ABF | YRC Regional more than triples the profit of ABF

Yes we that is some of us are looking for ways to benefit the Members and ABF. We don't just sit around and cry the sky is falling. You took the poll as to mean we did not no longer want a defined pension fund. Such is not the case we do but it may have to be achieved in a different manner. There are ways to reach our goal but it may take some intestinal fortitude. But in the end I am confident we can reach both our goal and preserve the financial stability of ABF. But throwing in the towel is not the answer. And your 10 billion dollar loss came from the 2008 year where CSPF lost around 9 BILLIONS dollars alone.
 
Nyhan has petitioned the government to allow CSPF to entertain the idea of maybe following the New England Pension fund agreement with UPS. That is why I posted their agreement. In it they allowed UPS 50 YEARS to pay off their pension liability Which in turn gives UPS the exit they wanted and for a small cost yearly. And that I think is what ABF and CSPF would be working towards. Brothers just need to calm down and get informed as to the workings of all parties. We as ABF Teamsters need to keep our heads and not run scared and ruin the futures of our families. I never said CSPF was in good shape. But I knew that people were looking into different avenues to keep CSPF as a viable fund for the companies still paying into it. But some on this site want out at any cost to those that have EARNED a pension. And that won't happen. Keep informed and we will find the answers we need to secure our futures. YOUR ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THE INFORMATION BROTHER ALWAYS!
 
Don't misunderstand, I have a question to anyone willing to answer. When the Multi-Employer Plans were formed there were 1,000s of employers. As a result of both economic conditions as well as de-regulation that number has dwindled to a few 100. What will you do for the many approaching retirement whose careers spanned employers who have closed but who then found employment with other employers in Multi-Employer Plans? Surely there are Teamsters at ABF whose career's encompass other employers. Would you say to them that ONLY their time at ABF will be applied to their retirement plans?
Muler, I think you are offering solutions that NEED to be discussed. This is NOT intended to incite an argument. I just think that some feel there can be easy answers. I am sure that most recognize that there are not, and will give all due thought to any offered solutions.
 
Don't misunderstand, I have a question to anyone willing to answer. When the Multi-Employer Plans were formed there were 1,000s of employers. As a result of both economic conditions as well as de-regulation that number has dwindled to a few 100. What will you do for the many approaching retirement whose careers spanned employers who have closed but who then found employment with other employers in Multi-Employer Plans? Surely there are Teamsters at ABF whose career's encompass other employers. Would you say to them that ONLY their time at ABF will be applied to their retirement plans?
Muler, I think you are offering solutions that NEED to be discussed. This is NOT intended to incite an argument. I just think that some feel there can be easy answers. I am sure that most recognize that there are not, and will give all due thought to any offered solutions.
I have asked that question since the beginning of this mess. They are not easy answers, but they are a long way from impossible. According to the pdf that was posted "Partitioning" will result in those employees getting their full retirement. I don't understand it all but I am very glad that more folks are finally taking this issue seriously. I just wish it was started a decade ago.
 
Don't misunderstand, I have a question to anyone willing to answer. When the Multi-Employer Plans were formed there were 1,000s of employers. As a result of both economic conditions as well as de-regulation that number has dwindled to a few 100. What will you do for the many approaching retirement whose careers spanned employers who have closed but who then found employment with other employers in Multi-Employer Plans? Surely there are Teamsters at ABF whose career's encompass other employers. Would you say to them that ONLY their time at ABF will be applied to their retirement plans?
Muler, I think you are offering solutions that NEED to be discussed. This is NOT intended to incite an argument. I just think that some feel there can be easy answers. I am sure that most recognize that there are not, and will give all due thought to any offered solutions.

Every solution involves someone taking less than they were originally promised. The pension obligations of these companies long since out of business essentially terminated with the demise of each of these bankrupt carriers. The money to pay for these benefits were put into the pension long ago while the companies still breathed air. Mistakes were made long ago both in the administration (letting certain folks access to the pension that should not have been considering they hadn't paid into it at the same rate as those who had been in it all along)of the benefits and investment strategies. It is essentially spilled milk and we cannot recover the lost funds "spilled" but we can work on a solution. This starts with a conversation where everyone has the opportunity to discuss their own personal perspective and listening to others. Attacking differences personally will not solve our crisis, yet honest debate can pave a path of prosperity for everyone.

The longer we put this off, the more difficult the task of fixing the problem. No one wants to take less than what they were promised. Yet, if you read any of the info put out by the Trustees of CSPF, it is only a question as to when the pension fails, not if the pension fails.
 
I have already accepted the fact that I will most surely receive less than I anticipated when I began at Roadway. I am in Local 710. If YRCF can somehow manage to recover financially I don't believe that there will be a return to the previous contribution levels. For the sake of MANY other Teamsters, as well as myself, I hope that there will be an increase though. As I understand it my monthly benefit for 20.2 (when YRCF ceased payments) years of service at 62 will be paid from 2 funds. The 20.2 will be paid by the original Local 710 fund under the original formula for benefits. But as of August 2011 a separate fund for YRCF employees will pay the remaining benefit at a reduced level of about $25.00/a month/per earned year. Provided I work a minimum of 5 years in the new plan. Am I happy NO. But these are the facts as they exist.
 
Don't misunderstand, I have a question to anyone willing to answer. When the Multi-Employer Plans were formed there were 1,000s of employers. As a result of both economic conditions as well as de-regulation that number has dwindled to a few 100. What will you do for the many approaching retirement whose careers spanned employers who have closed but who then found employment with other employers in Multi-Employer Plans? Surely there are Teamsters at ABF whose career's encompass other employers. Would you say to them that ONLY their time at ABF will be applied to their retirement plans?
Muler, I think you are offering solutions that NEED to be discussed. This is NOT intended to incite an argument. I just think that some feel there can be easy answers. I am sure that most recognize that there are not, and will give all due thought to any offered solutions.
No you bring up a good question we will have to ask someone that worked as a freight hauler and his company closed and he went to work for UPS. That would answer our question. Because a person that has been UPS all his career could not be considered.
 
Every solution involves someone taking less than they were originally promised. The pension obligations of these companies long since out of business essentially terminated with the demise of each of these bankrupt carriers. The money to pay for these benefits were put into the pension long ago while the companies still breathed air. Mistakes were made long ago both in the administration (letting certain folks access to the pension that should not have been considering they hadn't paid into it at the same rate as those who had been in it all along)of the benefits and investment strategies. It is essentially spilled milk and we cannot recover the lost funds "spilled" but we can work on a solution. This starts with a conversation where everyone has the opportunity to discuss their own personal perspective and listening to others. Attacking differences personally will not solve our crisis, yet honest debate can pave a path of prosperity for everyone.

The longer we put this off, the more difficult the task of fixing the problem. No one wants to take less than what they were promised. Yet, if you read any of the info put out by the Trustees of CSPF, it is only a question as to when the pension fails, not if the pension fails.
The only one that has been a smart mouth is you calling post stupid. So take your own advise. I have been trying to inform you that there are options coming available and all you had to say was we have to get out we have to get out. You just remember if we don't do this right you ,me and all Teamsters will suffer. You never caught that they now make us pay for our own insurance in order to give our companies a break way back in 2004. That is when our insurance cost for retirement sky rocketed. That was to give the companies a break and to place the burden on us. So no we have given them a huge break. Now is the time to do the fair and right things for everybody not just one side. Also remember the people that worked somewhere else had their pension paid or else they would not have contributory credit for years worked. That means we are not giving then nothing they are getting what they earned. Now if you said that the over seers screwed us out of our money. How about CSPF booted Goldman Sachs a couple years ago and they really lost BILLIONS of our retirement dollars. And yet not one word on that matter. But I hope you now see there are people working to fix things as we speak. YOUR GETTING THE INFORMATION OUT THERE BROTHER ALWAYS!
 
How about CSPF booted Goldman Sachs a couple years ago and they really lost BILLIONS of our retirement dollars. And yet not one word on that matter. But I hope you now see there are people working to fix things as we speak. YOUR GETTING THE INFORMATION OUT THERE BROTHER ALWAYS!

Right, Goldman Sachs, Bill Zollars and Tyson Johnson ruined everything. You giving George Bush a pass on this one? :coffee1:
 
First, my numbers are right. Since you have a pair, go ahead and question one you think is not right. I will show you were your wrong.

Secondly, I understand Judy has meet with a Congressman from Tennessee with whom is sympathetic to the plight of ABF having to cover pension costs for employees who never worked a day at their company. I also understand he is a Republican, the House is controlled by Republicans so therefore any solutions will simply allow for unfunded exceptions to current law. That is a nice poliet way saying they will divide the pension as best they see fit. Last time I checked, the Republicans were not very sensitive to union rules like pensions. But may be you're right, we should just trust the Republican Politicians to do the right thing when it comes to our brother teamsters living on a fixed income.
Well if you want I will just post this one mistake to posted that was not factual.

8. The pension protection act requires those still contributing into the pension increase their contribution 8% annually.

This is not true. Here is a quote from Judy's testimony to Congress.

of Teamsters (IBT). ABF is a party to the National Master Freight Agreement (NMFA) with the IBT, and the current five-year agreement expires March 31, 2013. In order to comply with the requirements of the PPA applicable to Red Zone and Yellow Zone plans, the current version of the NMFA has imposed a 7% annual, compound multiemployer pension plan contribution increase on ABF since it went into effect in 2008.

But again there are ways to achieve our goals if we all just keep our heads and stay informed by facts not BS!

Then as you can see she met with more than just one Congressman.It was a Congressional Committee.

Testimony of Judy McReynolds, President and Chief Executive Officer of Arkansas Best Corporation United States House Committee on Education and Workforce Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions
June 20, 2012
Chairman Roe and Ranking Member and distinguished members of the Subcommittee,

http://edworkforce.house.gov/uploade..._mcreyolds.pdf
YOUR NOT BLOWING RAINBOWS UP YOUR BUTT BROTHER ALWAYS
 
From your link provided by Brother Muler, Thomas Nyhan, Executive Director of CSPF says: "Unless the CSPF reduces the liability associated with orphan participants, it will become insolvent within the next 10-15 years."

He also said "And long before the date of insolvency, the remaining contributing employers will either be forced out of business (causing catastrophic job losses) or fearful of the ramifications of insolvency, will adopt measures that would accelerate the insolvency date."

This statement was issued in May of 2010.
 
From your link provided by Brother Muler, Thomas Nyhan, Executive Director of CSPF says: "Unless the CSPF reduces the liability associated with orphan participants, it will become insolvent within the next 10-15 years."

He also said "And long before the date of insolvency, the remaining contributing employers will either be forced out of business (causing catastrophic job losses) or fearful of the ramifications of insolvency, will adopt measures that would accelerate the insolvency date."

This statement was issued in May of 2010.
The fund saw a profit in the year 2010. As I have stated many times on this thread there are things in the works to fix the CSPF we have to keep informed and vote accordingly. If you read the appeals courts ruling in the pensions you will see that there are other options other than closure for companies of multiemployer pension funds. And the New England funds handling is what Nyhan has ask to be allowed to place before employers of the fund. So as you can see the sky isn't falling.
 
The fund saw a profit in the year 2010. As I have stated many times on this thread there are things in the works to fix the CSPF we have to keep informed and vote accordingly. If you read the appeals courts ruling in the pensions you will see that there are other options other than closure for companies of multiemployer pension funds. And the New England funds handling is what Nyhan has ask to be allowed to place before employers of the fund. So as you can see the sky isn't falling.

Based on the statements by the man who is in charge of CSPF listed above, does he also think the sky is falling?
1. Agrees with my position that the pension will fail, fairly soon.
2. The liabilities of the pension will run the remaining companies out of business even sooner if something isn't done to fix the pension problem. Which has been my position from day 1.
 
Based on the statements by the man who is in charge of CSPF listed above, does he also think the sky is falling?
1. Agrees with my position that the pension will fail, fairly soon.
2. The liabilities of the pension will run the remaining companies out of business even sooner if something isn't done to fix the pension problem. Which has been my position from day 1.
What are you trying to say we at ABF should do. You have beaten around the bush for months? Say it. Nyhan is trying to be proactive to PROTECT the FUND! If you want my opinion he is saying that he has no faith in the IBT ever organizing more companies into the CSPF and he is asking the government to lift some of the restrictions placed on the fund in order to keep it safe. They have almost assured themselves years of added security since that statement because of the drastic cuts placed upon any and all yrc companies. Since Nyhan made that comment thousands of yrc Teamsters lost up to to 48% of their pension payouts. Thousands will die before they are accredited with enough time to retire. Do the math after the last MOU it will be almost impossible for anyone under the 25% status to work enough years to retire. AND THAT IS A SHAME! So all these post you have made did not take into account the changes in the last couple years to the fund. Are we out of DANGER? NO! But it is being worked on and we have a great chance to see something better come from something so BAD! Before you put a lot of faith in Nyhan's comments write CSPF and ask for Form 5500 And you will get a list of who gets paid what and it will also tell you where every nickle in our fund is invested.It will also tell you how many companies still contribute to the fund. You might be surprised to see you don't know it all. YOUR ALREADY READING FORM 5500 BROTHER ALWAYS!
 
Just so as to make sure there is no confusion on the time table.

http://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Nyhan.pdf


http://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Nyhan.pdf


http://tdu.org/files/Central States Bulletin 2011-4 Dated 3-22-11.pdf

Nyhan spoke of 10to 15 years prior to these drastic cuts. Take away the retirements of the vast majority of the yrc Teamsters and how much does that shore up the fund? It is a sad thing that yrc the company screwed their Teamsters. And hoffa and the Turncoat went right along with it. Now do we agree on the time line and the dramatic change in the funds contributions and the pay outs in the future?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What are you trying to say we at ABF should do. You have beaten around the bush for months? Say it. Nyhan is trying to be proactive to PROTECT the FUND! If you want my opinion he is saying that he has no faith in the IBT ever organizing more companies into the CSPF and he is asking the government to lift some of the restrictions placed on the fund in order to keep it safe. They have almost assured themselves years of added security since that statement because of the drastic cuts placed upon any and all yrc companies. Since Nyhan made that comment thousands of yrc Teamsters lost up to to 48% of their pension payouts. Thousands will die before they are accredited with enough time to retire. Do the math after the last MOU it will be almost impossible for anyone under the 25% status to work enough years to retire. AND THAT IS A SHAME! So all these post you have made did not take into account the changes in the last couple years to the fund. Are we out of DANGER? NO! But it is being worked on and we have a great chance to see something better come from something so BAD! Before you put a lot of faith in Nyhan's comments write CSPF and ask for Form 5500 And you will get a list of who gets paid what and it will also tell you where every nickle in our fund is invested.It will also tell you how many companies still contribute to the fund. You might be surprised to see you don't know it all. YOUR ALREADY READING FORM 5500 BROTHER ALWAYS!

Yes, Mr. Nyhan has reduced the benefits paid to YRC employees who retired after September,2010. No, the pension is not even close to being out of troubled waters.

There are two sides to pension issue addressed by Mr. Nyhan. The side that pays benefits has been reduced to stretch the principle of pension out. It is a logical action based on our pension dillema. However, Mr. Nyhan also spoke on the funding side. Specifically, "And long before the date of insolvency, the remaining contributing employers will either be forced out of business (causing catastrophic job losses) or fearful of the ramifications of insolvency, will adopt measures that would accelerate the insolvency date," The $130 million ABF puts into the pension has not been reduced eventhough roughly 60% of that contribution goes to maintain the retirement benefits of employees who worked at ABF. That means 40% of the monies paid by ABF goes into a fund that pays retirement benefits for workers who never worked a day at ABF. The issue has to be addressed and settled. If it is not, ABF without a doubt will do just as Mr. Nyhan has warned and "adopt measures that would accelerate insolvency."
 
Yes, Mr. Nyhan has reduced the benefits paid to YRC employees who retired after September,2010. No, the pension is not even close to being out of troubled waters.

There are two sides to pension issue addressed by Mr. Nyhan. The side that pays benefits has been reduced to stretch the principle of pension out. It is a logical action based on our pension dillema. However, Mr. Nyhan also spoke on the funding side. Specifically, "And long before the date of insolvency, the remaining contributing employers will either be forced out of business (causing catastrophic job losses) or fearful of the ramifications of insolvency, will adopt measures that would accelerate the insolvency date," The $130 million ABF puts into the pension has not been reduced eventhough roughly 60% of that contribution goes to maintain the retirement benefits of employees who worked at ABF. That means 40% of the monies paid by ABF goes into a fund that pays retirement benefits for workers who never worked a day at ABF. The issue has to be addressed and settled. If it is not, ABF without a doubt will do just as Mr. Nyhan has warned and "adopt measures that would accelerate insolvency."

I have to agree with you on what ABF will do if push comes to shove. There is a lot to lose by becoming insolvent, but why not. If & when the ABF powers that be, come to the conclusion that it will be cheaper to close the company & start all over than trying to pay in to the pension fund, the only thing left to do is have counsel file the papers in Federal Court. I like to think positive, but the Central States Pension Fund will go just like United Airline, 30 cents on the dollar. What are the figures now? 1 person working to support 2 retired people. I am retiring in 4 years with 20 vested. I have planned on the Feds taking over CS & reducing my benefit by 66%. Hope it does not happen, but the direction CS is going dictates otherwise.
 
Yes, Mr. Nyhan has reduced the benefits paid to YRC employees who retired after September,2010. No, the pension is not even close to being out of troubled waters.

There are two sides to pension issue addressed by Mr. Nyhan. The side that pays benefits has been reduced to stretch the principle of pension out. It is a logical action based on our pension dillema. However, Mr. Nyhan also spoke on the funding side. Specifically, "And long before the date of insolvency, the remaining contributing employers will either be forced out of business (causing catastrophic job losses) or fearful of the ramifications of insolvency, will adopt measures that would accelerate the insolvency date," The $130 million ABF puts into the pension has not been reduced eventhough roughly 60% of that contribution goes to maintain the retirement benefits of employees who worked at ABF. That means 40% of the monies paid by ABF goes into a fund that pays retirement benefits for workers who never worked a day at ABF. The issue has to be addressed and settled. If it is not, ABF without a doubt will do just as Mr. Nyhan has warned and "adopt measures that would accelerate insolvency."
Have you not been reading the post? They are working on the fund. I have given links that shows that judy and others have been attending committee meetings to have changes place upon the pension plans. Yes the sky is not falling. Please post your links for the 40% going to other members that never worked a day for ABF. Then post the link that shows where the money that was paid into the fund for those members went. YOUR NEEDING PROOF BROTHER ALWAYS!
 
Top