What's new

Yellow | Pension Fund says Hoffa’s Kroger Deal is Illegal

The following is a letter to all Parcel and Small Package Division locals from Chairman of the Teamsters UPS National Negotiating Committee James P. Hoffa and Co-Chairman Ken Hall:
The Teamsters National United Parcel Service Negotiating Committee has been advised that UPS has reached an agreement in principle with the Central States Pension Fund establishing conditions for a potential UPS withdrawal from Central States. The specific terms of the agreement are being finalized by the Company and Fund. As you have been advised, these matters are strictly between the Company and Central States. Neither the Negotiating Committee nor the International Union has any authority or legal right to participate in those negotiations.
It is important for it to be clearly understood that whatever agreement has been reached between Central States and UPS cannot be implemented unless it is accepted by the Negotiating Committee and ratified by the members. In short, the existence of the agreement between Central States and UPS does not mean that UPS is free to withdraw from Central States and establish a new, jointly administered Teamster pension plan for its employees. We have said from the beginning that we will not accept a proposal for UPS to withdraw from Central States unless we are satisfied that it would be in the best interest of all Teamsters who are participants in that Fund, not just the UPS employees. While we await official notification of the terms of the settlement, we continue to evaluate the effect on the future of Central States. We repeat what we have pledged before. The Negotiating Committee will not accept a new UPS contract that does not protect the retirement and health benefits of our members whether they are employed by UPS or by the many other companies that participate in the Central States Fund.
When negotiations were suspended, we indicated that we were prepared to return to the bargaining table once the Company is prepared to submit a comprehensive economic proposal for our consideration. That has not yet occurred, although we are hopeful that the agreement with Central States will permit the Company to draft an economic package that will satisfy the needs of all Teamster benefit funds and protect all of our members.
We will continue to advise you of developments as they occur so that you can keep your members informed and respond to their questions.

Aug 2, 2007
#1
 
ABFer said:
No offense intended but I am not so sure that what you are saying here is right. I am not aware of what terms ABF had in mind for exiting the Funds. I know that they did report to us in a video that they were willing to buy their way out and they said that they had to money to do it. Just the IBT would not permit it. I am also unaware of a provision that puts YRC's liability on ABF. To my knowledge each beneficiary of their respective fund receives benefits based on contributions made on their behalf. ABF and YRC are not covering the liabilities of all the now defunct companies, you and I are.
Click to expand...

"We can provide the same benefits that we're providing now directly to our employees at significantly less cost than we're now paying," Davidson told Wall Street analysts at a conference sponsored by Bear Stearns in New York May 8. "That money would allow us to amortize the withdrawal liability that we would pay to the funds, and would lower our operating ratio to allow us to be even more competitive in the marketplace."

According to SEC filings, ABF estimates it would cost the company $600 to $650 million in "contingent liabilities" to withdraw from the plan, payable over a 10 to 15 year period.

Such a move, however, is likely to be a major sticking point with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. The National Master Freight Agreement expires in March 2008, and both sides are gearing up for the latest round of talks.

Sorry for not providing entire link,Some of them are so long I tried to get the pertinent paragraphs.Stupid of me though cause I can't find the article where the teamsters denied their terms because it wasn't a lump sum payment but,I did read it.
 
falconfan said:
"We can provide the same benefits that we're providing now directly to our employees at significantly less cost than we're now paying," Davidson told Wall Street analysts at a conference sponsored by Bear Stearns in New York May 8. "That money would allow us to amortize the withdrawal liability that we would pay to the funds, and would lower our operating ratio to allow us to be even more competitive in the marketplace."

According to SEC filings, ABF estimates it would cost the company $600 to $650 million in "contingent liabilities" to withdraw from the plan, payable over a 10 to 15 year period.

Such a move, however, is likely to be a major sticking point with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. The National Master Freight Agreement expires in March 2008, and both sides are gearing up for the latest round of talks.

Sorry for not providing entire link,Some of them are so long I tried to get the pertinent paragraphs.Stupid of me though cause I can't find the article where the teamsters denied their terms because it wasn't a lump sum payment but,I did read it.
Click to expand...
It has been quite a while since it was news and anything on it will be harder to find. I recall Bob Davidson telling us in a video about his desire to exit the Teamsters' Funds and that $600 million figure is what he was saying. He also said something along of the lines that [the $600 million is easy to come by but getting the IBT to agree to it is another story.]
 
bigtruk_us said:
Alot of us members or retirees didn't have a say or vote on that departure.
Click to expand...
HUH❓❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top