Yellow | Teamsters Organize To Defend Pensions!

Can it also be because of the high risk highly commissioned investments made by the government imposed Wall St. brokers who control the fund?

If you have some verification/documentation of what you say, please show it as I do believe you're wrong about that.
 
If you have some verification/documentation of what you say, please show it as I do believe you're wrong about that.

Maybe if the IBT was upfront with the audit the membership already paid for we would have the facts!
It is on a need to know basis and if you ask they want to know why you need to know :LMAO:
 

Hoffa's opinion is not fact and this article has absolutely nothing to do with CSPF.

Maybe if the IBT was upfront with the audit the membership already paid for we would have the facts!
It is on a need to know basis and if you ask they want to know why you need to know :LMAO:

What are you talking about? Do you understand what I asked for? Documentation on CSPF fund administration in case you forgot.
 

Ordering an audit is not proof of mismanagement. What is the result of the audit?

By the way, did you read and understand this part of the announcement?

Although many pension funds are suffering in the current climate, the
Central States Fund suffers from the added handicap that the number of
retirees drawing benefits from the Fund significantly outnumbers the active
participants for whom contributions are being made.
 
Ordering an audit is not proof of mismanagement. What is the result of the audit?

By the way, did you read and understand this part of the announcement?

Although many pension funds are suffering in the current climate, the
Central States Fund suffers from the added handicap that the number of
retirees drawing benefits from the Fund significantly outnumbers the active
participants for whom contributions are being made.

Pay particular attention to the things being kept secret from the members by the Government and the IBT
Quite of bit of reference to higher fees paid for riskier investments

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/15/business/15teamster.html?pagewanted=print&position=
 
No you're wrong, the withdrawal liabilities are what stops companies from joining multiemployer pension funds.

Take away the withdrawl liabilities and watch how many companies leave and how quickly they bail from the funds.
 
Take away the withdrawl liabilities and watch how many companies leave and how quickly they bail from the funds.

I'm talking about new employers who would join the plans. If they could get more companies to join it would take the burden of higher payments for current plan members away .
 
Like it or not, these are the real reasons most funds are in trouble today.

Central States’ active contributing employers are 20 percent what it was at its peak two decades ago. But that plan is contributing benefits to an ever-higher number of retirees.
<snip>
That’s because of structural labor changes in the trucking industry. Since deregulation in 1980, the trucking industry has lost more than 500 Teamster-covered carriers. Currently, about 95 percent of the overall trucking industry is non-unionized. In the truckload sector, it is virtually non-union.

For instance, there is only one active worker for every four retirees receiving benefits from the Central States plan, the Teamsters’ largest.


Pension funds depend on a stable or growing labor force for contributions. In LTL we have the opposite situation unfortunately.
 
That's a 10 year old article talking about what happened in the 1960's and 1970's before we had more effective oversight. It's 2014, talk to me about what's been happening more recently.

It's obvious you didn't read the article. If you would have it starts in the 60's and ends in present day. It is newspaper article and you have to let people have a place to start. The IBT audit results were withheld from the members and the profit / loss statements were withheld by the Government.
 
Like it or not, these are the real reasons most funds are in trouble today.

Central States’ active contributing employers are 20 percent what it was at its peak two decades ago. But that plan is contributing benefits to an ever-higher number of retirees.
<snip>
That’s because of structural labor changes in the trucking industry. Since deregulation in 1980, the trucking industry has lost more than 500 Teamster-covered carriers. Currently, about 95 percent of the overall trucking industry is non-unionized. In the truckload sector, it is virtually non-union.

For instance, there is only one active worker for every four retirees receiving benefits from the Central States plan, the Teamsters’ largest.


Pension funds depend on a stable or growing labor force for contributions. In LTL we have the opposite situation unfortunately.

And the Teamsters Western States Pension was immune to these forces?:wtflol:
 
It's obvious you didn't read the article. If you would have it starts in the 60's and ends in present day. It is newspaper article and you have to let people have a place to start. The IBT audit results were withheld from the members and the profit / loss statements were withheld by the Government.

I did read the article, but again it was written in 2004, 10 years ago. There's good information in it but what has happened or changed in the past 10 years? Most of what the CSPF money managers did in the past was typical of what most pension fund managers did. Western States took an unusual approach which paid off for them. The real problem is the shrinking contribution base trying to fund a growing payout base.
 
If the information was not being withheld from the people it affects then no one would think they are hiding anything.
Correct me if I am wrong but 2003 was the first cuts at CSPF so 03 it when problems became reality.
 
If the information was not being withheld from the people it affects then no one would think they are hiding anything.
Correct me if I am wrong but 2003 was the first cuts at CSPF so 03 it when problems became reality.

I agree with you on the hiding part. That's got to make you wonder why. Interesting for sure.
 
And I agree there are a lot of things that brought us to this point
There's not many of us left from the glory days but I had a good time
 
And I agree there are a lot of things that brought us to this point
There's not many of us left from the glory days but I had a good time

It's a different world we're living in these days in more ways than I can count. Like you say though, we at least had a good time back when it was a much better environment.
 
Top