Teamsters Applaud Treasury Decision to Deny CSPF Cuts, Protect Retiree Pensions

[hondo]

We have less mechanics and maintenance in my neck of the woods than we did 15 years ago. This trend will probably continue. The airline industry has gone down also. It will only be a matter of time.

Yes, there is a lot more 'Remove & Replace', as opposed to 'Remove, Rebuild, & Replace' nowadays. A lot less periodic adjustments needed to equipment. Extended fluid service intervals. And then there's the problem of PT sups on the inside and Teamster drivers not properly inspecting and writing up equipment. Or, if it is written up, 'it's not in the budget'.

 

[Mugarolla]

Yes, 2 pensions here. However, IAM L701's fund is currently 72.5%-'endangered'. I was told (by a mechanic who's been around so long he was there for the vote), that the 2 pensions went a long way on selling the mechanics on the IAM vs Teamsters.

Apparently they have a local IAM pension, not part of the National IAM Pension Fund.

Bingo

As explained here

You took Len's highest contribution rate in your example. I agreed that someone with 30 years in may not get the current benefit multiplied by 30 because most previous years were most likely a little lower. And I know that each years benefit amount needs to be added, but we don't know the exact amount of the previous years.

But when the mechanics get their yearly statements, it calculated those previous years contribution rates, and estimates the future years rates.

Back to Len. As I stated earlier, someone with say, 15 years in, multiplying the current rate by 30 is a close estimate of what the 30 year pension should be, if the yearly increases are pretty consistent, which they have historically been.

At 15 years, halfway into his career, Len's contribution rate was $142.43. I would estimate his 30 year pension to be 30 time $142.43, or $4273/mo. A darn pretty close estimate to his actual pension of $4452/mo.

This will work every time if the contributions rates are uniformly increased every year, or every 3 years, as in Len's case.

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior as long as past behavior has been pretty consistent.

We have less mechanics and maintenance in my neck of the woods than we did 15 years ago. This trend will probably continue. The airline industry has gone down also. It will only be a matter of time.

Yes, it may happen. But we are not 100% sure.

The bottom line is that right now, based on current conditions and future predictions, short of the IAMNPF collapsing like the CSPF did, and I am not saying that it won't happen, a 15-20 IAM mechanic has a projected 30 year pension of $9000/mo.

Yes things could change. The sun may not rise tomorrow. They may never see that $9000/mo, but it is a fact right now that their projected benefit is $9000/mo.

 

[hondo]

Apparently they have a local IAM pension, not part of the National IAM Pension Fund.
...

They show up on IAMNPF:Search by Name | IAMNPF Home with a current contribution rate of $5.02/hr & benefit of $176.79
(Employer code U01A/LL701 fleet & trailer if my link doesn't work).Yeah, I can't get the link to work. Search 'United Parcel Service', then 'Aurora, IL'.

 

[Mugarolla]

They show up on IAMNPF:Search by Name | IAMNPF Home with a current contribution rate of $5.02/hr & benefit of $176.79
(Employer code U01A/LL701 fleet & trailer if my link doesn't work).Yeah, I can't get the link to work. Search 'United Parcel Service', then 'Aurora, IL'.

OK. So some of the other cities I posted earlier with the low contribution rates, as opposed to $10.50, may also have more than one pension.

Still does not negate the fact of a projected $9000/mo pension that some other posters are trying so hard to tear apart, but that is interesting info.

$3500/mo from the IAMNPF and some other amount from another pension. Still not too shaby if the other pension has even a decent amount.

 

[Bubblehead]

Yes, there is a lot more 'Remove & Replace', as opposed to 'Remove, Rebuild, & Replace' nowadays. A lot less periodic adjustments needed to equipment. Extended fluid service intervals. And then there's the problem of PT sups on the inside and Teamster drivers not properly inspecting and writing up equipment. Or, if it is written up, 'it's not in the budget'.

Yep, but UPS will continue to have more vehicles in service, as their business continues to grow,and grow, and grow...?

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

Central States Pension Fund Drops Efforts to Create Second Bailout Plan

 

[Bubblehead]

Central States Pension Fund Drops Efforts to Create Second Bailout Plan

It can wait until after the General Election this Fall?

Who are they kidding???

 

[oldngray]

Are they hoping some politician will promise to bail out the fund? and actually do it?

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

It can wait until after the General Election this Fall?

Who are they kidding???

Politics are behind everything.

 

[Bubblehead]

Are they hoping some politician will promise to bail out the fund? and actually do it?

One last chance, for everyone to posture, before the "day of reckoning".

 

[BigUnionGuy]

You're not very good at reading posts, are you?

Better than most.... But, not as good as a few.

I never said that the IBT has control over investment strategy.

You seemed to infer it.

Now, on to your elitist UPS attitude.

Really? A five minute search turned these up. Give me 30 minutes and I could fill this whole thread with your quotes.

Facing facts, is tough.

You don't want to hear it.

And, FZ and TS want to pretend.... the reality doesn't exist.


I stand behind everything I've said.

Right or (technically) wrong.

The bottom line is that right now, based on current conditions and future predictions, short of the IAMNPF collapsing like the CSPF did, and I am not saying that it won't happen, a 15-20 IAM mechanic has a projected 30 year pension of $9000/mo.

Let's cut to the chase.


It's a BS projection. And, how about.... that SS offset ?

Not to mention....

The liability, of an additional 90,000 retiree's ?


Pfft.



-Bug-

 

[hondo]

Hmm. @Mugarolla , it seems that when we're looking at the current contribution rate-benefit amount numbers, those are 'Schedule B'. If you really want an eye-opener, look at the benefits amount for the same contributions under 'Schedule A'. It looks like 'B' is a lower tier of future benefits (40% reduction) started in 2003 for new participants, then phased in from 2011-2013 for the remaining higher schedule 'A' members (who so far retain what they previously earned under 'A').

 

[Mugarolla]

Hmm. @Mugarolla , it seems that when we're looking at the current contribution rate-benefit amount numbers, those are 'Schedule B'. If you really want an eye-opener, look at the benefits amount for the same contributions under 'Schedule A'. It looks like 'B' is a lower tier of future benefits (40% reduction) started in 2003 for new participants, then phased in from 2011-2013 for the remaining higher schedule 'A' members (who so far retain what they previously earned under 'A').

Talked to our mechanics last night.

They said that they indeed get yearly reports listing their contributions and estimating their pension at retirement age. At 65, 30 and out, etc.

One of them, 20 years in, said his projected pension was a little over $12000/mo until, he thought, a few years ago. The other guy thought it was in 2014, but their projected pensions changed.

He said it is now projected at $10500/mo. Still unbelievable, but a $1500/mo reduction.

They said they expect it to be reduced again before they retire, but are expecting to see over $9000/mo for 30 years when they retire.

 

[Bubblehead]

I hope you guys haven't lost sight of the original reason this IAM Multi-employer pension was referenced?

The "slight of hand" tactics of the H&H boys is designed to challenge the validity of the claim and make us forget that this fund viablely manages to pay double or more in monthly benefits, while doing so with similar contributions from the employer.

They don't want us challenging the notion that these Multi-employer pensions can be managed responsibly, while ours wasn't.

 

[Mugarolla]

You seemed to infer it.

I didn't infer anything. If you took it that way, you were the one doing the inferring.

And, how about.... that SS offset ?

SS offset? There is no Social Security offset. No pension will be offset or reduced in any way, shape or form due to any benefits received from Social Security.

The liability, of an additional 90,000 retiree's ?

There is no liability for these additional 90,000. These retirees are accounted for and their benefits are included in the funds liability. The fund is over 100% funded. The money is currently in the fund to pay these and all other benefits. The current contributions is enough to pay the projected pensions of active employees.

This is one pension fund that is not a Ponzi Scheme. It does not rely on current contributions to pay for any currently retired member. And it is still funded at over 100%

It's a BS projection.

No, it is not. The money is in the fund for the current retirees, and the contribution rate is high enough to support these projections for active contributing participants.

Facing facts, is tough.

You don't want to hear it.

And, FZ and TS want to pretend.... the reality doesn't exist.


I stand behind everything I've said.

Right or (technically) wrong.

I was referring to you denying that you feel UPS employees are spoiled brats and are elitists.

Are there UPS employees that are spoiled, that think they deserve everything, that they are the elite? Yes.

Are there a lot of them? Probably.

Are all of us like that? No.

As long as you do your job that your local members, including UPS Teamsters, are paying you to do, I am good with that. I don't care what you feel about us.

Do not let this go to your head. For what it's worth, I believe that you know the contract very well and do a damn good job at your local. As long as you continue to do your job well and to the best of your abilities, I could care less what you personally think about us.

 

[Mugarolla]

I hope you guys haven't lost sight of the original reason this IAM Multi-employer pension was referenced?

The "slight of hand" tactics of the H&H boys is designed to challenge the validity of the claim and make us forget that this fund viablely manages to pay double or more in monthly benefits, while doing so with similar contributions from the employer.

They don't want us challenging the notion that these Multi-employer pensions can be managed responsibly, while ours wasn't.

That, and the fact that 10 Point brought it up as to what some mechanics were projected to get for their pensions and people were quick to drag him through the mud calling BS.

 

[By The Book]

Yep, but UPS will continue to have more vehicles in service, as their business continues to grow,and grow, and grow...?

Or will they..............?

 

[Bubblehead]

Or will they..............?

Yea, that Internet and shop at home thing is probably going to die down soon.

 

[Inthegame]

Bubble, here's a hot tip, but don't tell anyone. Buy buggy whips, they're poised to skyrocket.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

I didn't infer anything. If you took it that way, you were the one doing the inferring.

Maybe so.

SS offset? There is no Social Security offset. No pension will be offset or reduced in any way, shape or form due to any benefits received from Social Security.

I thought there was, with this plan ?

There is no liability for these additional 90,000. These retirees are accounted for and their benefits are included in the funds liability. The fund is over 100% funded. The money is currently in the fund to pay these and all other benefits. The current contributions is enough to pay the projected pensions of active employees.
This is one pension fund that is not a Ponzi Scheme. It does not rely on current contributions to pay for any currently retired member. And it is still funded at over 100%

The money is in the fund for the current retirees, and the contribution rate is high enough to support these projections for active contributing participants.

Honestly....

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this.

I've never dealt with the mechanics and didn't know their plan, at all.

It's kind of like a state of disbelief.

I was referring to you denying that you feel UPS employees are spoiled brats and are elitists.

Are there UPS employees that are spoiled, that think they deserve everything, that they are the elite? Yes.

Are there a lot of them? Probably.

Are all of us like that? No.

Don't forget.... I am out of UPS.

That "opinion" is mainly derived out of constant criticism from the freight members.

Maybe hearing it so often, has left me jaded.

As long as you do your job that your local members, including UPS Teamsters, are paying you to do, I am good with that. I don't care what you feel about us.

Do not let this go to your head. For what it's worth, I believe that you know the contract very well and do a damn good job at your local. As long as you continue to do your job well and to the best of your abilities, I could care less what you personally think about us.

The running joke amongst people serving in elected positions is;

"Today you're a hero.... tomorrow, you're a zero."


I wasn't trying to turn this in to a pissing contest.



-Bug-