for life from injuries received at UPS, often their first real job.
* UPS has consistently stonewalled union demands for appropriate safety equipment such as decent seatbelts, seats, and tires, and has refused to retire from their fleet trucks that have only single cylinder brakes.
* The EEOC has filed a class action suit against UPS for violating the rights of disabled workers. Workers who suffer eye injury are entitled to be transferred to other jobs, but UPS has refused or failed to accommodate their disabilities.
* UPS has a rate of occupational injury that is three times that of the transportation industry.
* The National Coalition on Ergonomics, an employer association has worked to prevent OSHA from adopting standards intended to cut down on repetitive motion injuries. Among the main corporate opponents of sensible repetitive motion injury regulations has been UPS, which is among the leading violators of OSHA regulations.
* The average penalty for a serious violation is $709, according to "Death on the Job: The Toll of Neglect," a new report by the AFL-CIO.
Political influence vs. safety statistics:
*Ergonomic injuries account for all serious workplace injuries and cost society approximately $50 billion each year
*Ergonomic injuries affect women the most who make up less than 50% of the workforce, but account for 1/3 of the total workplace injuries
* UPS facility in Lenexa Kansas was fined $140,000 by OSHA for deplorable working conditions that were resulting in an injury rate of almost 20:100 employees, thus began UPSs venture into the ergonomic arena battling OSHA, and the public interest
*UPS sued OSHA in Federal court over the Lenexa Kansas citation, and the Federal judge ruled that since no ergonomic standard existed for workers all citations were dropped, and OSHA began working on ergonomic standards
*Teamster General President James P. Hoffa joins UPS in refusing to address skyrocketing injury rates (refer to news article enclosed)
*Teamster General President James P. Hoffa appoints OSHA killer hired gun, Joseph DiGenova, to the IRB overseeing union corruption, which the position is paid for by members dues money to the tune of $100,000 a year plus a union retirement
*UPS was found to have illegally contributed to James P. Hoffas election campaign in 1996
*Teamsters General President James P. Hoffa was a former labor attorney representing UPS and ATA member, Yellow Freight against UPS employees
*UPS hired Eugene Scalia, son of U.S Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, as a lobbyist to defeat ergonomics
* UPS attempted to endow a chair at the University of Washington and fill it with their bought M.D, and hired consultant, Stanley Bigos, who testified against the ergonomics standard in the House\
* UPS and their Coalition is lobbying for the for the application of cost benefit analysis or worker death to cost to profit ratio
*UPS claimed publicly that the national ergonomic standard would cost its shareholders $3 billion
*UPS was the top contributor in the 2000 US Presidential Election- transportation sector: UPS $3,135,569
*Ergonomic injuries affect mainly lower wage scale workers, which is comprised mostly of minority and female workers
*UPS was the #1 political contributor while being a member of the NAMCE, the 300 company coalition headed by UPS
*UPS hires former OSHA head, DOROTHY STRUNK, as a consultant to attack and defeat the very language she drafted to protect workers from ergonomic injuries. Shes paid over $60,000 as a UPS lobbyist (see documents enclosed)
*President Bush (00) returns the favor to UPS and defeats the ergonomic bill affecting millions of American workers.
UPSs SOCIAL AND BUSINESS PRACTICES
* Annual turnover rate at UPS is 400%
* UPSs association with National Welfare to Work campaign has hired more than 50,000 welfare recipients since the program began in 1997. Very few of those people remained by years end respectively.
*UPS receives incentives for hiring these people into poverty jobs
*Average weekly salary of the welfare to work employees was $104 after taxes per week. ($8.00 hr X 3.0 hour guarantee X 5 days 25% with holdings and - $25 in union dues)
*Work place abuse, unsafe working conditions, and no hope for a FULL TIME job cited as reasons for leaving UPS
*UPS is routinely sued by the EEOC and various other Civil and Human rights agencies for violations, and discrimination
* RAINBOW PUSH Coalition is well known for attacking companies who violated minoritys civil rights, but it seems that UPS is a trading partner on their Board, and now has nothing to worry about from RAINBOW PUSH
*UPSs main public relations firm, Edelman Public Relations Worldwide, is the volunteer firm for the UN Global Compact. The Compact is hoped to be a PR coup for companies with tarnished public images to show to show their support for democracy and human rights without ACTUALLY having to change their practices
*UPS is being sued in two separate class actions from previous customers who were over charged for insurance, which stems from UPSs $1.8 billion tax evasion suit
* UPS was sued in two separate suits involving wage fraud regarding meal issues of drivers in New Jersey and Washington state, which have cost UPS employees an estimated $3 billion
*Monopolistic practices: UPS is routinely suing foreign governments for unfair, and monopolistic practices, while expanding exponentially around the world, and at the same time keeping foreign companies out of the American market
*Workers at UPS who report unsafe working conditions, unsafe and illegal equipment, payroll fraud, and corruption are harassed and discharged often without help from the Hoffa controlled Teamsters union clearly in violation of Federal law.
And there's more where that came from...
tieguy
Banned
ok2bclever said:
I really think you get a little thin skinned on these labeling issues. The labeling of the evil corperation does not always have to be an accusation against you. Its a phrase that I have coined ( I know I'm not the first) because in my time I have seen that many people will assign a set of evil or immoral values to a large entity such as a corperation. That does not mean there aren't some corperations that have not earned that reputation. But generally when you break it down a corperation is a group of individuals trying to do what is right for its stockholders and its people. With my slice of the pie I think its my job to assume the responsibility for my part of the corporation and to minimize the passing of the buck as much as possible. The "evil corporation" term is actually intended to be more tongue in cheek in referencing this concept of blaiming the faceless company for things we don't like.
For some reason several here get upset when something is said about UPS that isn't wine and roses.
Well I would prefer champagne with my roses. Naa a beer is fine.
I do also blame myself (we, the workers) for not investigating this thoroughly from the beginning and demanding more accountability of both our company and our union for their promises over the decades regarding the pension.
part of the problem is u need a finance degree to understand the issues. Its very complicated. Lot of differences between multi-employer, single employer plans. How the plans are administered. How the investment decisions are made. etc.
As for the bush quote, I just thought it was nice that a very pro-business president was stating publicly that many companies were underfunding pensions.
I always thought Bush might be too liberal. I'm sure there are corporations guilty of that charge. Many pension plans are single employer. its always been my understanding that the funding requirements for single employer plans are much stricter than mult-employer plans hence you would think employers would be required to maintain funding on those. As you look at the multi-employer plans you then have to determine what each companies fair share is which I know there are some guidelines for. And then the last question which did not sit well with you. If UPS is paying the amount mandated by the contract then are they guilty of underfunding?
Personally I think the teamsters should have negotiated profit sharing as a means of rebuilding these pension plans. Have your hourly fees that go into the H&W and retirement. Then negotiate a percentage of UPS's yearly profits that get paid into these ailing pension plans. Help fix the pensions and build some teamwork between the teamsters and UPS. I'm sure we would get swamped with sales leads from our drivers if we had this type of teamwork.
That mindset is sadly missing from current management / labor negotiations. You have the traditional mistrust of management. The suspicion by some that UPS would cook the numbers to minimize their obligation. The Enron fears of tying UPS profits in with the pension plans. The plan administrators would also have to have the discipline to allow these profits the time to restore the financial viability of these plans. If they spend it as they get it then this solution would not work. Part of the damage done from our poorly negotiated pension issue in 97 was that many plans raised their disbursment amounts before they were financially able to do so in response to the pension pressure on the teamsters at the time. And last but not least the internal political pressures within the union itself. Your union exists by telling the workers they cannot trust the company. If the teamsters came out each year and said they loved UPS management and trusted us 100 percent then the members would wonder why they even need a union. The fear might be that buidling a strategic relationship with the company that includes profit sharing incentives would get whatever teamster president was responsible shot and dismembered for being to company oriented. JMO
[/quote]
Last edited:
