Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Obama singed a law that lets unions cut their pensions, and now they are doing exactly that. These workers need a union to protect them from their union.
1 posted on 12/30/2014 7:16:07 PM PST by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: grundle

The unions use the retirement funds to get the dems elected to office.


2 posted on 12/30/2014 7:17:37 PM PST by stockpirate (The Republican leadership are all fascist/Socialists, just like the fascist democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

They’re going to hear from a lot of Grumpy Old Men and Women. They will be raising Cain (or cane).


3 posted on 12/30/2014 7:17:45 PM PST by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Who could not see this coming?

Wait... apparently the union members


4 posted on 12/30/2014 7:19:09 PM PST by Mr. K (Palin/Cruz 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Silly workers. The purpose of the Union is to pay the Democrat Party.


5 posted on 12/30/2014 7:19:10 PM PST by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

If Pacific Gas and Electric or Humana tried this, their CEO would be up on charges.

But since it’s a labor union doing it, it’s much more like “tough noogies you blue-collar suckers.”


6 posted on 12/30/2014 7:19:43 PM PST by Steely Tom (Thank you for self-censoring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Serves them right for funding Democrats lo these many years.


7 posted on 12/30/2014 7:19:58 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (Black lies matter. 'White privilege' is dog-whistle for 'kill white people.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

One of the ways to “break” unions would be to require that they honor their pension obligations.


8 posted on 12/30/2014 7:21:06 PM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Whatever happened to the concept of fiduciary responsibility?

The Unions should have been putting funds away to protect these pensioners from this outcome.

If they weren’t, then the union should be prosecuted and disbanded.


9 posted on 12/30/2014 7:22:10 PM PST by DoughtyOne (The question is Jeb Bush. The answer is NO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Stop paying dues... What? Is the union going to fire you? Who writes your paycheck? More and more states become right-to-work states... anyone have any stories about peoplenexcersicing that right? I seem to recall a fellow conservative friend with a PhD in Physics that became a HS science teacher in Indiana... he refused to join the teachers union on principle... something to the effect that he was “allowed” to contract directly with the school board for his position. I may be completely mistaken, but I am.pretty sure that’s how it went down.


14 posted on 12/30/2014 7:26:59 PM PST by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

They need a couple of nasty-faced lawyers.


17 posted on 12/30/2014 7:31:37 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Rip it out by the roots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Wow would I be PO’d if I was in that union. My dues going to pay lobbyists! Going to swanky resorts? Imagine how many retirees could have been funded for 8 million. Criminal.


18 posted on 12/30/2014 7:31:47 PM PST by vpintheak (Keep calm and Rain Steel!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Doesn’t apply to “sacred” gov’t employee unions as their pensions are covered by taxpayers.


19 posted on 12/30/2014 7:35:28 PM PST by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

What is sad is the rank and file of most unions do not hold their leadership accountable. My experience is they come to expect greed and corruption.


22 posted on 12/30/2014 7:38:31 PM PST by Fzob (Jesus + anything = nothing, Jesus + nothing = everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

So willing contributors to democrats took it in the shorts and I am to haZ an upset why?

Note, not one of these people was chained to their employer. Ergo, they willingly gave their cash.


23 posted on 12/30/2014 7:41:29 PM PST by Norm Lenhart (1`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Unions have no obligation to the employer, the public or their members. Unions only have loyalty to unions. For those who, for decades, say “I’m a union person”, it is time to eat crow.


24 posted on 12/30/2014 8:05:00 PM PST by Dapper 26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Step aside, Paul Ryan. The Rats will give Granny and Pa a nice push off the cliff instead.


25 posted on 12/30/2014 8:10:33 PM PST by 4Liberty (Prejudice and generalizations. That's how Collectivists roll......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

I suspect corporations will be wanting the same deal. While most corporations ended their defined benefit pension plans, there are still millions of corporate retirees drawing on underfunded legacy defined benefit pension plans. Some of the underfunding is due to managements from time to time changing the actuarial assumptions so they can pull money out of the fund.

Don’t be surprised to see Wall Street and the multinationals quietly lobbying Congress for a stealth rider in one of the thousand page Christmas tree bills Congress loves to pass giving corporations the ability adjust legacy retiree defined benefit pension plan payments instead of meeting their contractual obligations. I’m sure Boehner and McConnell will be glad to do this favor for the Chamber of Commerce. Maybe changing pension law for corporations can be a rider on the amnesty bill so they’ll get Democrat votes.

The typical defined benefit pension plan of a US corporation is funded at 70% of obligations. If Congress changes the law, corporations will be off the hook to fully meet their promises to retirees and can simply cut benefits by 30% while continuing to pay out tens of millions of dollars in executive bonuses.

After all, who is going to look after retirees? Not unions, not Republicans, and not Democrats. Certainly not Obama.


26 posted on 12/30/2014 8:22:08 PM PST by Soul of the South (Yesterday is gone. Today will be what we make of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: grundle

Having served on a Union Pension Fund board of trustees as an employer group representative, I have some insight and mixed feelings about this story and want to share the thoughts.

First of all, as union membership declines during decades where life expectancy has climbed, the actuarial statistical numbers have worked against the Pension Funds, most of which are managed by the trustees of the fund and not by the union or the companies that pay the employees the benefits that get contributed.

Often in these multi employer union setting the employers might have five members on the board and the union has five members or some other equal formulation. It is in the employers interest to have the fund be solvent to avoid “unfunded pension liability” which can impact employers in a court finding.

Often the funds are much more professionally managed then the unions or the individual companies that participate. This is because watch dog managers and attorneys are paid to do nothing but make sure the trustees manage the fund correctly and carefully. The fund I was on made sure that the funds were managed by four different investment firms with four different investment portfolio types. One in equity growth, one in bonds, one in T bills and one in Contrarian mid caps. No fund segment could have more than 1.5 percent in any one investment or stock. Rules and audits by independent firms were scrutinized.

So, lets say the economy tanks, and the interest rates stay very low for a long time, and then, the pensioners live to 85 instead of 80. What is the answer? Deplete the fund for current retirees? Make a legal claim against employers and current employees? No, the answer is to adjust benefits but to do it in a manner to do the least damage to all parties. The important thing is to do the correction early and adjust contributions and future benefits in an open and honest manner.


27 posted on 12/30/2014 8:43:11 PM PST by KC Burke (I know my screen name says KC but I'm in AZ now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: IncPen

interesting

Bet the state of Illinois wishes could get same deal to balance its budget and get out from under pension obligations.


31 posted on 12/31/2014 1:02:19 AM PST by Nailbiter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson