ABF | Default Status

j2edge7

TB Lurker
Credits
0
Am I wrong or wouldn't the reduced pension contributions proposed by ABF put the active ABF participants in the central states fund under the "Default Status"? If so benefits would be reduced 40-50 percent.
 
Am I wrong or wouldn't the reduced pension contributions proposed by ABF put the active ABF participants in the central states fund under the "Default Status"? If so benefits would be reduced 40-50 percent.
Probably, I highly doubt that the reduced contributions they want to contribute we're run by Central States. Hopefully its just a proposal that goes no where.
 
Am I wrong or wouldn't the reduced pension contributions proposed by ABF put the active ABF participants in the central states fund under the "Default Status"? If so benefits would be reduced 40-50 percent.

You are Absolutely Right. ABF ,....Pardon me,.....ArcBest,...would like nothing better than to see these funds go to Pension Benefit Guarantee Insurance in Default Status run by the Government.

Completely removes them from the responsibility and the liability of continued funding. Plus,....it gives them the ability to tell future employees that they ..."saved"....them from a crippled Fund,....and allowed them to start a defined-contribution plan,....(..that just so happens to cost ArcBest far, far less than the old Plan.......Got to think of the Bottom Line!....).....

Don't tell the new employee that reduced funding was directly responsible for the fund being crippled........That wouldn't work for propaganda purposes to admit they were instrumental in ruining the Funds.........

HOPEFULLY,.......our Teamster Leaders see right through that plea for "relief". And,......we also HOPE that they remember ArcBest will receive a windfall 14% reduction in taxes across the board, due to the new tax code. Time to Share the Profits!
 
Am I wrong or wouldn't the reduced pension contributions proposed by ABF put the active ABF participants in the central states fund under the "Default Status"? If so benefits would be reduced 40-50 percent.
It should I think but YRC set the precedent.
 
Probably, I highly doubt that the reduced contributions they want to contribute we're run by Central States. Hopefully its just a proposal that goes no where.
The 401k idea may work well for younger employees with fewer years of service, but for those like myself (39yrs at 57.5 yrs of age) it doesn't help we need the current contribution rate to continue.
 
You are Absolutely Right. ABF ,....Pardon me,.....ArcBest,...would like nothing better than to see these funds go to Pension Benefit Guarantee Insurance in Default Status run by the Government.

Completely removes them from the responsibility and the liability of continued funding. Plus,....it gives them the ability to tell future employees that they ..."saved"....them from a crippled Fund,....and allowed them to start a defined-contribution plan,....(..that just so happens to cost ArcBest far, far less than the old Plan.......Got to think of the Bottom Line!....).....

Don't tell the new employee that reduced funding was directly responsible for the fund being crippled........That wouldn't work for propaganda purposes to admit they were instrumental in ruining the Funds.........

HOPEFULLY,.......our Teamster Leaders see right through that plea for "relief". And,......we also HOPE that they remember ArcBest will receive a windfall 14% reduction in taxes across the board, due to the new tax code. Time to Share the Profits!
Unfortunately the 401k will be attractive to newer hires and understandably so but it does nothing for those of us near retiring
 
Top