Yellow | YRC Pension & Central States

As usual I was being a Smartarse and Ol Level Headed always Sober Trip missed what I was being a smartarse about. :o

OK wise-arse, you got me again!! :bowdown: :LMAO: Remember, I don't get mad, I get even!!

PS - "Level Headed always Sober"?? Nobody that knows me would recognize me by that description! :hysterical:
 
My point is still being missed!!

The dead companies paid full pension rates at that time, and the people who worked there retired afterward. These cuts are not for people who HAVE retired- they are for people who are NOT YET retired. Stay until age 65, and (if the Fund is still alive) get full benefits paid. The fund HAD to take action to preserve the Fund, or people like me, that are no longer YRC employees, COULD SUE for not taking action to perserve the Fund through irresponsible payments to non-paying YRC Employees....

YRC caused all this by not paying the fund. Why UPS saw this coming, and negotiated a settlement to get out. The last company standing gets the bill for everyone. That's why no one wants to be in a Multi-Employer Fund in this day and age....

My point is that unless the cuts are because of critical status, (which I don't believe they are--has ABF been cut?) then YRC's non-contributions for the last two years should NOT affect the contributions prior to that. Those prior accrued benefits are not to be touched per ERISA---the Pension Protection Act of 2006 doesn't come into play unless all in the fund are getting cut because of critical status.

How can going from $2700 per month at the end of March 2011, to $1700 on the same day NOT be a cut in accrued benefits?
OK, I know full well that YRC has not made contributions for the last two years, BUT only benefits for the last two years should be affected if I retire now; NOT MY ENTIRE PENSION.

If someone from say, ABF retires at age 57 with 27 years paid in, how much will he get if he retires now? I'll bet it's more than me at age 59!
 
My point is that unless the cuts are because of critical status, (which I don't believe they are--has ABF been cut?) then YRC's non-contributions for the last two years should NOT affect the contributions prior to that. Those prior accrued benefits are not to be touched per ERISA---the Pension Protection Act of 2006 doesn't come into play unless all in the fund are getting cut because of critical status.

How can going from $2700 per month at the end of March 2011, to $1700 on the same day NOT be a cut in accrued benefits?
OK, I know full well that YRC has not made contributions for the last two years, BUT only benefits for the last two years should be affected if I retire now; NOT MY ENTIRE PENSION.
Harley......where do you come up with ABF did not get cut, they did due to criticle status. We in turn recieved more penitlies because we were droped from the fund.
 
YRC caused all this by not paying the fund. Why UPS saw this coming, and negotiated a settlement to get out. The last company standing gets the bill for everyone. That's why no one wants to be in a Multi-Employer Fund in this day and age....[/QUOTE]

The union should have NEVER allowed this to happen!!!
 
Harley......where do you come up with ABF did not get cut, they did due to criticle status. We in turn recieved more penitlies because we were droped from the fund.

I haven't seen anything that says they have been cut. If it's true, then where are you getting it from? I'd like to know.

What about my example: If someone from ABF retires today at age 57 with 27 years paid in, how much will his pension check be?
 
Harley; you aren't going to 'see it' or agree. So, hire an attorney and go at it. Just be aware, few will join your suit, and don't invest more in it than you can afford to lose. You won't agree with concensus that sees it different, so go to court and prove us wrong.
 
I haven't seen anything that says they have been cut. If it's true, then where are you getting it from? I'd like to know.

What about my example: If someone from ABF retires today at age 57 with 27 years paid in, how much will his pension check be?
If ya don't wanna beleive me go ask Muler at ABF....he knows what this cost him and will glady explain it to ya. And there are way to many varibles to tell you how much a ABF guy would get...but I will ball park it at 2300-2500 just so no one thinks I'm avoiding the question. Any ABF guys wanna weigh in?
 
If ya don't wanna beleive me go ask Muler at ABF....he knows what this cost him and will glady explain it to ya. And there are way to many varibles to tell you how much a ABF guy would get...but I will ball park it at 2300-2500 just so no one thinks I'm avoiding the question. Any ABF guys wanna weigh in?
Wolf is correct. We the Teamsters of ABF did also get caught in the yrc deferral mess. We went from being able to retire with 25 to 30 years to also not being able to retire before age 57. Here is the letter that was sent explaining their stance.YOUR BROTHER ALWAYS!

http://tdu.org/files/Central States Bulletin 2011-4 Dated 3-22-11.pdf
 
Wolf is correct. We the Teamsters of ABF did also get caught in the yrc deferral mess. We went from being able to retire with 25 to 30 years to also not being able to retire before age 57. Here is the letter that was sent explaining their stance.YOUR BROTHER ALWAYS!

http://tdu.org/files/Central States Bulletin 2011-4 Dated 3-22-11.pdf
Central States no longer gives me access to the "Pension Planer", seems no one from YRC can.....Muler do you have a Ballpark figure for Harleys Question? :shrug:
 
Those retiring under 65 will be hit with a 6% per year reduction if they retire before July 1. After July 1, the penalty for retiring under 65 will be worse: for example, retirement at age 62 will mean a 26% reduction from a pension that has been already reduced.

There is a “grandfather clause” to partially protect Teamsters who reached age 55 by July 9, 2009, and who had 25+ years credit as of that date. They can retain their 25- and 30-and-out benefits, but only if they wait till age 62 to retire. If they retired after September 24, 2010 at less than age 62, they will be allowed to stop their payments till age 62, losing years of pension benefits if they retired early.
Central States Slashes Pensions for YRCW Teamsters | Teamsters for a Democratic Union
 
If it means anything back in 2004 when CSPF made cuts and they retro ed them back a couple months they allowed anyone that was on comp to be granted exclusion from the cuts. Just a thought. YOUR BROTHER ALWAYS!
 
Harley; you aren't going to 'see it' or agree. So, hire an attorney and go at it. Just be aware, few will join your suit, and don't invest more in it than you can afford to lose. You won't agree with concensus that sees it different, so go to court and prove us wrong.

This is a smart a$$ answer and uncalled for. I will see "it" when someone gives a good answer. There are a lot of things I see, but there are points that have not been answered. What I'm seeing is a couple of "apologists" for Central States. Makes me wonder if you work at CS. Only Muler has given part of an answer to my question. If ABF has lost their pre-57 retirement, then they ARE included in at least part of this.

BUT, I still would like to know what I would retire with monthly if I worked at ABF and retired with 27 years paid in at 59 years old. I had enough accrued benefits at that time to receive $2700, but it was cut to about $1700. Would it be the same if I worked for ABF?

Yes, I realize YRC has stopped paying into the fund, BUT this is what I had accrued BEFORE that. The TDU link "ilikeit" posted: Central States Slashes Pensions for YRCW Teamsters | Teamsters for a Democratic Union, only reinforces my thoughts that only YRC is getting 'benefits accrued' cut. I quote the first two paragraphs from that page:

"March 25, 2011: Central States is totally eliminating early retirement for YRC Teamsters and dropping them into the rock bottom plan.

Hoffa told YRC Teamsters to take givebacks. He never told them they would lose their already-earned pension credits."

"ALREADY-EARNED PENSION CREDITS." ERISA protects against this. If ABF is suffering the exact same fate to their already earned pension credits, then the Pension Protection Act of 2006 must be the cause. If not, then YRC is getting screwed contrary to ERISA in my eyes.

Now, how about a clear, proven answer to that? (I'm not saying I have the answer, I'm still looking for it.....ALL of it.)
 
At the risk of being Labeled an Apologist let me say that most of us on here either went through this, or atticipated it coming down, 3 years ago. We did the research and come to the conclusion we got screwed and were gonna have to live with it. Now you come with few posts Complaining like you just found out last week what was gonna happen. First where ya been. Second we have told you what we think but ya want us to prove it, I have since cleared my cache of all relevant info and can't provide it for you...Sorry. I am not gonna do the research to prove what I believe to be right either, and at this stage in the game it will be hard to come up with the proof you want. Your gonna have to do it yourself or do as Jimmy suggested, pay a lawyer to do it for ya. I think everyone here has tried to help.
 
@ Harleywideglide please read all the pages I posted and your answers are there . Plain and simply if you have a question after reading all those pages I will come back online after the games over and try and answer them , our one of our other members will try . You have been getting good advise but maybe it's not what you want to hear . Also use the TB search function ( top right ) and you will find nearly everything that Central States has put out over the last few years . Have a great one games almost back on !!
 
please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the whole Central States Pension fund crisis based on the projected unfunded liability to the fund in the near future. Thaqt being said what we need to realize is that if we do not allow companies and contractors to leave the fund there is no unfunded liability. I do realize however that there are a fraction of the companies in the fund today that there where 20 or 30 yrs ago. Most of those companies have been lost due to consolidation and loss. Many were not able to keep up with the times and subsequently went out of business or mergerd and down sized to stream line their operating cost. This is due in most part to a couple of things first and formost the deregulation of the trucking industry back in the early 80's and the other, I would like to mention, is the Taft Hartley Act. If we really want to understand why the fund is in the shape it's in we must understand what has taken place that has brought it to the state which it is in. I highly recommend that everyone interested in knowing what we are up against, read the Taft Hartley Act in order to gain a better understanding of what we as union men and women have been pitted up against for the past 30 yrs. We have been forced into a situation where we have almost no choice but to gamble our retirements in the open stock market and hope for the best. This is of course all by design. The Wall street cadre decided that merely managing pension funds wasn't lucretive enough for them so they lobbied to get Taft Hartley enacted. They won and here we are. Today less than 10% of the workforce in this country is union, compared to about 50% 40yrs ago. so it standes to reason that we are facing the loss of our retirement benefits. Fewer people putting into a fund that has a growing number of people starting to withdrawl from it. Who by the way are living longer means more benefits must be paid out than are coming in. When I started in this industry about twenty years ago I was told the average retirement draw was about 13 mos. since then it has increased significantly due to improvements in health care, preventative medicine and even working conditions,i.e. Better tractors safer roads etc. The short fall occurred because our leadership has failed to plan ahead adequetly. I contend that not enough was done early enough to stem the tide of companies exiting the fund for one reason or the other and now we are being told that it is reasonable to let them continue leaving the fund. Thusly increasing the margins of the unfunded liability. this cannot be allowed to continue. I contend that if we can halt the exodus from the Central States Fund then there will be no unfunded liability. Companies and contractors are using this to their advantage. They claim to want out of the fund bewcause they don't want to have to keep making ever increasing contributions to the fund to make up for the unfunded liability of the fund. We need to make them see that if they stay in the fund that it will eventually stabilize and the unfunded liability will be mitigated. This is a tough nut to crack! Most of the people my local has tlaked to cite this as their nmajor reasoning for wanting out of the fund. The step that is difficult is to try and mitigate the unfunded liability as it stands now. We need to get involved. This is our union! the days of sitting back and letting others make the decisions for us are over. We need to be proactive and let the elected officials know that they will need to start paying attention to us. We need these pensions. The stock market has proven itself to be a dicey proposition at best. That being said I look forward to reading your thoughts and comments on this post. Just shakinn the tree to see what falls out,so to speak!! LOL!!:Poke:
 
At the risk of being Labeled an Apologist let me say that most of us on here either went through this, or atticipated it coming down, 3 years ago. We did the research and come to the conclusion we got screwed and were gonna have to live with it. Now you come with few posts Complaining like you just found out last week what was gonna happen. First where ya been. Second we have told you what we think but ya want us to prove it, I have since cleared my cache of all relevant info and can't provide it for you...Sorry. I am not gonna do the research to prove what I believe to be right either, and at this stage in the game it will be hard to come up with the proof you want. Your gonna have to do it yourself or do as Jimmy suggested, pay a lawyer to do it for ya. I think everyone here has tried to help.

Wolf & all the rest who are trying to answer,
Don't think I don't appreciate what you're trying to do!! Where was I earlier? I was not aware of ERISA's provisions until recently and started reading and studying on some of these things. IF I'm a littlie "thick" right now it's because I've recently started in on all of this. I understand what's being said, but still have a problem seeing how anyone can say your pension didn't get cut, you just have to wait. That's about like saying I'll hire you and pay you $500 per week but you have to work three weeks to get it. I still haven't read all of r14's post, so I'll refrain from commenting farther until I read and DIGEST it all.

To-- r14: as far as what's being said what I want to hear. Of course I don't want to hear there's nothing we can do, who does? But if my questions are answered and everything's legal, then I will accept it. I just haven't had everything answered to my satisfaction yet. I'm not one to roll over and play dead. If I had run across this info earlier, I would have started all of this earlier. I have a record of fighting. If you were to ask anyone who really knows me, they would tell you.
 
Wolf & all the rest who are trying to answer,
Don't think I don't appreciate what you're trying to do!! Where was I earlier? I was not aware of ERISA's provisions until recently and started reading and studying on some of these things. IF I'm a littlie "thick" right now it's because I've recently started in on all of this. I understand what's being said, but still have a problem seeing how anyone can say your pension didn't get cut, you just have to wait. That's about like saying I'll hire you and pay you $500 per week but you have to work three weeks to get it. I still haven't read all of r14's post, so I'll refrain from commenting farther until I read and DIGEST it all.

To-- r14: as far as what's being said what I want to hear. Of course I don't want to hear there's nothing we can do, who does? But if my questions are answered and everything's legal, then I will accept it. I just haven't had everything answered to my satisfaction yet. I'm not one to roll over and play dead. If I had run across this info earlier, I would have started all of this earlier. I have a record of fighting. If you were to ask anyone who really knows me, they would tell you.
There is a YRC Teamster from Cleveland who I know has retained a Lawyer for the CSPF cuts. Whether or not it will be successful only time will tell. YOUR BROTHER ALWAYS!
 
Top