What's new

Dissolve and disperse central states pension fund now !

Do you want what's yours from Central States ?

  • Yes

    Votes: 52 85.2%

  • No

    Votes: 9 14.8%
  • Total voters
    61
Kennesaw Kid said:
It was close to 84% during the 94 strike and then the benefit was raised after the strike to the best of my knowledge...kk
Click to expand...

Seems there's plenty of blame to go around. I can't get behind your blaming it on Reagan if the fund was fine for 20 years after the consent decree. I think it was more the fault of the IRS, and the banks for not sticking to fixed income investments. You're not going to get anything from the IRS cause as we found out, they are accountable to nobody. Your best bet is suing the banks, that's a tough nut to crack unless you got the Justice Department doing it, and when they do the injured party gets nothing and the proceeds disappear into the black hole of government. Not saying I know what I'm talking about, just the way I see it. I'd like to see you sue the pants off Goldman Sachs, they're scum as far as I'm concerned, but I just don't see it working out that way.
 
jimmy g said:
The problem in that scenario isn't the investments, but that the IRS banned overfunding, and CSPF used that ruling to create 'at any age' payouts, at a time when union company after union company closed. We as Teamsters, were led to expect twice as much as the Fund could deliver. That's not the investment firm's fault- it's OUR'S. No investment could have doubled our money and that's what we needed, apparently.

All the articles posted on this page of the thread indicate that the managing firms were appointed by an agreed upon Independent Counsel, and that no improper investing was accused until the cuts were brought up. We're all wanting full payouts; but going before the GAO with 'they screwed us' as the main argument probably won't win....
Click to expand...

That IRS thing was huge. It would be interesting to know what the fund would look like now were it not for the loathsome IRS. I'm not in Central States but weren't they even offering 25 and out at any age in order to bring the funding down to meet the IRS demands?
 
jimmy g said:
The problem in that scenario isn't the investments, but that the IRS banned overfunding, and CSPF used that ruling to create 'at any age' payouts, at a time when union company after union company closed. We as Teamsters, were led to expect twice as much as the Fund could deliver. That's not the investment firm's fault- it's OUR'S. No investment could have doubled our money and that's what we needed, apparently.

All the articles posted on this page of the thread indicate that the managing firms were appointed by an agreed upon Independent Counsel, and that no improper investing was accused until the cuts were brought up. We're all wanting full payouts; but going before the GAO with 'they screwed us' as the main argument probably won't win....
Click to expand...

What was the investment firms fault was taking on risk rather than doing what any investment advisor worth his salt would recommend for retirement investing as you near retirement, fixed income or conservative dividend payers like utilities. They knew the fund was loaded with baby boomers getting ready to retire, they should have invested like a 65 year old should invest. Chances are if the IRS had stayed out of it and the banks had been prudent the fund would be close to fully funded now. It wasn't just Central States either, I remember the New England fund paying big lump sum bonuses to people retiring back in the late 90's, I think it was like $8K, that was to appease the IRS, now they're in bad shape, think they might be critical.
 
Just to add something to the conversation. I retired in 2009 from the WTWT. Back then it was based on your time in the fund, and your age. Tier 84 was the golden number for a full pension. I retired at tier 85. Age 58 and 27 years of credit. Every year since retirement, I have received a thirteenth check from the fund, based on a formula I don't understand but at a lessor amount because I retired from YRC. This years check was around $260.00. Last letter I received put the fund at around 93 percent funded.
 
mud said:
Just to add something to the conversation. I retired in 2009 from the WTWT. Back then it was based on your time in the fund, and your age. Tier 84 was the golden number for a full pension. I retired at tier 85. Age 58 and 27 years of credit. Every year since retirement, I have received a thirteenth check from the fund, based on a formula I don't understand but at a lessor amount because I retired from YRC. This years check was around $260.00. Last letter I received put the fund at around 93 percent funded.[/QUOTE

Retired in 2011 with 34 years at 56 birthdays.
My 13th check was $125.00 this year figure that one out ?
We can thank the late Ralph Taurone for his leadership as he was the one who pushed for this 13th check in the WTWT.

Why can't the failing funds mirror what the WTWT have done to build their funds ?
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: mud
Obviously, there are no easy options for saving Central States pensions. The fund is going broke, the feds, on either side of the political aisle, are not going to pump in billions to keep it running, PBGC will not be able to sustain even a reduced payout schedule, and the Sanders/Kaptur bill is just blowing smoke up your ass. You can't tax the rich enough to fund the Sanders /Kaptur idea.
When UPS paid billions to leave Central States, I thought that the new UPS pension fund would be 100% funded. Wrong.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ions-for-70-000-nonunion-workers-to-cut-costs
...UPS’s pension plans in the U.S. had a $9.85 billion shortfall at the end of last year, meaning they were about 76 percent funded, according to regulatory filings....

UPS may have shown how the underfunded pension plans nightmare will be addressed when it moves 70,000 non union employees to a 401-k situation, from their current pension fund. If I am reading this right, UPS will contribute to the fund. I can't tell if UPS is going to make a one time contribution to the fund or an ongoing annual contribution, but either way UPS saves a ton of money. The employees will contribute with a company match. Former employees, that are now receiving pension payouts, will not be affected.
UPS can get away with this because the affected employees are non union. However, that's not the case with Central States being all union members.The question is can the Central States rank and file union guys accept being moved to a 401k plan? Hoffa and his henchmen will not care as long as the dues keep coming.
 
Last edited:
SuperCourse said:
Seems there's plenty of blame to go around. I can't get behind your blaming it on Reagan if the fund was fine for 20 years after the consent decree. I think it was more the fault of the IRS, and the banks for not sticking to fixed income investments. You're not going to get anything from the IRS cause as we found out, they are accountable to nobody. Your best bet is suing the banks, that's a tough nut to crack unless you got the Justice Department doing it, and when they do the injured party gets nothing and the proceeds disappear into the black hole of government. Not saying I know what I'm talking about, just the way I see it. I'd like to see you sue the pants off Goldman Sachs, they're scum as far as I'm concerned, but I just don't see it working out that way.
Click to expand...

No SC....don't misunderstand me....I am blaming Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, Obama and their Secretary of The Treasury, for NOT having any checks and balances or any Congressional Oversight Committees to keep tabs on those firms that were appointed by Reagan to settle the lawsuit that was filed when Carter was President. One of the things that was addressed in hearings being held, and was part of many problems the Congressional Committee cause CSPF application to be denied was there has NEVER been any oversight of theses Trustees and their firms....we shall see what comes next....so far, no Retirees have had any pension cuts...kk
 
Kennesaw Kid said:
No SC....don't misunderstand me....I am blaming Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, Obama and their Secretary of The Treasury, for NOT having any checks and balances or any Congressional Oversight Committees to keep tabs on those firms that were appointed by Reagan to settle the lawsuit that was filed when Carter was President. One of the things that was addressed in hearings being held, and was part of many problems the Congressional Committee cause CSPF application to be denied was there has NEVER been any oversight of theses Trustees and their firms....we shall see what comes next....so far, no Retirees have had any pension cuts...kk
Click to expand...
The Settlement Decree Agreement that you posted said that a Court (not any President) picked the Independent Special Counsel to oversee that the Fund Managers picked the Fiduciary Managers. It says the ISC was to attend meetings and file reports so the Trustees had oversight. With these in place and following rules the CSPF agreed to, it's going to be difficult to prove neglect or fraud, because it states ultimate control was with the Fund.
 
With government oversight via Goldman Sachs and Northern Trust as the investment managers practically reducing the authority of Nyhan and other Pension administrators plus possible and I say possible loans authorized by our leader.Shouldnt the onus be placed on first the government and the associated investment management houses and then down the line for them the government which is our taxpayers to pay the penalty for guiding the pension funds to this juncture?Not everything our government does is fruitful.Sometimes we the tax payers pay for that
 
In my opinion what purpose is served by reflecting back to the persons that caused the current condition of our Teamsters pension fund?
Once any events are past there is little if anything that can be done to change anything,other than learning from past errors.
Or attempting to hold guilty parties accountable.
What we really need is solutions to turn around the current conditions we are all facing for the broken financial promises in signed contracts.
Contracts that were negotiated,& agreed on for us dues payers to take less in wages & more in our pensions over our working years.

Although as an oldtimer,I look back to how trucking companies killed themselves after deregulation.
When Yellow,Roadway,&Consolidated,started discounting freight rates,which we all can see came back around to hurt them in the long run.
I remember when there were around 3500 union trucking companies before deregulation,however they started going under.
Because they couldn't compete with the discounting,to where there are very few union companies left.
But like I say what point is served by playing the blame game,we really do need some good ideas to honor the contracts we all agreed on.
 
bigtruk_us said:
With government oversight via Goldman Sachs and Northern Trust as the investment managers practically reducing the authority of Nyhan and other Pension administrators plus possible and I say possible loans authorized by our leader.Shouldnt the onus be placed on first the government and the associated investment management houses and then down the line for them the government which is our taxpayers to pay the penalty for guiding the pension funds to this juncture?Not everything our government does is fruitful.Sometimes we the tax payers pay for that
Click to expand...
The Consent Decree that KK posted says the Trustees picked the Fiduciary, and had trusteeship over them, but had to follow the rules of the Court Appointed Independent Special Master. So, the Trustees still were the Responsible Party, and not the Fiduciary.
 
bigtruk_us said:
With government oversight via Goldman Sachs and Northern Trust as the investment managers practically reducing the authority of Nyhan and other Pension administrators plus possible and I say possible loans authorized by our leader.Shouldnt the onus be placed on first the government and the associated investment management houses and then down the line for them the government which is our taxpayers to pay the penalty for guiding the pension funds to this juncture?Not everything our government does is fruitful.Sometimes we the tax payers pay for that
Click to expand...

How many times in the history of this country has anything under government oversight been profitable?
 
35 pages of comments and over 300,000 looks and we are still fighting over the best resolution. If by some act of God the pension is funded again, how long will it last this time? Who will hold accountable the appointed, NOT ELECTED, pension fund managers?
I know they are not the only blame but a big part of it.
CSPF is a bottomless money pit, time to put our pension contributions in our own 401k.
ANYTIME YOU LET SOMEONE HOLD YOUR MONEY, THERES A GOOD CHANCE THERE WILL BE NOTHING THERE WHEN YOU COME BACK TO GET IT.
 
I'm Back ! I can't think of any thing new to say. On an unrelated topic does anyone have an educated opinion on the merits of riveted (LUND) or welded (CRESTLINER) boats. I'm going to buy a new boat as a retirement gift to myself.
 
Mr. Dracula, what an interesting example you chose to make your point. Both the UPS non union pension fund and the UPS/TEAMSTER replacement CSPF pension fund have been 100% vested in years past. What has changed you ask? UPS changed the discount rate from 5% to the rate a Corporation with a top credit rating would pay to borrow 3.26%. They did this to create cover for eliminating management pensions. UPS non union pension fund has 31.19 BILLION in it, with 70,000 participants. That Mr. Dracula is $445,571.00 per participant as opposed to $36,000.00 for CSPF participant. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. If the UPS/TEAMSTER pension fund used the same discount rate and mortality tables CSPF used, its funding level would be well over 200%.
 
Matching 401-K is that YOU control NOT the union is the only way to go period ................but will never happen because of greedy union wants to control you money & life !
 
wongway said:
Matching 401-K is that YOU control NOT the union is the only way to go period ................but will never happen because of greedy union wants to control you money & life !
Click to expand...

I agree to a point, whenever we invest our money, it's under the control of someone else's decisions... In the case of the Union, the Union decides how it's invested... In the case of a 401, you decide where and how it's invested..... But in the end, it's the same stock market..... Our money is still basically at the whim of the stock market......

Most people don't have the skills and knowledge to manage their money effectively...... The ones that can would be better off with a 401k.......but when the market crashes, like in 08, even those with a lot of money in their 401k's lost huge amounts of money... Many had to postpone retirement to wait for their financial condition to improve again....

So, no matter what financial tools we may use, it's still at the whims of wall street......

I do agree however, that the Union has to much control over how a person desides to use their time in retirement.... A person should be able to do anything they want, meaning work at any job they want, without losing their pensions........
 
pilot87 said:
I agree to a point, whenever we invest our money, it's under the control of someone else's decisions... In the case of the Union, the Union decides how it's invested... In the case of a 401, you decide where and how it's invested..... But in the end, it's the same stock market..... Our money is still basically at the whim of the stock market......

Most people don't have the skills and knowledge to manage their money effectively...... The ones that can would be better off with a 401k.......but when the market crashes, like in 08, even those with a lot of money in their 401k's lost huge amounts of money... Many had to postpone retirement to wait for their financial condition to improve again....

So, no matter what financial tools we may use, it's still at the whims of wall street......

I do agree however, that the Union has to much control over how a person desides to use their time in retirement.... A person should be able to do anything they want, meaning work at any job they want, without losing their pensions........
Click to expand...
Yes , agree you have some points , but bottom line is that only YOU should have CONTROL of your money , NOT union or ex-wife or a lawyer or ex-mother-in-law or wife or girlfriend , any time someone else controls your pension money and where you can work or do is total B.S. and they win and you lose !! and funny thing is that Nyhan the dude in charge is still at FULL pay & has a job ?? Why he should have been fired !!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top