Teamsters shrinking pension

[Chuck Schalk]

http://www.tdu.org/news/ibt-backs-plan-allow-some-pension-cuts


Are you Teamster card signers sure you know what your getting yourself into?

Believing in unsubstantiated promises by the Teamster salesmen and signing a card to have them possibly represent us can be fatal without knowing what they are about under their claimed shining armour.

AMFA is the only Class and Craft Union who will only represent Mechanic and related goups period.

Sign an AMFA card and lets finish this once and for all

AMFA 2013 and beyond

 

[Chuck Schalk]

The Failure to Protect Teamster Power
Our flagship fund in serious danger? Pension cuts spreading? How did that happen?
First off, James Hoffa and Ken Hall cut a deal with UPS in 2007 to give away the Central States Fund, to give UPS control of the pensions. We struck in 1997 to stop UPS’s pension grab, which killed it for a decade. Then Hoffa and Hall gave it away without so much as a skirmish, let alone a fight.
Second, the failure to organize and protect Teamster power in trucking led to the decline of major contributors to Central States and many other pension funds. Today YRCW, which has been the largest contributor to many plans, contributes zero. In June it is supposed to resume contributions, but at a mini-level of $1.75 per hour. And UPS Freight contributes zero, because a deal was cut to let them off the hook altogether.
This is the fruit of a failure to protect Teamster power in trucking and in other Teamster core industries. Hoffa’s freight division leaders’ only plan is to dodge the issues, sell concessions, and blame someone else.

If YRC doesn’t recover, we could see major pension fund failures, especially in plans such as New York Local 707, New Jersey Local 641, the Baltimore fund, and others which are already in the red zone.

 

[Chuck Schalk]

IBT Backs Plan to Allow Some Pension Cuts




February 26, 2013: The Hoffa administration has signed on to a joint employer-union proposal to allow "deeply troubled" pension funds to slash accrued benefits, even for Teamsters who have already retired.
This proposal, which could be aimed squarely at the Teamster Central States Fund, comes from the National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans, a committee of employers, unions and pension plans.
UPS is a prominent member of the group, which also includes several pension funds, employer groups, and some unions.
The group's proposal is to change federal law to allow "deeply troubled" plans, those in danger of going insolvent in the next 20 years, to drastically slash benefits.
These Pension Funds could slash benefits to as low as just 10% above the guaranteed rate set by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. For a retiree with 30 credit years, that rate is currently less than $1100 per month!
If new legislation along these lines is approved, the Central States Fund could eventually slash pensions by over 50%.
Under present law, that kind of cut in accrued benefits is illegal.
The Teamsters Union, the Central States Fund and the Western Conference of Teamsters Fund have joined with employers and some other unions to back this proposal.
The justification is to avoid having pension funds go insolvent down the road.
This is a worthy goal but the only "solution" put forward is to slash earned pensions.
Solutions Not Bailouts is the title of the full report issued by the pension committee. Many of its proposals are positive and reasonable. But the central proposal could be a dagger to tens of thousands of Central States Teamsters.
Consider the case of Greg Smith, an Ohio Teamster who retired from YRC after 29.5 years with a monthly pension of $3019.
If Central States goes bankrupt, the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation would pay Smith a monthly pension of about $1100.
The "alternative" being backed by the Teamsters would allow the Central States to cut Smith's pension to as low as $1210!
"Our union should be fighting for legislation that protects our pensions. We all know that Central States is in trouble. No one expects miracles. But the whole point of having a union is to fight for a square deal. This is just a surrender," Smith said.
It's not too late for the Teamsters Union to change course. The pension proposal is in its early stages. But Teamster members and retirees need to make their voices heard.
Millions of workers, retirees and our families depend on union pensions. Our union should be working other unions and seniors' groups to increase PBGC protections for our pensions, not backing legislation so our own union pension funds can sock it to us. That's not a bailout, it's just common sense.
Click here to download a full copy of the report, "Solutions, Not Bailouts."
To help us work to protect good Teamster pensions, join TDU.
- See more at: http://www.tdu.org/news/ibt-backs-plan-allow-some-pension-cuts#sthash.hdHau1W9.dpuf

 

[Chuck Schalk]

No replies? This is unprecedented or so true it's deafening!

Cricket.........cricket.........

 

[1AA]

Teamsters needs more $$$$$$
Lets NOT give them the opportunity to get this $$$ from American Airlines AMT's.

Like I said earlier our frozen pensions are there for the taking.
AA would love to shed this financial burden.
USAir dumped them. Do not think for a minute that the new USAir management
team will not consider dumping our frozen plans to the Teamsters.
Teamsters are no different than a shark in the prowl.
Food is $$$$ for the teamsters.

STAY AS FAR AWAY FROM THE TEAMSTERS!!

Sign a AMFA card and lets get it over with.

 

[aapitbull]

IBT Backs Plan to Allow Some Pension Cuts February 26, 2013: The Hoffa administration has signed on to a joint employer-union proposal to allow "deeply troubled" pension funds to slash accrued benefits, even for Teamsters who have already retired. This proposal, which could be aimed squarely at the Teamster Central States Fund, comes from the National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans, a committee of employers, unions and pension plans. UPS is a prominent member of the group, which also includes several pension funds, employer groups, and some unions. The group's proposal is to change federal law to allow "deeply troubled" plans, those in danger of going insolvent in the next 20 years, to drastically slash benefits. These Pension Funds could slash benefits to as low as just 10% above the guaranteed rate set by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. For a retiree with 30 credit years, that rate is currently less than $1100 per month! If new legislation along these lines is approved, the Central States Fund could eventually slash pensions by over 50%. Under present law, that kind of cut in accrued benefits is illegal. The Teamsters Union, the Central States Fund and the Western Conference of Teamsters Fund have joined with employers and some other unions to back this proposal. The justification is to avoid having pension funds go insolvent down the road. This is a worthy goal but the only "solution" put forward is to slash earned pensions. Solutions Not Bailouts is the title of the full report issued by the pension committee. Many of its proposals are positive and reasonable. But the central proposal could be a dagger to tens of thousands of Central States Teamsters. Consider the case of Greg Smith, an Ohio Teamster who retired from YRC after 29.5 years with a monthly pension of $3019. If Central States goes bankrupt, the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation would pay Smith a monthly pension of about $1100. The "alternative" being backed by the Teamsters would allow the Central States to cut Smith's pension to as low as $1210! "Our union should be fighting for legislation that protects our pensions. We all know that Central States is in trouble. No one expects miracles. But the whole point of having a union is to fight for a square deal. This is just a surrender," Smith said. It's not too late for the Teamsters Union to change course. The pension proposal is in its early stages. But Teamster members and retirees need to make their voices heard. Millions of workers, retirees and our families depend on union pensions. Our union should be working other unions and seniors' groups to increase PBGC protections for our pensions, not backing legislation so our own union pension funds can sock it to us. That's not a bailout, it's just common sense. Click here to download a full copy of the report, "Solutions, Not Bailouts." To help us work to protect good Teamster pensions, join TDU. - See more at: http://www.tdu.org/n...h.hdHau1W9.dpuf

Funny how the faithful scatter as soon as a little light shows on their lies. While we is undeniable that we need change the issue is what will that change will be another bloated overpaid out of touch organization like the TWU or Teamsters or a Democratic organization that represents our class and craft only and where all officers both National and Local are elected and can be recalled by the members on the Floor, It is Your Choice.

Make a Change that will Make a Difference!!!

AMFA

 

[CactUSmx]

My dad had Teamsters for 25 years and he gets letters in the mail that his pension is in the red and they will have to cut back. My dad counts on that money.

 

[aapitbull]

My dad had Teamsters for 25 years and he gets letters in the mail that his pension is in the red and they will have to cut back. My dad counts on that money.

I understand I have a father in his 80's and mother in her 70's and they need their money. I think it is a joke that the IBT runs around telling everbody about teamster power and then takes money out of the pockets of people like your father. If they are so powerful and have so much money then fix the problem don't sign off on a deal that takes from those who can least afford it.

 

[swamt]

***Let's also not forget this*** With the teamsters pension program, and I will use the same example of an actual retiree. Greg Smith retiring from YRC after 29.5 years is currently recieving $3019 per month, when these cuts go thru he will go down to as low as $1210. That's a whopping 60%. Now here's the other BIG kicker. With the rules and regs of the teamsters pensions plans, Mr Smith cannot, I repeat, CANNOT go back to work in the same industry or even any type of work listed on their restrictive list and still collect his massively reduced pension bennie of $1210 per month. You guys do not want the teamsters to come in at AA. Their primary agenda will be to go after the pensions. Rather they are frozen, eliminated, are even somewhat still in tact, the teamsters will go after control of it so that they can start moving even more money and funds around to try and help save the pensions but it is already too late. The teamsters need more laundry money, don't try and help them out.
The other thing that pisses me off is the fact that this decision was made by with out any input from the membership. This should send the UPS mechanics in an uproar, not to mention all the retired folks already retired. So all thru these years the teamsters have been pumping up and selling the big "pension plans" within the teamsters unionized work groups, now they all will be paid out at aprox just 10% above what the gov would have to pay if they took it over, but at a huge 60% reduction of bennies. It will only get worse (and not by much worse) if the teamsters pension plans and carriers of the plans go BK and the gov has to take them over.
Maybe, just maybe this will be a final nail for the teamsters at UPS. You never know as this affects every single employee that is in the pension plans @ UPS, as well as every single retiree already retired. This decision will affect literally millions of people.
I too see that all the teamster pushers have all of a sudden gotten very quiet. Hmmmm.

 

[Bob Owens]

Just thinking with the SWA match and the ability to set aside at least 20% of your pay and still take home more than we are, guys at SWA could walk away with well over $1million just in deposits after 35 years in their 401K, (around $350,000 in direct contributions from SWA). Figure double that with interest so they may retire at 60 with 35 years with as much as $2million. So they could spend $100k a year in retirement, not counting Social Security, for twenty years before they run out of money.

After 35 years at AA I would be looking at maybe $20K a year from my frozen DB pension plus 10 years of a 5.5% match on a much lower salary, so we are talking about maybe $38,500 match from AA. So over 20 years that would add maybe another $2000 a year. $100k/year vs $22k/year. I would have to be retired 100 years before the money I get from my DB exceeds what the WN guys get with their DB plus contributions funded by their wages that are far in excess of ours.

At this point I wish we had a 401K the whole time, we would have been more resistant to wage concessions and without the pension the company would have lacked the leverage to take what they were able to take. Now that there is nothing left they threaten to outsource, well they have nothing else to threaten us with, and our union plays right into their hands. We are screwed because we are too old, but AA will get what they pay for, the young have nothing to lose by leaving and nothing to gain by staying.

I want nothing to do with either a IBT or IAM pension scam. I've had enough broken promises for one career.

 

[swamt]

Bob, I wanted to add a couple of things here. We also have profit sharing, which has been a positive flow into my retirement account from day one. The other thing is this, alot of you may not know this but we can "sell back" our sick time to the company in trade of years of ins coverage for early retirement. EX: If a mech wants to retire early, say by 5 years, prior to medicare kicking in, then as long as we have 720 hours of sick time, we can trade that in for 5 years of ins for BOTH mech and spouse. If we would want to retire even earlier we can as long as we have the sick hours saved up. My 720 may not be exact, but it's close. Didn't know if you knew about this option we have. If you did, sorry for the redundance...

 

[Bob Owens]

Yes I knew about is because AA had offered us something they said was the same back in 2010 but is wasn't even close. AA wanted to charge us twice as many hours per month of coverage while giving us less than half the amount of sick time to bank. It came out that we would need something like 45 years of perfect attendance to bank enough time to to buy the insurance and retire early. In other words they were offering nothing.

 

[Chuck Schalk]

Teamster power is fading into concessionary solutions

 

[Overspeed]

IBT Backs Plan to Allow Some Pension Cuts




February 26, 2013: The Hoffa administration has signed on to a joint employer-union proposal to allow "deeply troubled" pension funds to slash accrued benefits, even for Teamsters who have already retired.
This proposal, which could be aimed squarely at the Teamster Central States Fund, comes from the National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans, a committee of employers, unions and pension plans.
UPS is a prominent member of the group, which also includes several pension funds, employer groups, and some unions.
The group's proposal is to change federal law to allow "deeply troubled" plans, those in danger of going insolvent in the next 20 years, to drastically slash benefits.
These Pension Funds could slash benefits to as low as just 10% above the guaranteed rate set by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. For a retiree with 30 credit years, that rate is currently less than $1100 per month!
If new legislation along these lines is approved, the Central States Fund could eventually slash pensions by over 50%.
Under present law, that kind of cut in accrued benefits is illegal.
The Teamsters Union, the Central States Fund and the Western Conference of Teamsters Fund have joined with employers and some other unions to back this proposal.
The justification is to avoid having pension funds go insolvent down the road.
This is a worthy goal but the only "solution" put forward is to slash earned pensions.
Solutions Not Bailouts is the title of the full report issued by the pension committee. Many of its proposals are positive and reasonable. But the central proposal could be a dagger to tens of thousands of Central States Teamsters.
Consider the case of Greg Smith, an Ohio Teamster who retired from YRC after 29.5 years with a monthly pension of $3019.
If Central States goes bankrupt, the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation would pay Smith a monthly pension of about $1100.
The "alternative" being backed by the Teamsters would allow the Central States to cut Smith's pension to as low as $1210!
"Our union should be fighting for legislation that protects our pensions. We all know that Central States is in trouble. No one expects miracles. But the whole point of having a union is to fight for a square deal. This is just a surrender," Smith said.
It's not too late for the Teamsters Union to change course. The pension proposal is in its early stages. But Teamster members and retirees need to make their voices heard.
Millions of workers, retirees and our families depend on union pensions. Our union should be working other unions and seniors' groups to increase PBGC protections for our pensions, not backing legislation so our own union pension funds can sock it to us. That's not a bailout, it's just common sense.
Click here to download a full copy of the report, "Solutions, Not Bailouts."
To help us work to protect good Teamster pensions, join TDU.
- See more at: http://www.tdu.org/n...h.hdHau1W9.dpuf

No argument on this thread. This is factual information. The IBT pension funds are in shambles I am sad to say. It seems the corporate types aren't the only ones who know how to screw up a pension fund.

 

[Tex-Mech]

No argument on this thread. This is factual information. The IBT pension funds are in shambles I am sad to say. It seems the corporate types aren't the only ones who know how to screw up a pension fund.

-1 for agreeing with Chuck.