Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
FedEx Freight | New 401k Plan
- Thread starter Gator
- Start date
: out of it!! 
There is no minimum age to cash out. You can also roll it on to an IRA or other eligible plan.
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
When you leave employment...you can’t do anything with it while you’re still employed here.There is no minimum age to cash out. You can also roll it on to an IRA or other eligible plan.
Trucker 206
TB Veteran
- Credits
- 0
That could very well be true. I know with my Teamsters Pension, I had NINE different benefit payout plans to select from. Three were out of the question, as they provided no survivor benefits. The other six DID provide survivor benefits, with several options: Lump sum death benefit to your spouse, smaller lump sum death benefit (with monthly payments thereafter), LARGER lump sum death benefit (with SMALLER monthly payments thereafter), and so on. It’s quite the process! Your form must be signed by you and your spouse and notarized at that time. Just make sure you select the plan that works for you, because once it’s filed, it can’t be changed.
I think there are several factors to consider. The least important to me is any savings the Company MAY realize. Stay with me for a minute.
This falls into a category I touched on in the Union Debate days. When there is a benefit that can be provided by the Company, with a lower actual cost to them (Tax benefit/group scale, etc.) than the value of the benefit to me/us, we should push for that. The term "negotiate" was used then, but "encourage" fits just as well, today. We have encouraged this type of change for some time. It seems they have listened. The fact that we have the option makes even better, IMHO.
Now on the surface the potential Co. savings seems obvious. Up to 9.5% vs up to 8%. Key words being "up to". Think about how long it takes to reach the max on pension credits. http://i.imgur.com/rknR8pW.jpg Many will NEVER see that. If they ever do, most of their time will accrue at much lower rates.
Equally significant: The 401k match starts almost right away. Year 1. So the potential Co. cost is much higher, BUT typically participation is NEVER 100%. So, that lowers the actual cost.
Bottom line: I'm not here to maximize the cost to the Company, but rather maximize the benefit to me. If I can increase my return, even while the Company lowers their cost overall, THAT is a win/win.
Keeping it as short as possible, we can look at strategy later. I'm sure we will. But the shortest version, it seems to me, is...
If you are fairly close to retirement (and at max on pension), stay put. Absolutely.
If you have a long way to go before retirement, take the higher 401k. Absolutely.
Those somewhere in the middle? A lot depends on risk tolerance and where you'd actually put that $$.
Last edited:
westdriver
TB Regular
- Credits
- 136
Some of you have a short memory, the Obama administration and the Democrats were thinking about taking everyone's 401 k and pay you back in monthly payments when you retired. If the Democrats ever regain control of the Senate and the presidency I wouldn't trust your 401 to be yours
That's true, but goes even further back than that. For a couple decades (or more), the Dems have wanted access to that massive amount of untaxed wealth. They do want to tax it now rather than wait until it's withdrawn. All in order to pay for even more social programs. They also believe it's just not fair that some (who sacrificed) have so much, while others do not.
I wouldn't count on Pension funds to be any more exempt than 401k funds. They'll call it a wealth tax, which would likely include all retirement funds, and assets of all kinds. The only exception might be ROTH accounts, which are funded by already taxed dollars. Even there, the gains made over the years (promised not to be subject to taxes) might be too much for them to resist getting a piece of.
- Credits
- 417
Then there is Central States Pension debacle.
Thom-8-Toes
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 29
You are correct....and dont forget the government BAIL IN laws that were passed ....where they can sieze up to 2/3 the value of 401 k to pay down the national debt......
at Conway they did this and gave up to a 11 percent match when they ended pension well few years later then that huge match was taken away so expect to be back at 3.5 percent in five years.
I can remember it was when the union was knocking on the door ..just sayin
No F-bdy Bs
TB Veteran
- Credits
- 565
They're banking on incoming, new hires to not contribute .
Myself, I'd stay with the PP AND ths current 401k.
Myself, I'd stay with the PP AND ths current 401k.
Yes the company does have a history of stopping/reducing 401k benefits but I think they are running out of ideas to attract and retain drivers. Guaranteed PPA contributions if you stay in it could be argued as well with them giving us the option now to leave. Down the road you could be forced out too due to low participation. I would weigh projections vs your return in the 401k. For me it is projecting a $18,000 increase in my lump sum payout in 9 years. Over that same time period I would get $27,000 more to invest my way in the 401k. Either way it is a gamble but I would rather invest the extra then let them try. The media has taken note of FedEx behavior of late and there is an article being written about our retirement so perhaps the company will be held more publicly accountable.
pension fund trustee kevin mccaffrey, making yrc great, for his & hoffa's benefit?I think there are several factors to consider. The least important to me is any savings the Company MAY realize. Stay with me for a minute.
This falls into a category I touched on in the Union Debate days. When there is a benefit that can be provided by the Company, with a lower actual cost to them (Tax benefit/group scale, etc.) than the value of the benefit to me/us, we should push for that. The term "negotiate" was used then, but "encourage" fits just as well, today. We have encouraged this type of change for some time. It seems they have listened. The fact that we have the option makes even better, IMHO.
Now on the surface the potential Co. savings seems obvious. Up to 9.5% vs up to 8%. Key words being "up to". Think about how long it takes to reach the max on pension credits. http://i.imgur.com/rknR8pW.jpg Many will NEVER see that. If they ever do, most of their time will accrue at much lower rates.
Equally significant: The 401k match starts almost right away. Year 1. So the potential Co. cost is much higher, BUT typically participation is NEVER 100%. So, that lowers the actual cost.
Bottom line: I'm not here to maximize the cost to the Company, but rather maximize the benefit to me. If I can increase my return, even while the Company lowers their cost overall, THAT is a win/win.
Keeping it as short as possible, we can look at strategy later. I'm sure we will. But the shortest version, it seems to me, is...
If you are fairly close to retirement (and at max on pension), stay put. Absolutely.
If you have a long way to go before retirement, take the higher 401k. Absolutely.
Those somewhere in the middle? A lot depends on risk tolerance and where you'd actually put that $$.
You are here
»
David Witwer, Ph.D.
Professor of American Studies, School of Humanities
Director, Honors Program
[email protected]
Office Phone: +1 717 948 6494
Office Location: Olmsted Building, W356
Mailing Address:
W356 OLMSTED BLDG
PENN STATE HBG
MIDDLETOWN, PA 17057
Bottom Fields
David Witwer joined Penn State Harrisburg in 2008 and previously taught at Lycoming College. He has a Ph.D. and an M.A. in history from Brown University and received his undergraduate degree from DePauw University. His scholarship focuses on the impact of union corruption scandals on modern American politics; it brings together the intersecting historical fields of labor, politics, journalism, and organized crime. His first book, Corruption and Reform in the Teamsters Union, focused on the causes of corruption, including the role played by organized crime, in one of the nation's most important labor organizations. By profiling a series of long overlooked reform efforts within the Teamsters, this book also challenged the stereotypical image of union members as apathetic and cynical towards corruption.
His work also highlights the way conservatives manipulated the issue of corruption to delegitimize the labor movement. In doing so, they and their allies in the media misrepresented the causes of corruption, ignoring the role of employers and corrupt elements of the state, and placing the blame solely on the phenomenon of union power. Anti-unionists promoted a broad definition of corruption, one that tagged many legal but aggressive tactics by unions as forms of racketeering. It is also true, however, that the real existence of corruption and organized criminal influence in some unions helped give this tactic its potency. In Shadow of the Racketeer: Scandal in Organized Labor, Witwer used the history of the conservative journalist Westbrook Pegler's exposé of a major corruption scandal involving the Chicago mob, Hollywood movie studios and the leadership of two national unions to demonstrate how such scandals have tainted the public's view of union power.
Witwer serves on the editorial board of the journal Labor History and in addition to his two books, he has published articles in the Journal of American History, Journal of Social History, Journal of Women's History, Social Science History, Journalism History, Trends in Organized Crime, Criminal Justice Review, and International Labor and Working Class History. In 2011, he held a fellowship from the Institute for Arts and Humanistic Studies at Penn State.
Richard Cranium
TB Legend
- Credits
- 0
Nah, we’ll just retire.
Not at all. I didn't see an answer to my question here. Still seems the only way to get your pension money is to quit. But that was only half the equation.
Quiting is one option. Retire#2. #3Roll it in to your 401and get the new 401 company match. #4Leave it alone and still receive accrued interest to the pension and stay at the current 401 company contribution without the new company match. What part of these equations aren't you understanding?.
Last edited:
Too much to comprehend?