Re: "Beyond Repair" . . . Really???
When its said a pension fund is 100% funded it means all those vested in the plan could retire TODAY and continue to be paid just by the plans growth. So if the company were to go bankrupt and close its doors, assuming the fund is 100% all we would need is someone to manage what UPS left behind. This is all in theory of course.
Glad you pointed that out Brett and to the earlier comments about APWA being unproven in several aspects, you are correct. However, the IBT are loaded with their own shortcomings as well so the "perfect world" scenario holds weight with them also. Their path of history has many failures whether of their own doing or not but they took the position of fudciary agent and thus they will get the blame.
As for the "fully funded" idea, back in the early 80's as a young Teamster who gave little if any thought of retirement as growing old was for other people, yeah did I learn the hard truth
I'd hear others discuss a fully funded pension plan and those opposed to such ideas (generally the hardcore union types) would argue if the plan was fully funded the company could stop paying into the plan. Not being to verse in that whole process I still just couldn't understand what was wrong with a fund that was fully paid up and had everyone covered so that we got exactly what we were promised but at the same time gave the company the flex to take those same funds and either use them elsewhere or if they so choose (not likely as in cold day in hell LOL!)to provide us with a higher pay rate or other benefits. Or in this day of labor costs at UPS verses FedEx, all of a sudden that large cost is off the table and the competitive advantage given back to UPS in pricing and other flexibilities in meeting FedEx, DHL or whoever out there in the real world. I guess I always saw this arguement against a fully funded pension plan as shortsighted and in the reality of today's CS, what would we now give for a fully funded pension fund? My how life changes as we live it!
As for the offer from UPS to create a combined pension fund UPS/IBT, etc? It's way early folks and there are still a number of questions but I view this as a positive step but not for the reason you might think. Based on what I've read from the Teamster.org release of 5/10 and the 5/11 UPSDate mailing from IBT, this time verses 1997' the union is giving consideration to the proposal. I said consideration, not they are taking it but the fact that they are looking it over is a good thing. I want them to be openminded to consider any and all potentials out there and not be closed minded to think there is only one size shoe to wear no matter the foot you are trying to fit. Also the fact they are considering this IMO is rather telling. I think the IBT knows that the rank and file are not only watching but their thinking has greatly changed in the last 10 years. Having that "ballbat" called the APWA lurking out, whether it can get the job done or not is having an impact. If they (IBT) blow this, if they muck this up, you very well could see not only larger numbers drop from the union but the even greater chance that one or even a few buildings could do the unthinkable and go APWA and then the potential "genie is out of the bottle" and you run the risk of setting them up with a shot to prove themselves and what happens if they just happen to get lucky!
Hate APWA and their ilk all you want but at the same time I do believe they are helping to hold some feet to the fire and God Bless Em for that! Whatever happens folks I just hope for UPSers that we can obtain a plan that let's UPSers gain from all our hardwork and efforts over the years and be able to enjoy a retirement life that I really believe we deserve.
Don't remember the exact comment but something was asked about the APWA ability to pay pensions if UPS went down the tubes and it's a valid point. APWA as I understand what I've read on the matter seems to be a plan of almost like an individual retirement account. Not it's not strictly in that fashion but it does appear more linked to the individual in certain aspects rather than you are a part of a larger pool. Again, it's not exactly like a pure 401k or IRA plan but it does come across to me anyway as a type of hybrid between a IRA/401K and a larger collective pension plan in the sense that it's taken some good aspects of both and thrown into one. Maybe I've read it wrong but that's the way I see it. As a type of "single employer" plan if the company goes bust you have what you have and nothing more as the same is true for CS under that scenario and I might add if UPS goes down CS is completely dead so let's be real here. Under the multi employer pension insurance protections, a 30 year retiree would get somewhere around $1000 a month as I understand it. However and what I find odd that under a single employer plan, that same retiree under those rules would get nearly twice that amount. I don't understand the thinking of Congress when they set this up but that's how I understand this if the worse case scenario took place. I also think the promises of the payouts of APWA are a little to pie-n-the-sky but I do think their idea is to always have at any given moment a fully funded plan because in theory you would have on hand at all times the funds needed to pay all obligations. This may seem crazy and impossible but what the APWA cheerleaders never tell you is that conversion to APWA would mean everyone starts at zero and until you meet certain time benchmarks of service, you have nothing because your account hasn't built up to cover you future needs. It is a pay as you go type of account and don't get me wrong I like the idea and approach. Very Smart IMO. What I don't agree with is that I don't think some folks with the pom poms are either being honest or they haven't studied all the facts. I personally think the current system sux and I want out bigtime and my solution is a lumpsum payoff and rollover into my 401k and then it's all on me but that cold day in hell scenario comes back into play.
JMHO!
That way we would follow you in droves.
You must be the really smart one.
