ABF | Abf Or No?

[GO40]

No....

That was the idea behind MEPFs.....And I was able , personally, to take advantage of that.

Unfortunately,.......rules for a "Break-in-Service" sometimes change. I also incurred a Break-in-Service, and lost about 5 years of pension time.......

Now,.....where , or to whom,....does that 5 years of deferred wage pension money,....paid on my behalf in lieu of wages,......Go?

I’m guessing the general fund....

 

[canaryinthemine]

I’m guessing the general fund....

So. ...generally.....I missed out?

 

[GO40]

So. ...generally.....I missed out?

Years ago it took 10 years to get vested, now only being five it’s a little easier....

 

[dokman]

Well,...that would be about 9 companies,......Gateway, Motor Freight, Werner-Continental, Hall's, Maislin, Mason-Dixon, Automobile Transport, M & G Convoy, and Nu-Car Carriers........

Explain "unfunded liability" to me........All those carriers paid into the W. Pa. pension fund,....they all went out of business prior to, at least, 1990,....
....and our pension fund was 99% funded in 2003........

Is the term "unfunded liability" something intangible?........Some term made up to somehow "blame" older Teamsters for a financial collapse that occurred in ....2008?

A company declaring bankruptcy now,....in an MEPF plan, would have an "unfunded liability" to the plan that's greatly magnified, due to the amount of "original carriers" in the MEPF,....and everyone on the seniority lists who ever worked for those carriers, and has vested time in the MEPF.
There were several thousand carriers that went bankrupt after deregulation in 1980, and the subsequent decade......Yet,...just about all MEPFs were 95% or above in their funding,.....10 years later, going into the 2000's.....when the bankruptcy rate had greatly slowed down.

Demographics showed that the...bulk of guys in MEPFs, that had worked for companies that had failed due to deregulation,...had retired by the 2000's....
......and the funds were,...as I said,....funded roughly around 95% nationwide.......

The term "unfunded liability" began to be bandied about around the passage of the 2014 Omnibus Bill, that gave the Treasury Department authority to...cut existing pensions,....for the first time in the....history of defined-benefit pensions.....

Prior to 2014,...I never heard the term "unfunded liability",........I was on several Pension Improvement Committees during the 2000's,.....and I have 10 years' worth of Form 5500's for the Western Pennsylvania Pension Fund.....

Never saw the term "unfunded liability" used in context of MEPFs....until passage of the Omnibus Bill in 2014.

When you have a set payout “defined benefit “ market fluctuations and more people drawing more money than they would have with a benefit based on what you would have gotten with a normal investment.
When payouts were increased there were a lot of pensions drawn that never had near enough paid in to justify the payment.

 

[GO40]

So. ...generally.....I missed out?

Generally speaking....

 

[canaryinthemine]

When you have a set payout “defined benefit “ market fluctuations and more people drawing more money than they would have with a benefit based on what you would have gotten with a normal investment.
When payouts were increased there were a lot of pensions drawn that never had near enough paid in to justify the payment.

But the pensions were based on time in service, and benefit level when contributions were no longer paid on your behalf by an employer.
Many guys who went to a non-Union LTL company tried to get their retirement at the minimum age, and found out their benefit was froze on the day they left Union service.........so it did no good to "wait" until benefits were...higher. You got paid the benefit you were entitled to......on the day you left service. If that was 20 years ago,....you got the benefit level from....20 years ago,....not today's benefit level.

So,....using our Fund as an example,.....We were 99% funded in 2003,.....including Past Credited Service and Future Credited Service.....covering all current and future participants who had achieved vesting.....

Demographically speaking,......the participant level of the Fund had stabilized in 2003......and the Death amortization rate had increased.......

Must've been one Helluva "market fluctuation" to kick our Fund down so badly,....when it had stabilized so well after the bankruptcy rush from deregulation in the 80's......

Would it be more accurate to blame it on a disastrous market, rather than those Greedy Ol' Retiree...."orphans"?

 

[dokman]

But the pensions were based on time in service, and benefit level when contributions were no longer paid on your behalf by an employer.
Many guys who went to a non-Union LTL company tried to get their retirement at the minimum age, and found out their benefit was froze on the day they left Union service.........so it did no good to "wait" until benefits were...higher. You got paid the benefit you were entitled to......on the day you left service. If that was 20 years ago,....you got the benefit level from....20 years ago,....not today's benefit level.

So,....using our Fund as an example,.....We were 99% funded in 2003,.....including Past Credited Service and Future Credited Service.....covering all current and future participants who had achieved vesting.....

Demographically speaking,......the participant level of the Fund had stabilized in 2003......and the Death amortization rate had increased.......

Must've been one Helluva "market fluctuation" to kick our Fund down so badly,....when it had stabilized so well after the bankruptcy rush from deregulation in the 80's......

Would it be more accurate to blame it on a disastrous market, rather than those Greedy Ol' Retiree...."orphans"?

 

[dokman]

But the pensions were based on time in service, and benefit level when contributions were no longer paid on your behalf by an employer.
Many guys who went to a non-Union LTL company tried to get their retirement at the minimum age, and found out their benefit was froze on the day they left Union service.........so it did no good to "wait" until benefits were...higher. You got paid the benefit you were entitled to......on the day you left service. If that was 20 years ago,....you got the benefit level from....20 years ago,....not today's benefit level.

So,....using our Fund as an example,.....We were 99% funded in 2003,.....including Past Credited Service and Future Credited Service.....covering all current and future participants who had achieved vesting.....

Demographically speaking,......the participant level of the Fund had stabilized in 2003......and the Death amortization rate had increased.......

Must've been one Helluva "market fluctuation" to kick our Fund down so badly,....when it had stabilized so well after the bankruptcy rush from deregulation in the 80's......

Would it be more accurate to blame it on a disastrous market, rather than those Greedy Ol' Retiree...."orphans"?

As Trey Gowdy said to Elizabeth Warren “ Mr chairman I give up”
I don’t think you understand the market or the exact way a defined plan works.

 

[canaryinthemine]

As Trey Gowdy said to Elizabeth Warren “ Mr chairman I give up”
I don’t think you understand the market or the exact way a defined plan works.

Brother,......don’t give up. You’re an intelligent man.......But I am questioning the conventional “wisdom”.....in which it appears to me, that an effort is being made to........deflect some of the anger about the state of pensions,.......onto some of the older Teamsters..

In My Opinion,........creating a “split” between retired Teamsters, older Teamsters,........and the younger participants in the MEPFs....
.......will make it easier to....”sell” .....a different type of pension plan in the future......

Any residual anger that working Teamsters harbor against older Teamsters,.....retired or not.......will be played for the advantage of any employer looking to......get out of MEPFs.

I don’t know if you would agree with my premise.....
It doesn’t appear to me,......that “orphans”.....and the companies they worked for,.......didn’t properly fund the pensions prior to their bankruptcy.......I think they did.......
Having been doing this since 1975,.....and living through the changes in the trucking industry,.......I cannot see the Teamsters NOT launching an all-out attack on any company failing to make their pension obligations.........PRIOR TO 1985.....

The current “leadership “ however,.......is a different story.......and, In My Opinion,.....Not a very trustworthy one.....
Fully capable of......”disinformation “
And......creating blame and deflection.....( possibly for the benefit of the........employer...).

Common sense tells me that any money........deferred wages, actually.......paid to the funds on behalf of any employee......is fully accounted for as far as what the fund owes that employee....

And the term “Orphan”........is a deflection of blame away from some of the disastrous decisions from the money managers....

 

[dokman]

Brother,......don’t give up. You’re an intelligent man.......But I am questioning the conventional “wisdom”.....in which it appears to me, that an effort is being made to........deflect some of the anger about the state of pensions,.......onto some of the older Teamsters..

In My Opinion,........creating a “split” between retired Teamsters, older Teamsters,........and the younger participants in the MEPFs....
.......will make it easier to....”sell” .....a different type of pension plan in the future......

Any residual anger that working Teamsters harbor against older Teamsters,.....retired or not.......will be played for the advantage of any employer looking to......get out of MEPFs.

I don’t know if you would agree with my premise.....
It doesn’t appear to me,......that “orphans”.....and the companies they worked for,.......didn’t properly fund the pensions prior to their bankruptcy.......I think they did.......
Having been doing this since 1975,.....and living through the changes in the trucking industry,.......I cannot see the Teamsters NOT launching an all-out attack on any company failing to make their pension obligations.........PRIOR TO 1985.....

The current “leadership “ however,.......is a different story.......and, In My Opinion,.....Not a very trustworthy one.....
Fully capable of......”disinformation “
And......creating blame and deflection.....( possibly for the benefit of the........employer...).

Common sense tells me that any money........deferred wages, actually.......paid to the funds on behalf of any employee......is fully accounted for as far as what the fund owes that employee....

And the term “Orphan”........is a deflection of blame away from some of the disastrous decisions from the money managers....

No blame to retirees. The leaders of both the fund and the union should have asked for help when fund was over funded, by allowing them to remain overfunded as there was a declining enrollment as tar back as early 80’s they had a choice to up the payout or reduce contribution rate, the chose to up the pay out. Had they employed some good actuary to show them what would happen, maybe we would not be in the shape we are.
I personally know retired operators from operators union who are pulling down 4,400 and one more than that. They were based on hours worked and years of service, every one is different. But the have no problem.
And I don’t appreciate retired guys saying that active guys took the money and didn’t consider the pension. I am not a rocket scientist but I am smart enough to know why throw good money after bad.
Freeze pension for active, let money grow.
Put retired in loan program. And put all new money in 401 k for each individual..

 

[canaryinthemine]

No blame to retirees. The leaders of both the fund and the union should have asked for help when fund was over funded, by allowing them to remain overfunded as there was a declining enrollment as tar back as early 80’s they had a choice to up the payout or reduce contribution rate, the chose to up the pay out. Had they employed some good actuary to show them what would happen, maybe we would not be in the shape we are.
I personally know retired operators from operators union who are pulling down 4,400 and one more than that. They were based on hours worked and years of service, every one is different. But the have no problem.
And I don’t appreciate retired guys saying that active guys took the money and didn’t consider the pension. I am not a rocket scientist but I am smart enough to know why throw good money after bad.
Freeze pension for active, let money grow.
Put retired in loan program. And put all new money in 401 k for each individual..

Glad you didn't give up.....
The ERISA act of 1974 prohibited pension funds from saving money. IT ALL had to be spent on benefits. Pension payment amounts were regarded as...negotiated hourly earnings,...to be deferred into pension plans. Any surplus was to be returned to Employers,...just as any overage in your weekly check, would be taken back after the next week.

This was the rationale for Pension Benefit Guarantee Insurance. Any failure of the Fund would be covered by.....insurance. Therefore, there is no need for Funds to gain excess money off the employers.

But now we see that there's a possibility that......someone,..or some groups,.....are trying to deliberately wreck MEPFs. The mere fact that PBGC is paying FULL benefits to the employees of more than 14,000(!!) failed Single Employer Pension Plans,......yet pays greatly reduced..(..10 cents on a dollar?..) benefits to the 87(!!) failed MEPFs,...and is expected to RUN OUT OF MONEY for the MEPF side of the program itself,........is as suspicious as Hell.
As the Director of the PBGC himself stated,.....Congress just....won't appropriate the funds for the MANDATORY insurance program that Employers pay premiums for,....to prevent loss of benefits for employees.

Why is Congress bleeding dry an insurance program designed to protect pensions?.....Let me re-phrase that,......Why is Congress bleeding dry,...HALF of an insurance program?
The Single Employer Insurance program is ...fully funded,.....according to W. Thomas Reeder, Chairman of the PBGC. Read his Yearly Statement. NO explanation of the funding shortfall,....yet,...there it is.....

The declining enrollment had stabilized after CF went out of business on Labor Day in 2002....The Union LTL industry bankruptcy rate had slowed dramatically in the mid '90's,....and the employees who still needed to pick up pension time,..like me,...bent Heaven and Earth to get back into a MEPF employer. Most guys on seniority lists were absorbed. Pension lists had stabilized.
Things were tough,......but since there were few Union companies left to go out of business,...and their ranks had swelled, picking up former employees of bankrupt companies,.....the proverbial "light" at the tunnel end was in sight.

So,.....Someone had to....."engineer"....a disaster.....YRC was allowed to merge 4 large companies together.....UPS was allowed to buy out of CSPF,.....YRC was allowed to negotiate contracts with,...at first,...NO pension payments,...then ...quarter payments.
Between UPS and YRC,....many pension funds were......greatly underfunded.....

All that was needed was a Stock Market Collapse......We got one in 2008......

And Congress rammed through an Omnibus Bill under threat of Government shutdown if the President didn't sign it,..in 2014,....that gave the Department of Treasury...(..the Guarantor of PBGC..)...the ability,..for the first time in history,...to take back existing benefits from retirees......

Stinks like Collusion.........Too many "moving parts" to be....coincidential......

We'll have to have another talk about how 401(k)'s are being "sold" as the Saviour to working peoples' ills........
If you get a chance,....look at passage of Act 5 in Pennsylvania last year. Pension "reform" for public employees....but they made the mistake of.....giving out actuarial numbers......

 

[Ted Decker trk]

Glad you didn't give up.....
The ERISA act of 1974 prohibited pension funds from saving money. IT ALL had to be spent on benefits. Pension payment amounts were regarded as...negotiated hourly earnings,...to be deferred into pension plans. Any surplus was to be returned to Employers,...just as any overage in your weekly check, would be taken back after the next week.

This was the rationale for Pension Benefit Guarantee Insurance. Any failure of the Fund would be covered by.....insurance. Therefore, there is no need for Funds to gain excess money off the employers.

But now we see that there's a possibility that......someone,..or some groups,.....are trying to deliberately wreck MEPFs. The mere fact that PBGC is paying FULL benefits to the employees of more than 14,000(!!) failed Single Employer Pension Plans,......yet pays greatly reduced..(..10 cents on a dollar?..) benefits to the 87(!!) failed MEPFs,...and is expected to RUN OUT OF MONEY for the MEPF side of the program itself,........is as suspicious as Hell.
As the Director of the PBGC himself stated,.....Congress just....won't appropriate the funds for the MANDATORY insurance program that Employers pay premiums for,....to prevent loss of benefits for employees.

Why is Congress bleeding dry an insurance program designed to protect pensions?.....Let me re-phrase that,......Why is Congress bleeding dry,...HALF of an insurance program?
The Single Employer Insurance program is ...fully funded,.....according to W. Thomas Reeder, Chairman of the PBGC. Read his Yearly Statement. NO explanation of the funding shortfall,....yet,...there it is.....

The declining enrollment had stabilized after CF went out of business on Labor Day in 2002....The Union LTL industry bankruptcy rate had slowed dramatically in the mid '90's,....and the employees who still needed to pick up pension time,..like me,...bent Heaven and Earth to get back into a MEPF employer. Most guys on seniority lists were absorbed. Pension lists had stabilized.
Things were tough,......but since there were few Union companies left to go out of business,...and their ranks had swelled, picking up former employees of bankrupt companies,.....the proverbial "light" at the tunnel end was in sight.

So,.....Someone had to....."engineer"....a disaster.....YRC was allowed to merge 4 large companies together.....UPS was allowed to buy out of CSPF,.....YRC was allowed to negotiate contracts with,...at first,...NO pension payments,...then ...quarter payments.
Between UPS and YRC,....many pension funds were......greatly underfunded.....

All that was needed was a Stock Market Collapse......We got one in 2008......

And Congress rammed through an Omnibus Bill under threat of Government shutdown if the President didn't sign it,..in 2014,....that gave the Department of Treasury...(..the Guarantor of PBGC..)...the ability,..for the first time in history,...to take back existing benefits from retirees......

Stinks like Collusion.........Too many "moving parts" to be....coincidential......

We'll have to have another talk about how 401(k)'s are being "sold" as the Saviour to working peoples' ills........
If you get a chance,....look at passage of Act 5 in Pennsylvania last year. Pension "reform" for public employees....but they made the mistake of.....giving out actuarial numbers......

So hopefully I won't be called a troll by responding to this thread but I'm curious. I started with CFCC in 1987 , straight dock in Toledo breakbulk casual then 10%. Life happens and I had to relocate . Only Teamster gig was casual with CF at an EOL terminal in new location, no real prospects of getting on so I moved on with my non union driving career. Last worked casual at CF in 2000. So I have time with the Teamsters but very little, about 3 years. My perspective at that time was the CSPF was a Ponzi scheme. I was 31 in 2000. Given your description listed above, which I knew nothing about till reading your post, it basically was turned into a Ponzi scheme by mandating the fund could not save money and by letting Big Brown out after the Overnite purchase. Would you agree with that ? And who was behind some of the things you describe that ended up hurting the fund. Was it companies ala' double breasting like CF/Conways. I enjoy your posts and your knowledge of the history of this is enlightening . I come from a union family and I was castigated for not pursuing a Teamster job by many, but from my position in 2000, it just never seemed the smartest route . I'm not arguing Union vs non union, but rather no opportunity to finish out a union career because of the way the LTL sector was evolving CF was my only real option on 2000 and we see how that went.
Pardon for the rambling and personal stuff but I always thought I was being pragmatic about my choices. I would have loved to have retired in 15 years (2024) with the retirement some of my family members availed themselves of in the 70's and 80's but I just never saw a path forward for myself.

 

[canaryinthemine]

So hopefully I won't be called a troll by responding to this thread but I'm curious. I started with CFCC in 1987 , straight dock in Toledo breakbulk casual then 10%. Life happens and I had to relocate . Only Teamster gig was casual with CF at an EOL terminal in new location, no real prospects of getting on so I moved on with my non union driving career. Last worked casual at CF in 2000. So I have time with the Teamsters but very little, about 3 years. My perspective at that time was the CSPF was a Ponzi scheme. I was 31 in 2000. Given your description listed above, which I knew nothing about till reading your post, it basically was turned into a Ponzi scheme by mandating the fund could not save money and by letting Big Brown out after the Overnite purchase. Would you agree with that ? And who was behind some of the things you describe that ended up hurting the fund. Was it companies ala' double breasting like CF/Conways. I enjoy your posts and your knowledge of the history of this is enlightening . I come from a union family and I was castigated for not pursuing a Teamster job by many, but from my position in 2000, it just never seemed the smartest route . I'm not arguing Union vs non union, but rather no opportunity to finish out a union career because of the way the LTL sector was evolving CF was my only real option on 2000 and we see how that went.
Pardon for the rambling and personal stuff but I always thought I was being pragmatic about my choices. I would have loved to have retired in 15 years (2024) with the retirement some of my family members availed themselves of in the 70's and 80's but I just never saw a path forward for myself.

Trolling? Heck, no!
This is an Opinion site.......None of us, and all of us......are experts...

I would disagree that the CSPF was a......Ponzi scheme......I think it was deliberately forced into insolvency.
Don’t forget that the pension our Legislators, professional educators, and most State employees retire on.....is a defined-benefit pension.
Apparently........they work,......and they are preferred.....

The CSPF was forced into insolvency for a reason.

 

[canaryinthemine]

So hopefully I won't be called a troll by responding to this thread but I'm curious. I started with CFCC in 1987 , straight dock in Toledo breakbulk casual then 10%. Life happens and I had to relocate . Only Teamster gig was casual with CF at an EOL terminal in new location, no real prospects of getting on so I moved on with my non union driving career. Last worked casual at CF in 2000. So I have time with the Teamsters but very little, about 3 years. My perspective at that time was the CSPF was a Ponzi scheme. I was 31 in 2000. Given your description listed above, which I knew nothing about till reading your post, it basically was turned into a Ponzi scheme by mandating the fund could not save money and by letting Big Brown out after the Overnite purchase. Would you agree with that ? And who was behind some of the things you describe that ended up hurting the fund. Was it companies ala' double breasting like CF/Conways. I enjoy your posts and your knowledge of the history of this is enlightening . I come from a union family and I was castigated for not pursuing a Teamster job by many, but from my position in 2000, it just never seemed the smartest route . I'm not arguing Union vs non union, but rather no opportunity to finish out a union career because of the way the LTL sector was evolving CF was my only real option on 2000 and we see how that went.
Pardon for the rambling and personal stuff but I always thought I was being pragmatic about my choices. I would have loved to have retired in 15 years (2024) with the retirement some of my family members availed themselves of in the 70's and 80's but I just never saw a path forward for myself.

By the way,.....if you grip a steering wheel,...or ever handled a two-wheeler, towmotor, Johnson bar, or pallet jack.......We are on the same Team,....Union or not......

The Union guys are trying to keep First Amendment rights and Collective Bargaining rights alive,....and available to the non-Union guys,...if they wish to take advantage of those Rights......

The real Enemy,.....is those who want your Right of Free Speech, and Freedom of Association,...to end on company property when you punch that time clock.......

They understand that real strength,...is strength in numbers,.......so there is a Battle for the Hearts and Minds of all the Laboring people out there......

Many of whom aren't aware of any such battle........

 

[Ted Decker trk]

Trolling? Heck, no!
This is an Opinion site.......None of us, and all of us......are experts...

I would disagree that the CSPF was a......Ponzi scheme......I think it was deliberately forced into insolvency.
Don’t forget that the pension our Legislators, professional educators, and most State employees retire on.....is a defined-benefit pension.
Apparently........they work,......and they are preferred.....

The CSPF was forced into insolvency for a reason.

Right, I wasn't calling it a Ponzi scheme per se, but from my 2000 perspective it looked like one at my level. I'm a little slow sometimes, so maybe you've answered my question but I missed it, who forced it into insolvency in your opinion?

 

[Homesick]

Trolling? Heck, no!
This is an Opinion site.......None of us, and all of us......are experts...

I would disagree that the CSPF was a......Ponzi scheme......I think it was deliberately forced into insolvency.
Don’t forget that the pension our Legislators, professional educators, and most State employees retire on.....is a defined-benefit pension.
Apparently........they work,......and they are preferred.....

The CSPF was forced into insolvency for a reason.

LOL, LOL. And don't forget your neighbor just bought a NEW $80,000 Ford 350 with all the options! WOW, what a deal. And the neighbors behind you just bought a $120,000 fithwheel travel trailer, NEW. They work, they are preferred, you should have them too.

Me I'll drive my old Toyota, take my vacations in motels, resorts and cruise ships. But what the hell, my neighbors have it so I should too, correct? LOL, not your best argument brother but very entertaining. LOL. the opinion from the cheap seat.

 

[GO40]

LOL, LOL. And don't forget your neighbor just bought a NEW $80,000 Ford 350 with all the options! WOW, what a deal. And the neighbors behind you just bought a $120,000 fithwheel travel trailer, NEW. They work, they are preferred, you should have them too.

Me I'll drive my old Toyota, take my vacations in motels, resorts and cruise ships. But what the hell, my neighbors have it so I should too, correct? LOL, not your best argument brother but very entertaining. LOL. the opinion from the cheap seat.

I just purchased a 17 tacoma & I also cruise every so often (won’t fly) on vacation this week, stopping by Dover Downs for a night to make a donation. Then off to Delaware till Wednesday for a little R&R....

 

[canaryinthemine]

LOL, LOL. And don't forget your neighbor just bought a NEW $80,000 Ford 350 with all the options! WOW, what a deal. And the neighbors behind you just bought a $120,000 fithwheel travel trailer, NEW. They work, they are preferred, you should have them too.

Me I'll drive my old Toyota, take my vacations in motels, resorts and cruise ships. But what the hell, my neighbors have it so I should too, correct? LOL, not your best argument brother but very entertaining. LOL. the opinion from the cheap seat.

Because we're truck drivers,....we should expect less? The point I was trying to make was that ....defined-benefit pensions are considered as a...very good retirement vehicle....

That opinion seems to be shared by the very people who...legislate pension plans,....and college-educated professionals.....

As long as the funding source is reasonably secure,....defined-benefit pensions are the way to go, apparently.

Right, I wasn't calling it a Ponzi scheme per se, but from my 2000 perspective it looked like one at my level. I'm a little slow sometimes, so maybe you've answered my question but I missed it, who forced it into insolvency in your opinion?

Well,....It certainly looks like some of the highest Teamster leadership either made some,...really poor choices,...or some really calculated stabs-in-the-back to the rank-and-file.

Allowing UPS to step out of CSPF,.....Allowing UPSFreight to set up a..."third" substandard contract.....( putting them under either the UPS or the NMFA would've meant payments to the CSPF...)...
Allowing YRC to become a "mega carrier".......Negotiating a YRC contract with no pension contributions,...and then partial contributions....
Allowing the NMFA to be broken up into separate contracts....(..his father's Life's Work, you know...).....

All those things taken into consideration,.......I think Kim Jong Un could've negotiated better for the Teamsters in general, and the CSPF in particular,...over the last decade.......

And then the next question........Who benefits?.......Who wanted to see the large MEPF's broken up?.......Was there some...group...behind the attempted destruction of pension funds?

Most defined-benefit funds had pretty much...stabilized....by the 2000's as far as contributions, bankruptcies, demographics, and participants were concerned..........Not "robust"....but not failing........

So,....a financial "disaster" was........engineered?..in 2008?

Operating Engineers Local #66 is located in W. Penna. They had the same problems with failing companies and bankruptcies through the '90's....They are an MEPF pension plan also,......

Their defined-benefit MEPF is quite healthy,....in fact,...their members brag about it....

They went through the same trials and tribulations through 2008 as most Teamster funds did......The difference is that their national leaders didn't negotiate hand grenades and torpedoes into their contracts......

 

[Ted Decker trk]

Because we're truck drivers,....we should expect less? The point I was trying to make was that ....defined-benefit pensions are considered as a...very good retirement vehicle....

That opinion seems to be shared by the very people who...legislate pension plans,....and college-educated professionals.....

As long as the funding source is reasonably secure,....defined-benefit pensions are the way to go, apparently.




Well,....It certainly looks like some of the highest Teamster leadership either made some,...really poor choices,...or some really calculated stabs-in-the-back to the rank-and-file.

Allowing UPS to step out of CSPF,.....Allowing UPSFreight to set up a..."third" substandard contract.....( putting them under either the UPS or the NMFA would've meant payments to the CSPF...)...
Allowing YRC to become a "mega carrier".......Negotiating a YRC contract with no pension contributions,...and then partial contributions....
Allowing the NMFA to be broken up into separate contracts....(..his father's Life's Work, you know...).....

All those things taken into consideration,.......I think Kim Jong Un could've negotiated better for the Teamsters in general, and the CSPF in particular,...over the last decade.......

And then the next question........Who benefits?.......Who wanted to see the large MEPF's broken up?.......Was there some...group...behind the attempted destruction of pension funds?

Most defined-benefit funds had pretty much...stabilized....by the 2000's as far as contributions, bankruptcies, demographics, and participants were concerned..........Not "robust"....but not failing........

So,....a financial "disaster" was........engineered?..in 2008?

Operating Engineers Local #66 is located in W. Penna. They had the same problems with failing companies and bankruptcies through the '90's....They are an MEPF pension plan also,......

Their defined-benefit MEPF is quite healthy,....in fact,...their members brag about it....

They went through the same trials and tribulations through 2008 as most Teamster funds did......The difference is that their national leaders didn't negotiate hand grenades and torpedoes into their contracts......

That makes more sense. A problem of leadership. I have no problem with MEPF style defined benefit plans as such, my wife is a teacher (though all 4 of my kids are home schooled) and when she wanted to start working again in her career field, the State Teachers Retirement tipped the scales in relation to several job offers. She had a fair number of offers in non traditional schools. I just never really got what happened to CSPF in particular .

I do enjoy the history and perspective you and some of the older hands on TB bring to the table.

 

[00mustang]

I just purchased a 17 tacoma & I also cruise every so often (won’t fly) on vacation this week, stopping by Dover Downs for a night to make a donation. Then off to Delaware till Wednesday for a little R&R....

Enjoy brother and while your at downs put 5 on the trifecta form you can pick the numbers lol