Yellow | Should YRCW Buyout out of Pension ?

No they shouldn't buy out of pension.Even YRCW had been paying 100% into the fund it wouldn't have changed anything.Goldman and Northern Trust and the government oversight messed it up.Just combine the Teamsters pension funds and fire Nyhan and the ilk and let's move on.At some point in time when the funds accumulate enough value then maybe we can go back to having separate regional pension funds.
 
No they shouldn't buy out of pension.Even YRCW had been paying 100% into the fund it wouldn't have changed anything.Goldman and Northern Trust and the government oversight messed it up.Just combine the Teamsters pension funds and fire Nyhan and the ilk and let's move on.At some point in time when the funds accumulate enough value then maybe we can go back to having separate regional pension funds.we can take care of this ourselves without begging to the government
 
Yes trip,it's in lalaa land,,
Agree , But point is NOBODY is coming up with a plan to save it , and funny thing is the ones on here that post smart ass remarks are NOT saying what there idea would be to save it . Plus the retirees now collecting full pension don't want to change anything , they don't care about there brother's still working , it's every man for themselves and this is what YRCW wanted is hate between the member's so they won't stand together, YRCW has WON , as they have taken our pay & pension & Vac week and union pride away ! and I know you will stick for YRCW again but that's ok , you are entitled to your opinion ! Have a Great Yellow Day !
Wong no-one has an idea,everyone just likes to tear everyone apart who does,at least you speak your mind, plenty of expert's here,
 
Wong no-one has an idea,everyone just likes to tear everyone apart who does,at least you speak your mind, plenty of expert's here,
But trip hit it on the head more going out than coming in,so much for organizing and letting upsfreight into separate agreement, with there own fund,that should have been a sign ,the bit don't care about us,they break bread with the upper echelon of Yrc and we pay for it whole getting laughed at,they knew this fund was in trouble long before we did,but yet we and I stress we ,In being the non voter and yes voter, I guess we can call them the scared voter, when you meet one of those idiots, make sure you thank them,
 
No they shouldn't buy out of pension.Even YRCW had been paying 100% into the fund it wouldn't have changed anything.Goldman and Northern Trust and the government oversight messed it up.Just combine the Teamsters pension funds and fire Nyhan and the ilk and let's move on.At some point in time when the funds accumulate enough value then maybe we can go back to having separate regional pension funds.
I read your comment about when the funds accumulate enough value....I have to ask if you are living in denial or some sort of fantasy? You do realize the fund will be out of money in approximately ten years,
That's what we do in the west. $1.45/hour x 2080 hours. It's not a huge amount, but every penny is mine to invest as I choose.
I would vote yes to that in a heart beat!
 
Just that Central States is in no position to have contributions suspended and Western is in better shape to ubsorb it for awhile.

5tolls suggested putting the present contributions into a 401k and that it wouldn't cost the company anything more. I'm saying they'll have to maintain the 25% contributions indifinatly , so much for an additional 401k contribution.

In 2014, there were 583,000 members of the WCTPP. The number of YRC employees is negligible. Our benefits are frozen as of 2009. There may be a slight variance due to positive or negative interest rate fluctuation. In 2002 my anticipated benefit was reduced from just under $67K/year to just under $28K/year in order to keep the plan solvent, due to declining interest rates. (My present anticipated benefit at 65 is now $1800/month, or $21,600/year.) WCTPP took these steps so as to benefit all and remain solvent. To my knowledge, CSPF did not make adjustments. WCTPP was aggressive and preemptive in protecting member benefits, CSPF was not. As a result, the dramatic cuts and probable future insolvency is due to poor management and failure to recruit new members in other industries.

Note that YRC failed to make contributions of any kind in 2009, yet WCTPP credited members with 6 months that year.

Luckily, the 25% partial contribution that was not accepted by WCTPP does not disappear into a black hole of futility of CSPF.
 
You would think that CSPF should be recouping some of the lost funds from 8-9 years ago now,with the Dow rising in the last year from around 16,000, to over 20,000 now. Guess we will see when the next report on CS comes out...I would hope the clowns managing the fund now have some of that approximately 16 billion in the market??
 
You would think that CSPF should be recouping some of the lost funds from 8-9 years ago now,with the Dow rising in the last year from around 16,000, to over 20,000 now. Guess we will see when the next report on CS comes out...I would hope the clowns managing the fund now have some of that approximately 16 billion in the market??
Assuming they remained steady in their aggressive investments that failed them in '09.
More likely, as with most investors, sell when the market bottoms and buy when it's peaking.
 
Agree , But point is NOBODY is coming up with a plan to save it , and funny thing is the ones on here that post smart ass remarks are NOT saying what there idea would be to save it . Plus the retirees now collecting full pension don't want to change anything , they don't care about there brother's still working , it's every man for themselves and this is what YRCW wanted is hate between the member's so they won't stand together, YRCW has WON , as they have taken our pay & pension & Vac week and union pride away ! and I know you will stick for YRCW again but that's ok , you are entitled to your opinion ! Have a Great Yellow Day !

Wong, there's one huge flaw in your thinking. That flaw is your assumption that the plan can be "saved" at all. CSPF, as well as numerous pension plans - both private and governmental - are in bad shape. The basic problem underlying most all of them is that more was promised than can be delivered. There are many reasons for that - people promising more for political benefit, declining numbers of contributors, investment declines, mismanagement, declines in a particular industry, etc. There is no easy answer because there are many reasons for the problem. Not everything in life works out the way we want unfortunately. ::shit:: happens sometimes. Blame YRCW all you want but what about all the trucking companies that shut the doors since the 1970's and 1980's. We did very well with pay and benefits during the 1970's but did any of us foresee the future back then? I don't think many did. We accepted the great pay and benefits and thought they'd go on forever. Some of that was just unsustainable in the long term.

PS - There you go again claiming I'm "sticking up for YRCW" when I'm only speaking reality. Come on in out of your fantasy world. YRCW didn't "take" anything from us. We (the majority anyway) accepted less in order to try and help the last large unionized ltl carrier to survive in what is an environment where a major part of our competition is non-union. That certainly wasn't the case decades ago. Don't you think it's time to back off the constant whining? How many years has it been now?
 
Mmmm.
The question is.
Should YRCW buyout of the pension fund?
Sure. Only if it's fully funded. They go out of business. And everyone gets their full pension from here on out.
That. Is not gonna happen.
Sarcasm.
 
Wong, there's one huge flaw in your thinking. That flaw is your assumption that the plan can be "saved" at all. CSPF, as well as numerous pension plans - both private and governmental - are in bad shape. The basic problem underlying most all of them is that more was promised than can be delivered. There are many reasons for that - people promising more for political benefit, declining numbers of contributors, investment declines, mismanagement, declines in a particular industry, etc. There is no easy answer because there are many reasons for the problem. Not everything in life works out the way we want unfortunately. :::shit::: happens sometimes. Blame YRCW all you want but what about all the trucking companies that shut the doors since the 1970's and 1980's. We did very well with pay and benefits during the 1970's but did any of us foresee the future back then? I don't think many did. We accepted the great pay and benefits and thought they'd go on forever. Some of that was just unsustainable in the long term.

PS - There you go again claiming I'm "sticking up for YRCW" when I'm only speaking reality. Come on in out of your fantasy world. YRCW didn't "take" anything from us. We (the majority anyway) accepted less in order to try and help the last large unionized ltl carrier to survive in what is an environment where a major part of our competition is non-union. That certainly wasn't the case decades ago. Don't you think it's time to back off the constant whining? How many years has it been now?
Trip , will see how you whining is when your Retiree checks stop coming in a few years ?? and NO it's not yrcw fault it's the S.O.B. Union's & Hoffa's for NOT motioning the pension problem years ago when all these companies were going under ! and NO I will never ever QUIT WHINING , because I know it makes your day ! Have a Great Week Trip ! as I'm off "TO MOVE AMERICA" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
wong should keep posting his opinion. Imo.

Trip , will see how you whining is when your Retiree checks stop coming in a few years ?? and NO it's not yrcw fault it's the S.O.B. Union's & Hoffa's for NOT motioning the pension problem years ago when all these companies were going under ! and NO I will never ever QUIT WHINING , because I know it makes your day ! Have a Great Week Trip ! as I'm off "TO MOVE AMERICA" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, shame on me for suggesting you stop whining Wong, my bad. Speak your mind anytime you like, it neither makes or breaks my day FYI.

As far as my pension, the payment from one of my Teamster funds has already been cut practically in half since that fund is almost wiped out. However, it wasn't a very large amount to begin with. On the other hand I've saved, invested, and diversified all my working life in order to provide for my own retirement. I never wanted to be at the mercy of some other entity just in case.
 
"Luckily, the 25% partial contribution that was not accepted by WCTPP does not disappear into a black hole of futility of CSPF."

That's a fact. Even if yrc were to contribute the full amount, at this point, it would still end up in the black hole.
 
Wong, there's one huge flaw in your thinking. That flaw is your assumption that the plan can be "saved" at all. CSPF, as well as numerous pension plans - both private and governmental - are in bad shape. The basic problem underlying most all of them is that more was promised than can be delivered. There are many reasons for that - people promising more for political benefit, declining numbers of contributors, investment declines, mismanagement, declines in a particular industry, etc. There is no easy answer because there are many reasons for the problem. Not everything in life works out the way we want unfortunately. :::shit::: happens sometimes. Blame YRCW all you want but what about all the trucking companies that shut the doors since the 1970's and 1980's. We did very well with pay and benefits during the 1970's but did any of us foresee the future back then? I don't think many did. We accepted the great pay and benefits and thought they'd go on forever. Some of that was just unsustainable in the long term.

PS - There you go again claiming I'm "sticking up for YRCW" when I'm only speaking reality. Come on in out of your fantasy world. YRCW didn't "take" anything from us. We (the majority anyway) accepted less in order to try and help the last large unionized ltl carrier to survive in what is an environment where a major part of our competition is non-union. That certainly wasn't the case decades ago. Don't you think it's time to back off the constant whining? How many years has it been now?
Yeah the yes voters accepted less to save a company that made bad decisions, Yellow went on a buying spree and had no cash so the financed their way into debt. Yellow should have went out of buisness. Bill Zollars broke the last of the Union freight division. Triplex don't act like it was the non union trucking companies that caused this concession, get real!
 
Yeah the yes voters accepted less to save a company that made bad decisions, Yellow went on a buying spree and had no cash so the financed their way into debt. Yellow should have went out of buisness. Bill Zollars broke the last of the Union freight division. Triplex don't act like it was the non union trucking companies that caused this concession, get real!

Derelict, re-read my post, I never said or implied that non-union companies "caused" our concessions. I said we're operating in a time when our main competition is non-union, unlike the way it was decades ago when Teamster companies ruled ltl trucking.

PS - What would have been gained if Yellow went out of business? How would that have helped Teamster ltl trucking?
 
Derelict, re-read my post, I never said or implied that non-union companies "caused" our concessions. I said we're operating in a time when our main competition is non-union, unlike the way it was decades ago when Teamster companies ruled ltl trucking.
Well, sounds like they moved it from the Caymans Account. bigtruk's all over it!
We (the majority anyway) accepted less in order to try and help the last large unionized ltl carrier to survive in what is an environment where a major part of our competition is non-union...that's what you said!
 
We (the majority anyway) accepted less in order to try and help the last large unionized ltl carrier to survive in what is an environment where a major part of our competition is non-union...that's what you said!

One last time - I pointed out that a major part of our competition is non-union, not that non-union carriers "caused" the concessions. The concessions were required by the investment banks before they would refinance the notes that were coming due. That was the "cause" of the concessions. Clearer now?
 
Top