Dear DOCKER, If you read the letter posted referring to Apostolic pension fund teamsters 707. .
Dear PAPAJOHN, According to the letter their pensions where reduced in Feb 2016 by about 30%. It sounds like a done deal Sir. Have a blessed day PAPAJOHN.
LOL... Now read letter again and see what you come up with this time:
Board of Trustees, Road Carriers - Local 707 Pension Fund
14 Front Street, Suite 301
Hempstead, NY 11550
Dear Mr. McCaffrey and the Board of Trustees:
On February 19, 2016, you submitted an application to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) on behalf of the Road Carriers – Local 707 Pension Fund (Plan). The application you submitted (Application) requests a partition under the Multiemployer Pension Reform Act of 2014 (MPRA).
We are writing to notify you of PBGC’s decision to deny the Application because the proposed partition fails to satisfy the statutory criteria for approval of a partition.
As you know, the Fund entered the 2016 plan year without sufficient financial resources to pay full Plan benefits. The Plan filed its insolvency notice with PBGC in December 2015, designating February 1, 2016 - January 31, 2017 as its first insolvency year. In February 2016, the Plan reduced benefit payments for retirees and beneficiaries by about 30%, to the "resource benefit level," a level above the PBGC guaranteed benefit level that is supportable by available Plan assets. The Plan will file for financial assistance beginning February 2017, when it’s expected to run out of money to pay benefits. At that time, PBGC will extend financial assistance to allow the Plan to pay guaranteed benefits. Due to the Plan’s impending insolvency, the Plan’s partition Application requests a July 1, 2016 effective date, requiring expedited consideration of the request.
The Application states that insolvency will be avoided if the partition is approved and implemented, along with benefit suspensions, as of July 1, 2016. If the Application (along with benefit suspensions) is approved, the Plan will continue to provide accruals over the long-term for active participants and residual benefits in excess of PBGC-guaranteed benefit levels for all participants. The Application proposes a transfer of 100% of the guaranteed benefit liabilities of retirees, beneficiaries and terminated vested participants to a successor plan that would receive financial assistance from PBGC.
Under section 4233(b)(3) of ERISA, as amended by the MPRA, a plan is eligible for a partition if, among other things, PBGC reasonably expects that (A) a partition of the plan will reduce the corporation’s long-term loss with respect to the plan, and (B) a partition of the plan is necessary for the plan to remain solvent. A plan must satisfy the requirements of the Act to be eligible for a partition. PBGC then uses its discretion on whether to order a partition.
After reviewing the Application, PBGC has determined that the Application fails to demonstrate that the Plan would remain solvent following a partition. The contribution base units, active participant counts, and contribution levels projected in the Application are based on unreasonably optimistic assumptions. Because the Application fails to demonstrate the requirement to remain solvent, PBGC did not make a determination as to other statutory criteria for a partition.
http://www.pbgc.gov/documents/PBGC-Letter-June-2016.pdf