What's new

ABF | Is ABF ready to buy???

trucker999 said:
Just ask the poor souls whove had been putting into thier 401ks for the last 25 years and have nothing to show for it and cant retire,short term long term they are nothing but ponzi schemes just like bernie madeoff with all the money ponzi scheme.
Click to expand...

Excluding people who actually HAVE lost everything in the Madoff scam, noone has lost "their entire retirement" in the market over the last couple years. YES... they may have lost 35 or 40% (in a good fund) and yes it's come back in the 15% range (in a good fund) this year... but be realistic. Just because the market goes down does NOT mean you lose money. You only lose when you sell. When you hit 65 years old... do you withdraw all your $ from your retirement account? NO, you leave it there to grow (albeit at a more conservative rate, probably in bond funds at 7 - 8%). You withdraw just enough to live off of... so, yes, for a couple years while the market recovers, you should live more modestly than you would have otherwise (and that sucks), but the $ you leave in the market while it recovers will grow back into what it was before or something similar.

But let's say someone WAS investing over the last 25 years... and over the last 2 years lost 35%... they STILL have more than they would have had if they were invested in a pension fund for a company that goes bankrupt (i.e. the fund fails). They still have a LOT more! (for the record, they'd still have WAY more $ than if they had just put all the $ in a mattress also).

So really... it's ridiculous to say that people "lost everything" in the market... yah, we've lost a bunch, but in reality you haven't lost anything unless you HAVE to sell (i.e. cash out for $ to live on in retirement)... so the people retiring THIS YEAR will have to live conservatively until the bulk of their retirement accounts recover with the market, and that recover is already underway. There are ups and downs... but historically (even averaging in the huge depressions we've had) the market earns between 8% and 12%.

Besides, if you're REALLY worried about it, put all your 401k in a US Bond fund... they return 7% to 9% practically guaranteed. But think about this... if you are in a pension, YOU have no control on how conservatively or aggresively your retirement is managed.
 
ScifiFri said:
If you work at ABF for your entire career, how would you feel knowing that thousands of people who never worked for ABF are withdrawing benefits from the $ ABF puts into the fund... and that ultimately THEY will be responsible for YOU not having a pension? (well, you having a very small one after the govt takes over) I understand why they created the plan, but the only people who benefit from it are the ones working for companies who ALREADY went bankrupt.

Just my take on it.
Click to expand...

I have to respectfully disagree with your opinion. But before we get into a debate and rehash the same arguments that have been repeatedly debated on this website, will you kindly answer these 2 questions for me?

#1 What monies, other than the contributions for the hours that we are now working, does ABF pay into the CSPF?

#2 How are the retirees from bankrupt companies to blame for my not having a pension? Didn't they earn that pension for all the years that they worked for those companies? And didn't those companies pay into the pension fund for every hour those retirees worked just like ABF did and is still doing?
 
2631 said:
#1 What monies, other than the contributions for the hours that we are now working, does ABF pay into the CSPF?
Click to expand...

Nothing... I didn't say ABF is contributing MORE than they should be... they contribute their fair share... but ABF employees will be affected just the same as everyone else if the fund goes down... this continues on the next question...

2631 said:
#2 How are the retirees from bankrupt companies to blame for my not having a pension? Didn't they earn that pension for all the years that they worked for those companies? And didn't those companies pay into the pension fund for every hour those retirees worked just like ABF did and is still doing?
Click to expand...

The reason central states will go down is because 99% of the companies that existed when it started no longer exist. In a NORMAL environment, if a company fails, it's pension obligations are picked up (usually at a prorated %) by the government...but in this case, they aren't. The reason the fund will go down is because there are WAY more people on the roster than ever worked at the companies STILL contributing... pensions have the same problems social security has... you have to keep contributing if more and more people are going to be withdrawing... if the company dies, no more contributing.

Pensions are invested in the market also, so if the market drops 40%, the pension drops the same amount, but the payouts don't drop... then you have two companies left to makeup the "underfunding" now seen in the fund. ABF should be obligated to supply the underfunded portion of their hours of service... and YRCW for their underfunded portion by hours... but then what about the rest?

I agree though, those people DESERVE their pensions... and if they worked for a company that wasn't part of a multi-employer fund, they'd still get their pensions... but since they don't... there's a good chance they won't... and when the govt takes over the fund, because of the # of people withdrawing, they'll get a lot less than they would have otherwise.

That's my understanding of the situation, at least.
 
ScifiFri said:
Nothing... I didn't say ABF is contributing MORE than they should be... they contribute their fair share...
Click to expand...

ScifiFri said:
They also have been contributing MORE than their obligation to the funds to put off it's failure as long as possible. They don't have to... but they do it to protect the interests of their employees.
Click to expand...

Sorry ScifiFri but you did say just that. I wanted to point this out before it goes to far and this gets heated. Either you forgot what you first said or you have something else going on that I don't/can't understand? If you have an opinion about something that's cool but don't post your opinion as fact, if you can't back it up with fact's. Other TB members will point it out when you post something incorrectly, always proof read your post's before you post them.
 
trucker999 said:
Just ask the poor souls whove had been putting into thier 401ks for the last 25 years and have nothing to show for it and cant retire,short term long term they are nothing but ponzi schemes just like bernie madeoff with all the money ponzi scheme.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the guys I work with that have 100's of thousands in their 401 accounts. You have to be smart enough to know how to manage your investments. All these guys knew when to move their money out of stocks. Twenty years in you better not have all your money in stocks. After taxes this is their money no need to worry about some pension fund.
 
ScifiFri said:
I agree though, those people DESERVE their pensions... and if they worked for a company that wasn't part of a multi-employer fund, they'd still get their pensions... but since they don't... there's a good chance they won't... and when the govt takes over the fund, because of the # of people withdrawing, they'll get a lot less than they would have otherwise.

That's my understanding of the situation, at least.
Click to expand...

Now I am even more confused, I am trying to figure out where you are coming from on this issue. First you try and blame the retirees for taking away ABF employee pensions. Then you post that those retirees deserve their pensions and lost me completely with the underlined part of your response
 
2631 said:
Now I am even more confused, I am trying to figure out where you are coming from on this issue. First you try and blame the retirees for taking away ABF employee pensions. Then you post that those retirees deserve their pensions and lost me completely with the underlined part of your response
Click to expand...

why in the hell would abf buy holland as a dayton road driver makes no sense to buy a losing trucking company
 
ScifiFri said:
In response to all the comments about the ABF pension obligations to the central states fund... there is a lot of confusion and misunderstanding...

My understanding is that ABF didn't want to get out of the fund because they were afraid their OBLIGATIONS were going to increase if YRCW went under... it's because the fund itself WILL go under if YRCW goes under, and actually it'll go under w/o YRCW going under, in time. Each company is only obligated to pay into the fund for the employees/miles driven by their actual employees. So just because one goes away does not increase the others obligations. HOWEVER... there are SO MANY retirees drawing on the fund that worked at companies who no longer contribute to the fund, that it will go under in time with only two companies contributing now. ABF knows that when it goes under, ABF union employees (NOT ABF itself) will be left holding the bag. The government will take over the fund, YAAAAY right? WRONG... they will only guarantee about 25% funding so yah... you'll get some retirement, but nothing like you were going to get before.

ABF has been trying to buy out of the fund to protect it's employees (past, present, future) interests... they want to quit contributing into a dying fund (basically throwing $ into a burn pit) and start contributing into something that resembles a 401k (but not exactly) that IS guaranteed and will NOT be drawn from by employees from dead companies who never worked for ABF. ABF knows this. They also have been contributing MORE than their obligation to the funds to put off it's failure as long as possible. They don't have to... but they do it to protect the interests of their employees. They are willing to start a new fund with a very large initial deposit and contribute to it and everyone's pensions will be secured.

The UNION wouldn't listen to ABF at the last negotiation... the union basically said you get what YRCW gets and YRCW wasn't interested in buying out (why? maybe because they are too broke to come up with the buy-out $?) so ABF was screwed. Also, if either ABF or YRCW quit contributing to central states... it'll go down faster... the union doesn't want that either. But it IS going to happen, just a matter of time.

Simple as that.
Click to expand...

yeah sure abf was looking out for their employees
like you really matter to management
please someone either wake this guy up or grab that dam koolade cup from his hands:TR10driving03:::shit:::nutkick:
 
here's a prediction boys
ark best will more than likely acquire new penn as new penn is a great fit
that is new penn without it's real estate as its real estate will be sold for needed capital
this will make it extremely attractive pricewise for ark best
in addition it is a NMFA carrier like abf which translates to an easier fit
notice boys i said ark best not abf as it will undeniably be a merger

reddaway will be acquired by ups freight as that will enhance its western ops
since reddaway is a white paper contract like ups freight, this translates into a remarkably good fit both freightwise & intergration-wise
as far as real estate holdings are concerned it will probably follow the same route new penn goes making it attractive pricewise, in otherwords "priced to sell"
its real estate sold for needed capital

as for holland it will more than likely be either absorbed into yellow roadway rather than sold and its real estate sold for needed capital
 
yeah sure abf was looking out for their employees
like you really matter to management
Click to expand...

Well in this case it just happens that what will benefit ABF in the long run is also what would benefit the employees in the long run... so either way it works out...
 
Benny Hill said:
Sorry ScifiFri but you did say just that. I wanted to point this out before it goes to far and this gets heated. Either you forgot what you first said or you have something else going on that I don't/can't understand? If you have an opinion about something that's cool but don't post your opinion as fact, if you can't back it up with fact's. Other TB members will point it out when you post something incorrectly, always proof read your post's before you post them.
Click to expand...

Well I misunderstood then... I'm not saying ABF is OBLIGATED to pay more because of other companies, I'm saying that ABF does (or at least has in the past, when profitable) paid more than their obligated amount... I can't post a specific fact to reference though... I do recall hearing them talk about it in one of the conference calls before the last union negotiations.

The conversation doesn't have to get heated though... I'm just telling you guys how I understand the situation. Take everything with a grain of salt... this is, afterall, an anonymous message board. I just know there are a lot of things going around that are definitely, factually false and I am just trying to clear things up for a few people.
 
2631 said:
Now I am even more confused, I am trying to figure out where you are coming from on this issue. First you try and blame the retirees for taking away ABF employee pensions. Then you post that those retirees deserve their pensions and lost me completely with the underlined part of your response
Click to expand...

no, I'm not BLAMING anyone, I'm saying that the reason the central states will go down is because there are too many hands in the pot. It's cause and effect, not blame. ANYONE who works their time deserves a pension, it's ridiculous to think otherwise. But in this situation, ABF is contributing (contractually) money into a pension fund that is (in my opinion) going to fail and the direct cause of that failure is the failure of all the other companies that have still have employees in the fund. It's wasted money, whereas there ARE better options out there... and no, not just 401k's.

But like I said, I'm not trying to place blame and I definitely think anyone who does their time deserves their pension. That's why the government has the pension benefit guarantee corporation... but that doesn't help these people who's companies went down if they are part of a multi-company fund... which is why the fund is now grossly underfunded.

I'm trying to be realistic on my observations too... I'll never say a 401k is the cure-all, or that pensions are the wrong way to go in all situations... just in THIS situation things aren't going as planned and SOMEthing needs to be done to provide for the people in the fund at some point. I'm guessing the union will deal with it in the next negotiation or so... as it becomes blindingly clear that it can't be ignored anymore.

dr
 
ScifiFri said:
The conversation doesn't have to get heated though... I'm just telling you guys how I understand the situation. Take everything with a grain of salt... this is, afterall, an anonymous message board. I just know there are a lot of things going around that are definitely, factually false and I am just trying to clear things up for a few people.
Click to expand...

If you think that this is heated then IMO you are on the wrong website. This topic has been rehashed over and over since UPS,YRC & ABF first came out with the so called pension "orphans" problem.

Ups quit the CSPF and paid its withdrawal liability. YRC & ABF appeared to be satisfied with the new contract that puts an extra $1 an hour into the pension fund instead of our paychecks. Nothing more was even said about the "orphans" until the effects of this recession caught up with YRCW. Then they appeared to be using the "orphan" issue only as a smokescreen while they appealed to the Federal Government for help.

IMO the the PGBC will not be taking over the CSPF and it will not fail. The loopholes in ERISA allowed the companies to created this unfunded liability problem. I believe that Congress will figure out a way to correct it.

ScifiFri, you are new to Truckingboards and chose not to fill out your profile. By your "trying to clear things up for a few people" in such a condescending manner and then trying to confuse the issue when questioned on it makes me skeptical of who you are and what your agenda might be.
 
stoneyABF said:
If you less companies paying into Central States or whatever conference you in, then how where does Central States get their funding? The Tooth Ferry? No, The remaining companies have to pay more to keep it funded. Use your freakin head.

And you spell it "Companies" not "Companys".
Click to expand...

The remaining companies have to pay more? The companies have tried to sell this as "we have to pay for the orphans" to us for some time. Do you have any facts to back up this post?
 
222lifer said:
The remaining companies have to pay more? The companies have tried to sell this as "we have to pay for the orphans" to us for some time. Do you have any facts to back up this post?
Click to expand...

No, I don't have any facts to back that up. Do you have have any facts to back up that companies like ABF don't pay more than their fair share? Its all how we like to look at this in our own particular view. You don't think they more than their fair share. I think they do.

But regardless, these pension companies are in the same boat as S.S.I. in my opinion. they will paying our more than whats coming in. Maybe not every pension fund is in trouble right now. But as we all know, central isn't doing so good. And I think more will follow if we stay with the status qro.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top