joes bar and grill
TB Legend
- Credits
- 0
I guess you missed the minimum wage security guard partI was addressing the "if my company issued ID isn't good enough, I'm bringing it back" bravado.
I guess you missed the minimum wage security guard partI was addressing the "if my company issued ID isn't good enough, I'm bringing it back" bravado.
Police and military bases, those contracted by such have specific contract language regarding the requirements. Everyone else should accept the company ID.How does that work for you at DoD contractors or Military Bases during higher stages of alert?
The police or military, their DOD contactors are something entirely different than the rent a cop at the local warehouse. Company ID better suffice or the shipment is coming back.I was addressing the "if my company issued ID isn't good enough, I'm bringing it back" bravado.
What does this legislation say about funds that are fully funded?http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6297970
In an unexpected move, lawmakers also agreed on legislation expected to be incorporated into the spending measure that will permit a reduction in benefits to current retirees at economically distressed multiemployer pension plans.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6297970
In an unexpected move, lawmakers also agreed on legislation expected to be incorporated into the spending measure that will permit a reduction in benefits to current retirees at economically distressed multiemployer pension plans.
I guess you missed the minimum wage security guard part
We do know the company that subs their guards out around here. Make that stop enough and before long you learn the life history and that of all the relatives. The problem we have is a manager that won't back a driver's right to protect privacy. A sign in sheet at the window where the world can obtain information causes problems. Wouldn't you agree?No, I caught that. Fact is that you don't know who's a minimum wage security guard or not. You are just being difficult for no real logical reason and obviously have some kind of grandiose attitude you like to project towards security guards attempting to do their job.
What's a matter did one of those security guards put you in the same category as one of those filthy PT drivers that speaks 3 words of English just because of your chosen profession?
I will receive around $3500 a month from my pension when I retire. I have a 401 k through the Teamster's National Plan that I have been contributing to for years. It is a non matching fund.The company has nothing to do with it. I am eligible for retirement at age 55. I had to prolong my retirement due to our concessions to help my company survive. Had we not suffered through Bill Zollars quest to be king of the LTL world, I could have retired with my full pension at 52 years of age.
Actually I have never had an issue, if they asked me I declined, no big confrontation, not being difficult it's my right to choose who I share my personal information with, security guards are not one of them if they told I wasn't getting in I left. If I were at a DoD facility I would show my military id which is acceptable and contains no personal information other than my name. I realize there is more than three English words here, hope it doesn't confuse you.No, I caught that. Fact is that you don't know who's a minimum wage security guard or not. You are just being difficult for no real logical reason and obviously have some kind of grandiose attitude you like to project towards security guards attempting to do their job.
What's a matter did one of those security guards put you in the same category as one of those filthy PT drivers that speaks 3 words of English just be
The problem we have is a manager that won't back a driver's right to protect privacy. A sign in sheet at the window where the world can obtain information causes problems. Wouldn't you agree?
So there again why do we want to be part of the union ? The pension we have now is not multieployer.http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6297970
In an unexpected move, lawmakers also agreed on legislation expected to be incorporated into the spending measure that will permit a reduction in benefits to current retirees at economically distressed multiemployer pension plans.
Neither is upsf... just sayin' ;)So there again why do we want to be part of the union ? The pension we have now is not multieployer.
So is this UPSF no but if you do your research they spent millions to buy out of their multieployer pension. Just saying.Neither is upsf... just sayin' ;)
Correct. :)So is this UPSF no but if you do your research they spent millions to buy out of their multieployer pension. Just saying.
Neither is upsf... just sayin' ;)
So did they see the writing on the walls with the multieployer pensions being bad. From the looks of things the government is going to start making employers cut benefits to people who have already retired.Correct. :)
That's kinda my point if you take the pension we currently have and the 401k it will equal what the current contract the union carriers have. The way I see its not the employers responsibility to plan your retirement it's yours. The mentality now is kinda like are government is portraying that you shouldn't have to work for anything they will provide it for you. That being said it is breaking the country as it will do to companies who are bound by a contract. As I've said before the contract makes it hard if near impossible for companies to adapt to economic changes quickly.So what makes you think FedEx will pay for a pension as generous as UPSF's? and did you see the stink about UPS trying to screw the taxpayers over their pension???? Will post....