What's new

FedEx Freight | Time has ran out!!

Purple Hammer said:
Swampy here is one of your posts stating Fedex would NEVER be in a multi employer pension fund. Just saying.
Click to expand...
I admitted, I didn't see it that one coming.

Still, FedEx is NOT in a multi employer pension fund. Just saying.

I've speculated as to why they went that route. Perhaps a Committee member will be able shed more light on the process.
 
SwampRatt said:
I admitted, I didn't see it that one coming.

Still, FedEx is NOT in a multi employer pension fund. Just saying.

I've speculated as to why they went that route. Perhaps a Committee member will be able shed more light on the process.
Click to expand...
Now I'm just a dumb truck driver and not on any committees, but because our worker pool is full of us old geezers ready to retire....
Would it not make more sense to be included in an established, well funded plan? As opposed to starting a new one that would be underfunded from its inception?
There is this thing called economies of scale. Just sayin'......
 
SwampRatt said:
Typical FAKE NEWS reporting. Select facts, twisted and applied in an alternate context.

Yes, I showed the information on underfunded status, in reply to those harping or the status of Central States Pension. Yes, I explained what the numbers really mean. NO, I never made the case for FedEx to achieve 100% funding status. Never ever. I did make the case for a better percentage of benefit, comparable to Express who enjoys a 2% higher contribution across the board. I even went on to show the variety of areas 2% could be placed.

Your memory of the conversations seems to be failing you in this discussion. It's easier for me to recall, since I've been consistent.

Yes, WCPF was mentioned briefly and separately and noted to be in excellent shape.

If you are not searching for a gotcha moment, why go on, and on about it?:scratchhead:
Click to expand...
See, here's another example of you deflecting...the topic of discussion was how most of you guys were claiming we'd never be involved with a MEPF when in fact that's exactly what was proposed in CLT, a multi-employer pension...fact, period!!

Now you're attempting to deflect by harping on our PPA and who said what about it...why, this topic has no relevance to the issue!! Yes, I misspoke when I said you were bashing our PPA for being funded at 88%, my bad, but it still doesn't negate the fact that a MEPF was proposed in CLT.

You and others said "we'd never be involved with a multi-employer pension", FACT, that's what was proposed, FACT, and now you've admittedly said you were wrong, FACT...case closed...thx!!

This was never about a "gotcha moment" issue but rather just another example of one of the many lies or mis-truths told by the pro-union side.

Just wait until we break down the healthcare proposal and why TeamCare wasn't part of their equation.....:popcorn:
 
Redracer3136 said:
See, here's another example of you deflecting...the topic of discussion was how most of you guys were claiming we'd never be involved with a MEPF when in fact that's exactly what was proposed in CLT, a multi-employer pension...fact, period!!

Now you're attempting to deflect by harping on our PPA and who said what about it...why, this topic has no relevance to the issue!! Yes, I misspoke when I said you were bashing our PPA for being funded at 88%, my bad, but it still doesn't negate the fact that a MEPF was proposed in CLT.

You and others said "we'd never be involved with a multi-employer pension", FACT, that's what was proposed, FACT, and now you've admittedly said you were wrong, FACT...case closed...thx!!

This was never about a "gotcha moment" issue but rather just another example of one of the many lies or mis-truths told by the pro-union side.

Just wait until we break down the healthcare proposal and why TeamCare wasn't part of their equation.....:popcorn:
Click to expand...


SM7ueu1.jpg
 
Redracer3136 said:
See, here's another example of you deflecting...the topic of discussion was how most of you guys were claiming we'd never be involved with a MEPF when in fact that's exactly what was proposed in CLT, a multi-employer pension...fact, period!!

Now you're attempting to deflect by harping on our PPA and who said what about it...why, this topic has no relevance to the issue!! Yes, I misspoke when I said you were bashing our PPA for being funded at 88%, my bad, but it still doesn't negate the fact that a MEPF was proposed in CLT.

You and others said "we'd never be involved with a multi-employer pension", FACT, that's what was proposed, FACT, and now you've admittedly said you were wrong, FACT...case closed...thx!!

This was never about a "gotcha moment" issue but rather just another example of one of the many lies or mis-truths told by the pro-union side.

Just wait until we break down the healthcare proposal and why TeamCare wasn't part of their equation.....:popcorn:
Click to expand...


I could say, "wait, my assertion still holds true, so technically I'm still not wrong." BUT clearly, my intention was that there was no possibility. Turns out, somebody did want it and it was proposed, so it was possible. Unlikely, but possible.

One question though. Why is it when you are wrong, it is characterized as having "misspoke"? But when I, or the opposition is wrong, it's a lie, effort to mislead, etc. Can't a person just be wrong, without it being a lie?
:scratchhead:
 
SwampRatt said:
I could say, "wait, my assertion still holds true, so technically I'm still not wrong." BUT clearly, my intention was that there was no possibility. Turns out, somebody did want it and it was proposed, so it was possible. Unlikely, but possible.

One question though. Why is it when you are wrong, it is characterized as having "misspoke"? But when I, or the opposition is wrong, it's a lie, effort to mislead, etc. Can't a person just be wrong, without it being a lie?
:scratchhead:
Click to expand...
Agreed...if we were playing semantics then technically you'd still be correct since there was never a chance of anyone being associated with a MEPF because as our former CFO Don Brown so eloquently stated during our anti-union meetings in which some refused to listen, "the company would never agree to anything that wasn't in the best interest of the company", regardless of what was proposed...but because it was proposed your premise was wrong.

Sure, depending on the circumstances of the situation. In my case I "misspoke" when I claimed you bashed our plan for being funded at 88% and not 100% when actually you bashed it for being underfunded by $5 Billion...in your case, you claimed for 3 years that "we would never be involved with a MEPF" and then unannounced to you one was proposed, that would make you "just wrong" because you aledgedly didn't know...in the case of others, they said the same as you for the same period of time but they went into great detail as to why we would never be involved in such a plan and then those very people proposed just that, so that would make them "liars"....
 
Redracer3136 said:
Agreed...if we were playing semantics then technically you'd still be correct since there was never a chance of anyone being associated with a MEPF because as our former CFO Don Brown so eloquently stated during our anti-union meetings in which some refused to listen, "the company would never agree to anything that wasn't in the best interest of the company", regardless of what was proposed...but because it was proposed your premise was wrong.

Sure, depending on the circumstances of the situation. In my case I "misspoke" when I claimed you bashed our plan for being funded at 88% and not 100% when actually you bashed it for being underfunded by $5 Billion...in your case, you claimed for 3 years that "we would never be involved with a MEPF" and then unannounced to you one was proposed, that would make you "just wrong" because you aledgedly didn't know...in the case of others, they said the same as you for the same period of time but they went into great detail as to why we would never be involved in such a plan and then those very people proposed just that, so that would make them "liars"....
Click to expand...
Funny.

1) I never considered D Brown an "eloquent" speaker.
2) You are still wrong (mispeaking?) On the underfunded status topic. I merely showed the facts, to bring context to the term "underfunded". So no, I never "bashed" it.

As far as I know, there is only 1 fund required to be 100% funded. That would be the US Post Office. A waste of funding resources, IMHO.

Oh, here''s that fun link again, to get you close to the topic in question:
http://www.truckingboards.com/bb/threads/the-union-debate-thread.65416/page-621#post-1095205
 
SwampRatt said:
Funny.

1) I never considered D Brown an "eloquent" speaker.
2) You are still wrong (mispeaking?) On the underfunded status topic. I merely showed the facts, to bring context to the term "underfunded". So no, I never "bashed" it.

As far as I know, there is only 1 fund required to be 100% funded. That would be the US Post Office. A waste of funding resources, IMHO.

Oh, here''s that fun link again, to get you close to the topic in question:
http://www.truckingboards.com/bb/threads/the-union-debate-thread.65416/page-621#post-1095205
Click to expand...
1) I and others found Mr Brown to be very persuasive, "eloquent", but then again, we were listening to what he was sayin...and everything he said in our meeting came to fruition!!

2) after further research, you didn't go back quite far enough...
http://www.truckingboards.com/bb/threads/the-union-debate-thread.65416/page-615
...it was CT that bashed our plan for being $5 Billion underfunded to which you "liked", meaning you agreed with his assessment when in fact the numbers he posted were for all of FedEx Corp's plans...guilty by association!! You then joined the conversation a page earlier than your link claims where you bashed me for using "the most favorable, optimistic, and adjusted numbers possible"...
http://www.truckingboards.com/bb/threads/the-union-debate-thread.65416/page-620

Agreed
 
silent trucker said:
And if Hoffa Jr had any balls, he'd consolidate all 21 Continental US pension plans into one, reduce benefits to existing retirees and future retirees, and in the process save the plan from the failure that is the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. Then he'd work with the remaining Unionized carriers before they go bankrupt (which is inevitable) and change the work rules to mirror the non union carriers that have grown like weeds while the union carriers have withered on the vine during deregulation.

Oops. DD, CT and the gang will suffer heart attacks having been exposed to this truth.

Happy Caskets!

ST
Click to expand...
And why don't you accept communist Chinese payrates or Mexican trucker payrates in order to do everything the market wants? Because that is what it wants. Maybe you'd be willing to live in a mud hut for the market to be happy........and be smacked with a cane if not working hard enough.
 
Purple Hammer said:
The two headed horse won't be dead until Fedex eradicates the cancer from our other 2 barns.
Click to expand...
You nonunion anti-union guys are the cancer of the industry, the nation, the locality you are in, and the world.............the business man have our nation $20 trillion in debt.....million or billions in trade deficits causing all kinds of need for welfare.....and you have no brains nor spine to stand up to them.........when the bottom drops and the economy crumbles...please remember to take a second to think about why you followed them. and didn't fight when you had the chance.....I repeat...the unions have had no real say in our government since probably the seventies.....Your worshipful masters, the businessmen...have pretty much had total control.........$20 trillion in debt.
 
silent trucker said:
And if Hoffa Jr had any balls, he'd consolidate all 21 Continental US pension plans into one, reduce benefits to existing retirees and future retirees, and in the process save the plan from the failure that is the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. Then he'd work with the remaining Unionized carriers before they go bankrupt (which is inevitable) and change the work rules to mirror the non union carriers that have grown like weeds while the union carriers have withered on the vine during deregulation.

Oops. DD, CT and the gang will suffer heart attacks having been exposed to this truth.

Happy Caskets!

ST
Click to expand...

You being the smart guy you are, don't realize even if they cut all their pensions in half, its still better than the portable peanut plan Fed ex offers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top