1. All employers have a social media policy, Your identity is UNKNOWN on Truckingboards unless you reveal it somehow yourself. When you post to Facebook Trucking Groups, everybody knows your name. Think about it.

Central States assets, trustees and executives, etc

Discussion in 'Central States Pension Fund Discussion' started by lulu belle, Nov 27, 2018.

  1. lulu belle

    lulu belle Member

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    24
    I am female, was a feeder driver at UPS and retired in 2000 and will be one of those affected by CSPF going under. I joined here today to ask this.

    #1 Why were we not able to get rid of Nyhan and all his executives and union trustees who were getting raises the same time we were told we were being cut by very healthy ( 50- 75%) percentages? They are a great part of the reason we are going broke; as well as the Wall Street outfits who did their magic on us. They had a fiduciary responsibility to the members and there should have been some repercussions to them. Instead, they got raises. I was all ready to take pitchforks and torches down there. Too bad that never happened. Last I saw Nyhan was close to $700,000 and he was a smart arse punk in dealing with us. Not so much as a sorry out of him.

    #2 What is the status of all the CSPF assets real estate in Rosemont, IL? I have seen pics of it and it looks like prime real estate. As well as vehicles, etc. I doubt they drive around in old Chevys. Any other assets? Time to get rid of that stuff and let those execs buy their own cars and lease a small building.

    I come here every week to check out what is happening. Thanks in advance.
     
  2. Jughead

    Jughead LOST

    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    2
    My question is.I read somewhere in the proposal coming out,if a plan is within 5years of going broke the PBGC would take over the fund. CSPF says in 2025 they`re going broke.So would the plan go PBGC in 2020?
     
  3. jimmy g

    jimmy g Kook

    Messages:
    23,033
    Likes Received:
    19,291
    Driver Since:
    1970
    It's Not law yet. I'd call it a work in Progress. Especially with an upcoming divided Congress...

    The article in my next post kind of confirms, yes- five years before. But apparently if an audit shows under 40% funded, it could be immediate.

    It also is said to kick Orphans (retirees from no longer in biz companies) off to the PBGC. I'm not sure exactly when, tho....
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2018
  4. jimmy g

    jimmy g Kook

    Messages:
    23,033
    Likes Received:
    19,291
    Driver Since:
    1970
    https://www.heritage.org/budget-and...ultiemployers-pension-draft-proposal-would-do

    KEY TAKEAWAYS
    The Joint Select Committee on Solvency of Multiemployer Pension Plan’s draft proposal partially meets two important goals, but fails on three others.

    Most troubling are the failure to prevent the same problems in the future, its incentives for plans to become underfunded, and its unjust burden on taxpayers.

    Policymakers should instead turn to commonsense and equitable reforms that would accomplish all five goals.
     
  5. jimmy g

    jimmy g Kook

    Messages:
    23,033
    Likes Received:
    19,291
    Driver Since:
    1970
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...Vaw2M_jkzJeWd2GAOlHzA6IBB&cshid=1543459955517

    The draft proposal in circulation would basically tackle the problem by relieving certain plans of their so-called orphan liabilities at PBGC expense. PBGC would assume obligations to pay the benefits of orphan workers, and would finance these new obligations through a combination of increased premiums assessed on pension stakeholders, and direct federal funding financed by US taxpayers. Under the draft proposal circulated last Wednesday, federal taxpayers’ contributions could be as high as $3 billion a year, or $30 billion over ten years.
     
  6. Jughead

    Jughead LOST

    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    2
    Does anyone know if there are reemployment rules if it goes under PBGC
     
    jimmy g likes this.
  7. jimmy g

    jimmy g Kook

    Messages:
    23,033
    Likes Received:
    19,291
    Driver Since:
    1970
    I dont know.

    I do know those rules were discussed two years ago, and the Trustees reportedly agreed that rules would allow any fulltime driving if PBGC took over. There were posts to that effect on the YRCW Forum, but it'll be quite a search to find them.

    I do know there Should NOT Be. Actually, if the Orphans are handed off to the PBGC, CSPF shouldn't have Any Say at all, for they're separated.
     
    slipperysleuth likes this.
  8. lulu belle

    lulu belle Member

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    24
    After all those years driving and then being retired for a long time and with bad back, bad knees and bad hips who would want to take any of us back into driving a truck? I'm pretty sure I could do it but older people have slower reflexes, etc.
     
    slipperysleuth likes this.
  9. jimmy g

    jimmy g Kook

    Messages:
    23,033
    Likes Received:
    19,291
    Driver Since:
    1970
    I've put in to collect and continue driving. (I'm 64, in great health, and haven't retired). Of course they turned me down. Then I appealed. Turned down.

    Wrote them this for my 2nd, final appeal:
    To the Trustees:
    I hereby appeal the decision that I cannot collect my earned pension and continue to work for Batesville Logistics as a Driver, for the following reasons:

    A: Pensions are defined as Delayed Wages to be Paid as Defined Benefit Amounts, upon reaching certain ages. I will be 65 in 6 months, and will have earned $2455.10 per month, with 21 years vested credited. Funds are accounts payable to Individuals, and are not an extension of the IBT Union. To collect payment, IBT members must resign from their employer that was under the wage agreement paying to CSPF. They no longer pay dues, they are no longer under a contract. Therefore, Union based Rules cannot be applied to the Fund. The Supreme Court has given the appearance through the Harris vs Quinn (2014) and Janus vs AFSME (2018) Decisions, that (as Justice Alito wrote in Janus) “agency-shop agreements violate the Free Speech Rights of Non-members by compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of public concern.”

    B: CSPF issues Wage and Earning Statements and withholds taxes when paying these payments. That implies they are under the Equal Opportunity Regulations. Section 623 (section 4) cites that it is unlawful for both Employers and Labor Organizations to limit, segregate, or classify an employee in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment Opportunities. If this case ends up in Court, under Discovery, it would be found that CSPF has allowed some 65 year olds to work, some were denied, some were allowed to work only certain jobs, and some were ordered to retire for a year before returning to work full time. That last part (stop driving for a year, from a good job, and then hope to be hired later at the bottom of an employers seniority) is ludicrous- especially when the Fund has stated there will be no money for payouts within 6 years. I plan to work until age 70 now to maximize Social Security since the Fund will fail. Your Rules defeat me from ever collecting what I have rightfully earned under the Master Freight Contract.

    C:The US Treasury Dept denied CSPF’S reallocating payouts under MEPRA, partly because it wasn’t equitable across the board. That fits That Treasury found Discrimination, and goes with the above Rules as a good case for a Discrimination Suit, especially in my home state of Indiana, a Right to Work State.

    I do not wish to sue- I wish to beg you to allow my collecting what the National Master Freight Agreement told me I earned. Unfortunately, the process only allows me to appeal twice. I am willing to wait until age 65 in 6 months to begin collecting. At that point, the rules DO allow for 65 year olds to continue working and collecting as long as they were out of the Fund’s Rules for a year. I’ve been gone from the NMFA for 10 years now, as Yellow had no job for me with the merger, and I froze my time and moved on to a better job. No one wins in a lawsuit. I would have to sue for $2455.10 times @ month times 6 years, plus triple damages and court costs. It might turn into a Class Action Suit, and bring the CSPF down, unable to pay Anyone. That is not my desire. All I ask is to be able to collect my earned pension. I could agree to begin in May 2019 at age 65, or now, at the age 64 1/2 rate. It is in all of our Best Interests that you agree.
     
    slipperysleuth and Big Dave like this.
  10. slipperysleuth

    slipperysleuth Tornadicthermalcyclogenesis, sorta..

    Messages:
    781
    Likes Received:
    185
    Driver Since:
    1982
    Why this thread on TB lacks participation is another reason. This should be front and foremost topic if one is a Teamster. But like I said previously, it's the "MEamster" Union not the "TEAMster" Union! Nobody cares who runs the fund, they only care about 62mph trucks!
    If I knew how to get a petition started on this board, I would,
    just to see where rank and file stood on allowing these criminals continue managing CSPF funds. Anyone who can help, PM me.
    Thanks
     
    jimmy g likes this.
  11. slipperysleuth

    slipperysleuth Tornadicthermalcyclogenesis, sorta..

    Messages:
    781
    Likes Received:
    185
    Driver Since:
    1982
    Jimmy G, you put alot of work and research to obtain facts to back your argument but as past practice has proven no matter how right you are the laws of "what the meaning of IS is" come into play. They wore me down no matter what the facts implied or direct, it boils down to their willingness to interpert fact or maintain their fictional point and the later always wins, just human nature.
    but good job anyway!
     
    jimmy g likes this.
  12. jimmy g

    jimmy g Kook

    Messages:
    23,033
    Likes Received:
    19,291
    Driver Since:
    1970
    Thank You! I explored a lawsuit, thru the National Right to Work Foundation. They advised me to not bother suing. They said it's established, that every fund has the right to their own rules.
     
    slipperysleuth likes this.
  13. slipperysleuth

    slipperysleuth Tornadicthermalcyclogenesis, sorta..

    Messages:
    781
    Likes Received:
    185
    Driver Since:
    1982
    Yeah, I know. Great gig if we could get something that paid that well AND control it with no oversight!
     

Share This Page