Discussion in 'Fedex Freight' started by Redracer3136, Jun 22, 2017.
I bet Tom can quote Debs.....
Settle down Red. In your desperation for a "gotcha moment", you are twisting/spinning quite a tale.
1st) I was never one who had ANY concern about the funding status of the current Pension plan. In fact quite the opposite. Go back and look, then move along.
2) I'll concede, during the debate about the Teamsters needing FXFE drivers to shore up their "failing" pension (context here=CSPF) I did say no one would want that, the company wouldn't want it, etc. Still true in that context. Western Conference is a totally different animal. If you think this leaked info proves me wrong on the whole concept, I'm good with that. I certainly didn't see it coming.
You do realize it's quite a different matter for a single center going it alone, right. Even four. FedEx certainly was able to use a strategy in this case, that would not have worked in another scenario, right?
Now, rather than call it a dumb idea, I tried to consider the reasoning. An improved pension was very high on many driver's list of requirements. They tried to find a way to deliver. I can't fault them for that. It's an idea with some merit. Also, the fact that The Western Conference fund is well funded, makes it worth considering, under their challenging circumstances.
I had no inside scoop on the negotiations, which is why I can speculate as to the thinking involved. If I did have inside knowledge, I certainly wouldn't be leaking it...
Tom is Dick. Dick is Tom. Dick can quote Debs.
"You must use your heads as well as your hands, and get yourself out of your present condition; as it is now the capitalists use your heads and your hands."
Eugene V. Debs
Dick can quote Che too.
"The true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality."
Ernesto "Che" Guevara.
And all the time I thought you were talking about (Little Debbie)
Good info Mud. Red will not be interested in the details. He's more concerned (as noted above) with finding the "gotcha moment". Proof of a super secret and sinister plan to mislead the members. A lot like searching for the elusive and nonexistent Russian collusion. Nothing else matters...
Quick! Someone pass me an oatmeal cream pie! I'll wash it down with a Sun-Drop.
I hear tell Tom's ballons popped somewhere over California.
When they came out with double decker oatmeal cream pies.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism man exploits man. It's six or a half-dozen. They're both corrupt systems. By the way, I'm not really a communist, I just play one on TV! (Truckingboards)
If you read my post as a "gotcha moment" then not only are you sadly mistaken, but you're obviously attempting to deflect which is the oldest trick in the book!!
1) If we take a trip down memory lane we'll see ole Swampy claiming our pension was underfunded by $5 Billion because he wanted to lump all of FedEx Corp's pensions together. Once it was proven that FXFE's pension was funded at 108% by the required criteria (2 year) and at 88% (25 year), he bashed our fund claiming it was underfunded because it stood at 88% instead of 100%...now that the WCPF stands at 90% using the same criteria and it's "quite strong"....again, hmmm...
2) I'll accept your admittance for being wrong but nowhere in your previous post did you mention CSPF. If my memory serves me correctly, it seems I remember the WCPF being brought up...by SAC I think..and you never differentiated between the two. You can claim "intent" all you want but without saying it, you can't expect us to read your mind.
Sure I realized it, what in the hell did you think we've been talking about for the last three years?? There's only been four centers for the last 2.5 years, why would we discuss any other strategy(s)??
It was a dumb idea considering the circumstances and for what was at stake...for their side!! It worked out quite nicely for us though!!
Either you weren't as knowledgeable about the situation as you portrayed or you're playing the "plausible deniability" card...I'm gonna go with the latter, which is a smart decision on your part considering there's two cards left on the table...and soon to be one!!
Nice attempt at deflecting...again.
Personally, I don't care where the WCPF stands...no, actually I do. I hope everyone involved with the plan enjoys the fruits of their labor and the success that comes along with it!! I hope they all can prosper and enjoy their long deserved retirement one day and not have to wonder if their pension is going to be cut!!
And if Hoffa Jr had any balls, he'd consolidate all 21 Continental US pension plans into one, reduce benefits to existing retirees and future retirees, and in the process save the plan from the failure that is the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. Then he'd work with the remaining Unionized carriers before they go bankrupt (which is inevitable) and change the work rules to mirror the non union carriers that have grown like weeds while the union carriers have withered on the vine during deregulation.
Oops. DD, CT and the gang will suffer heart attacks having been exposed to this truth.
And what authority does Hoffa jr have to do that? The pensions are not under teamster control, although I do agree he is without balls
Swampy here is one of your posts stating Fedex would NEVER be in a multi employer pension fund. Just saying.
Yet, even though Swamp used the word "any", somehow we were supposed to decipher that he was only referring to the CSPF within the context of the argument!!
Typical FAKE NEWS reporting. Select facts, twisted and applied in an alternate context.
Yes, I showed the information on underfunded status, in reply to those harping or the status of Central States Pension. Yes, I explained what the numbers really mean. NO, I never made the case for FedEx to achieve 100% funding status. Never ever. I did make the case for a better percentage of benefit, comparable to Express who enjoys a 2% higher contribution across the board. I even went on to show the variety of areas 2% could be placed.
Your memory of the conversations seems to be failing you in this discussion. It's easier for me to recall, since I've been consistent.
Yes, WCPF was mentioned briefly and separately and noted to be in excellent shape.
If you are not searching for a gotcha moment, why go on, and on about it?
you guys would have had to vote yes on a contract. I myself would never vote in a multi employer pension fund. You are arguing something that will not happen or will ever be provable to have happened. Just because it was proposed does not mean you had to accept the contract. Just saying.
Red, please explain these two conflicting statements. One yesterday, the other back in Oct.
Seems to be a bit of confusion... Might want to make up your mind.
For the rest of the class, here is some of the fun conversation we had: