What's new

Think about your family

chuckandbob said:
"...The company wanted out of the pension because of the cliff vesting five year rule. If the funds deposited for union employees that quit prior to five years were returned, or even followed the employee to their next union position, they might have looked at it differently..."
Click to expand...

Even in company 401(k)s, company contributions are subject to a five-year vesting rule, so that is a lame argument. Vesting is not a huge brick wall. In the Teamster pension, if you leave covered employment before you have completed five years, you have as many years as you had under covered employment to get back into covered employment once you leave covered employment.

This is fairly standard amongst all pension plans.

But more important than vesting is if you will even have ANY money in your 401(k) when you retire, or enough to retire on. Remember, what you earn in your pension is guaranteed, unlike a 401(k)...

chuckandbob said:
"...The question of health benefits is one of economics as well. If all of the employees of the company were on the company health plan, the company would have greater buying power, which would bring the cost for per employee down..."
Click to expand...

Um, the Teamsters plan has excellent coverage compared to the cost, and the comapny has long said they were unwilling to match the level of benefits in the Teamster plan in any company plan they had. Note I said unwilling, not unable...
 
I would love to be a fly on the wall of the accounting office to see how much this little strike has cost the boys compared to just settling a decent contract.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top