PBGC Raises Possibility of Program Insolvency
- Thread starter UTR906
- Start date
That is exactly why Congress moved to make it impossible for the 1400 multiemployer pension funds to go to the PBGC by changing the ERISA law to be able to cut the pension in half to make them last longer and not to be able ever to go to PGGC. However the funds like Central States will get 50 - 70% pension cuts and will still have to pay the insurance premiums to PBGC for protection they can never collect. Much like paying for health insurance you can never use. What a Crock. All the while the most underfunded pension system in the country (Congressional Pensions) which is not funded at all, will be paid by tax payer dollars and no one dare say a word about that. Did I say what a crock of
? Did I say I am angry about all of this and the Presidential elections? Did I say I needed a 
?ESP, Do you think that when the vote is over and it is approved as is ," X" years from now when the numbers they have used to sell this pension cut fall apart all of us will be cut to 110% ?That is exactly why Congress moved to make it impossible for the 1400 multiemployer pension funds to go to the PBGC by changing the ERISA law to be able to cut the pension in half to make them last longer and not to be able ever to go to PGGC. However the funds like Central States will get 50 - 70% pension cuts and will still have to pay the insurance premiums to PBGC for protection they can never collect. Much like paying for health insurance you can never use. What a Crock. All the while the most underfunded pension system in the country (Congressional Pensions) which is not funded at all, will be paid by tax payer dollars and no one dare say a word about that. Did I say what a crock of
I'm not ESP but I agree with your assessment that even with the proposed changes the pension will "fall apart" and fail anyway. I believe the actuaries are projecting a return of 7.5 percent on the funds assets going forward. It's hard for me to see that happening. It is apparent that companies contributing to the fund like Kroger are chafing at the bit to leave. With the help of the IBT that will probably become a reality after the expiration of their contract. I can't say that I'd blame them for wanting to leave this sinking ship. Ask yourself, would you as an employer want to contribute into this mess? The fund claims in their application that there is a 50.4 percent that the rescue plan will work. I don't like those odds even though they are better than those in Vegas. As for getting cut to 110 percent of the PBGC insured rate, what is the insured rate? Since our pensions are being cut won't the PBCG's obligation also be cut? Chances are that the insured rate will be figured on your new reduced pension and not on the original amount. So with all that said I still believe the government will insure the PBGC's obligation but probably at a reduced rate on your reduced pension and that's one hell of a lot lower than 110 percent of the present insured rate. With all that's happened up this point maybe I'm being too much of an optimist or simply naive to even think that anybody would help us. The first test of this unfair inequitable plan will take place next year when the fund makes their first report to Treasury about how the plan is working, I'm betting the results will show a failing rescue plan.
Thank you Grasshopper, you have listened wisely and learned from my mentoring. You have answered the question correctly and precisely. While there may be one exception. In the law, it states that Orphans will be cut the hardest and to the fullest extent of the law, which is 110%.( which is happening now) Then the other three tiers will not be reduced to the 110% until the plan is proven to not be working. Then the tier two will be reduced to the 110%, then tier three and then tier four. Which is UPS's lawsuit. They want everyone cut to the max first. Not ups retiree's at all. UPS's lawsuit has been rejected and I am sure they will revisit this whole thing. I do know that Ken Feinburg has let the cat out of the bag, saying the Pension Plan has followed the letter of the law. Which means that on May 7, 2016 he will announce that the plan to cut will go into effect after the voting is done. July 1st is the target date. Again thanks for answering UTR906 in my absence. I know you are not ESP, but you would be damn proud to be me.
. Then again 
"Thank you Grasshopper, you have listened wisely and learned from my mentoring. You have answered the question correctly and precisely. While there may be one exception. In the law, it states that Orphans will be cut the hardest and to the fullest extent of the law, which is 110%.( which is happening now) Then the other three tiers will not be reduced to the 110% until the plan is proven to not be working. Then the tier two will be reduced to the 110%, then tier three and then tier four. Which is UPS's lawsuit. They want everyone cut to the max first. Not ups retiree's at all. UPS's lawsuit has been rejected and I am sure they will revisit this whole thing. I do know that Ken Feinburg has let the cat out of the bag, saying the Pension Plan has followed the letter of the law. Which means that on May 7, 2016 he will announce that the plan to cut will go into effect after the voting is done. July 1st is the target date. Again thanks for answering UTR906 in my absence. I know you are not ESP, but you would be damn proud to be me.
Kroger is figured into the equation beginning July 1, 2016
"Kroger is assumed to have a Rehabilitation Plan Withdraw (“RPW”) in 2016 and pay monthly withdrawal liability payments of $1,449,751 for 240 months beginning July 1, 2016. These amounts are valued in addition to the withdrawal liability payment amounts otherwise assumed in the projections. Kroger participants’ benefit features are assumed to be reduced in accordance with the Rehabilitation Plan and applicable benefit suspensions apply. Kroger withdrawal liability and participant data are based on information provided by the Fund Office for this purpose."
Interesting...... I wasn't aware of the procedure that MPRA mandates for future reductions. So, if I understand you correctly, when a rescue plan does not work everyone follows the orphans (Tier 1) to 110 percent of the PBGC insured amount in succession. Tier 2 first followed by Tier 3. After the Funds total collapse we're handed over to the PBGC and get whatever the insured amount is if anything. It was my understanding that we stayed in our Tiers until the Fund collapsed then went to the PBGC rate. Good to know. Kinda like a race to the bottom.Thank you Grasshopper, you have listened wisely and learned from my mentoring. You have answered the question correctly and precisely. While there may be one exception. In the law, it states that Orphans will be cut the hardest and to the fullest extent of the law, which is 110%.( which is happening now) Then the other three tiers will not be reduced to the 110% until the plan is proven to not be working. Then the tier two will be reduced to the 110%, then tier three and then tier four. Which is UPS's lawsuit. They want everyone cut to the max first. Not ups retiree's at all. UPS's lawsuit has been rejected and I am sure they will revisit this whole thing. I do know that Ken Feinburg has let the cat out of the bag, saying the Pension Plan has followed the letter of the law. Which means that on May 7, 2016 he will announce that the plan to cut will go into effect after the voting is done. July 1st is the target date. Again thanks for answering UTR906 in my absence. I know you are not ESP, but you would be damn proud to be me.
Last edited: