April 20, 2016

One of the Nation's Largest Multi-employer Pension Plans Could Cut Pensions by 50 Percent

One of the nation’s largest pension funds could soon cut benefits for retirees


Members of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and their supporters attend a rally outside the Capitol in Washington on April 14. The demonstrators protested a plan by the Central States Pension Fund to reduce payments to retirees. (Drew Angerer/Bloomberg)

April 20, 2016

Washington Post - More than a quarter of a million truckers, retirees and their families could soon see their pension benefits severely cut — even though their pension fund is still years away from running out of money.

Within the next few weeks, the Treasury Department is expected to announce a crucial decision on whether it will approve reductions to one of the country’s largest multi-employer pension plans.

The potential cuts are possible under legislation passed by Congress in 2014 that for the first time allowed financially distressed multi-employer plans to reduce benefits for retirees if it would improve the solvency of the fund. The law weakened federal protections that for more than 40 years shielded one of the last remaining pillars that workers could rely on for financial security in retirement.

For many workers, the promise of a guaranteed income stream for life — a benefit now nearly extinct for younger generations — was at times strong enough to convince them to sacrifice pay raises or other job opportunities. But after decades of challenges that left many pension funds in tough financial straits, some people are learning in retirement that the promises made to them may have to be broken.

The Central States Pension Fund, which handles the retirement benefits for current and former Teamster union truck drivers across various states including Texas, Michigan, Wisconsin, Missouri, New York and Minnesota, was the first plan to apply for reductions under the new law.

Consumer advocates watching the case say the move could encourage dozens of other pension plans across the country that are facing financial struggles to make similar cuts.
“This is going to be a national crisis for hundreds of thousands, and eventually millions, of retirees and their families,” said Karen Friedman, executive vice president of the Pension Rights Center.
Like many other pension plans, the Central States Pension Fund suffered heavy investment losses during the financial crisis that cut into the pool of money available to pay out benefits. While the stock market has recovered since then, the improvements were not enough to make up for the shortfall that grew as the number of companies contributing to the plan declined and the number of people retiring and collecting benefits increased, said Thomas Nyhan, executive director of the Central States Pension Fund.

That imbalance left the fund paying out $3.46 in pension benefits for every $1 it received from employers. The shortfall has resulted in the fund paying out $2 billion more in benefits than it receives in employer contributions each year.

If nothing is done, the fund could become insolvent by 2025, said Nyhan. And because of its size, the plan could overwhelm the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, the insurance agency meant to shore up private pension funds, if it went under, Nyhan said.

The Central States Pension Fund pays out $2.8 billion a year in benefits, which would be reduced if the plan became insolvent. By comparison, the PBGC fund that backs multi-employer plans has roughly $2 billion in assets and is also projected to be insolvent by 2025.
“This was a very hard decision, a gut-wrenching decision,” Nyhan said, adding that he feared not taking any action could leave retirees with no pension at all. “It’s not a question of if there are going to be cuts. The question is where and when.”
If Treasury approves the fund’s proposal, then retirees could see their paychecks shrink by July 1. The move would give the fund at least a 50 percent chance of lasting for another 30 years as opposed to running out of cash in 10 years if no changes are made, Nyhan said. A decision is expected by May 7.


But opponents say there may be some negative consequences if the cuts are approved.
“It’s going to open the floodgates for other cuts,” said Friedman of the Pension Rights Center.
Out of the 10 million workers and retirees covered by multi-employer pension plans, roughly 1 million people are in plans that could run out of money over the next two decades, according to estimates from the PBGC. Already, three other pension plans that pay benefits to truck drivers and ironworkers have applied to the Treasury to have their pension benefits reduced.
 
The proposal introduced in September by Central States would cut benefits for current workers and retirees by 23 percent on average, though exact amounts would vary based on people’s age, health status and where they worked.
 
For many retirees, the losses may be much steeper.
 
 
Ava Miller, 64, and her husband, Ed Northrup, 68, could see their combined monthly pension income cut to about $3,000 from the nearly $7,000 they receive now, according to a letter they received from Central States in October.
 
If the cuts go through, Miller, who worked as a dispatcher in Flint, Mich., said they will need to dip into their savings to help cover their $1,300 mortgage payment, heating bills and trips to visit her 84-year old mother. Northrup, a retired car hauler, has started applying for truck driving jobs that could supplement their potentially smaller pension payments.
 
What makes the cuts more painful, Miller said, is that she took pay cuts so that the company could continue making contributions to the pension.
“I did everything I was supposed to,” Miller said, adding that she and her husband made extra payments on their car loan to cut down on their monthly bills after they received letters in October informing them of the potential cuts.
Critics of the cuts say the fund still has time to come up with an alternative solution. Some retirees and other supporters have rallied behind a bill introduced by Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders (Vt.) that would repeal the measure allowing the cuts, calling instead for the government to provide assistance to troubled pension funds.
 
Nyhan says he also supports that proposal and would welcome the money, but feels the chances that it will pass politically are slim.
 
If the cuts are approved, the proposal would be put to a vote by all 407,000 participants of the plan, including current workers and retirees who are exempt from the cuts because of their age or a disability. But even if a majority of the members vote against the proposal, the pension fund is so large that the Treasury Department may still be required to implement the cuts in order to protect the pension guaranty program.
 
Last week, hundreds of retirees, workers and family members from Michigan, Wisconsin, Texas and other states gathered on the lawn in front of the Capitol to rally against the cuts. They waved signs and periodically broke into chants of “No cuts.”
 
A steady stream of lawmakers, including Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D- Mass.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), walked on to a stage to speak against the legislation and to push for an alternative solution.

Roy Wroblewski, 64, a retired truck driver from Detroit, stood near the stage pumping his fist and holding up a sign that said “no cuts.”

Wroblewski, who hauled cars for about 30 years before retiring at 58, said he had just begun to feel stable financially two years before when he began collecting Social Security benefits. If his pension payments are cut in half to about $1,300, he says he’ll have to go back to work. But after two knee surgeries, truck driving is no longer an option.

Like other retirees at the rally, he said his union often prioritized preserving the pension over other benefits like pay raises.
“We always said the money was good enough but we want to have [our pensions],” Wroblewski said. “Now we’re back to fighting again.”

With some of the country's largest coal companies in bankruptcy, about 120,000 retired miners and their families in West Virginia could lose their pension and health care accounts. For many families in this region, this means losing their only regular source of income. (Jorge Ribas/The Washington Post)

Related:

3 comments:

  1. Reflextions
    10:20 AM EST
    The bribed politicians in Washington still get full pensions and healthcare for life but they don't hesitate to cut working class americans pensions and healthcare. This is the american imperial regime where only the rich, powerful and law enforcement criminals matter.

    dougreif
    10:19 AM EST
    No one stole their pensions. Managements made promises that can't possibly be kept given today's economy. But this is chump change compared to the promises politicians have given government employees in return for voting them into office. The unconnected among us are about to be hosed.

    hipshot
    10:18 AM EST
    Social Security is another large multi-employer pension plan that
    will be subjected to cuts in the near future. There is no way that
    the government will be able to make the promised payments. And
    state/municipal retirees will also have to make sacrifices. The
    alternative is to bring down our country.

    jojohns874
    10:15 AM EST
    Wall street and the banks and broker firms need to bail out all retirement funds now. Congress must act to bail out all retirement funds today. Just like in 2008 banker bail out. Now it time for was street to pay up.

    rdeco
    10:18 AM EST
    Should everyones taxes be doubled to do so? There are alot of underfunded very generous pensions out there...and most of those who would be taxed do not have such pensions themselves.

    clean government
    10:14 AM EST
    Our US Senators and Representatives should have to pay all of these weak pensions out, they are the ones who exported all of our good paying jobs, causing this mess. As our economy gets worst the Chinese will buy up all of our corporations, farm land and cheap defaulted houses, then we will be owned by the Chinese. They already own much more of it than our government tells us.

    http://globalslaves.blogspot.com/search/label/Maurice%20Strong%20and%20the%20Global%20Warming%20Scam

    There is a reason why Maurice Strong lives in China.

    Canadian oil billionaire Maurice Strong, Secretary General at the Rio de Janeiro United Nations 1992 Conference on Environment and Development, expressed the goal of Sustainable Development by declaring a partial list of what is not sustainable:

    “...current life-styles and consumption patterns of the affluent middleclass [e.g. Americans]—involving high meat intake [e.g. cattle production], use of fossil fuels [e.g. air and auto travel, industrial and consumer products], appliances [e.g. refrigeration] home and work air-conditioning and suburban housing are not sustainable.”

    ReplyDelete
  2. EXCLUSIVE: Godfather of Global Green Thinking Steps Out of Shadows at Rio+20
    FoxNews.com
    June 20, 2012

    Godfather of global environmentalism resurfaces

    Maurice Strong, the godfather of global environmentalism and organizer of the United Nations' 1992 Rio environmental Earth Summit, is making a quiet comeback to the limelight on the eve of that meeting’s successor, the Rio + 20 summit on "sustainable development," which starts June 20 in Brazil.

    Strong, 82, has been taking part in a variety of conference side-events prior to the three-day meeting of some 130 top-level international leaders, part of a growing wave of hoopla and promotion that will climax at the summit leadership sessions. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is leading the U.S. delegation there.

    His appearance at Rio + 20 is also the latest stage in a Long March through controversy that has kept Strong, a native Canadian who is widely deemed to be one of the key instigators of the global environmental movement, living a low-profile life in China for the past half-decade.

    Now Strong is back on one of the stages where he feels most comfortable--a global U.N. conference on the environment--though the role he may play in the leaders' sessions is not known. Questions sent by Fox News to the Rio + 20 conference organizers on Monday about his role had not been answered before this article was published.

    Nonetheless, on Monday evening, Strong was introduced as a "very special guest of honor" at a "Corporate Sustainability Forum" organized by the U.N. Global Compact, a corporate group that has signed onto a variety of U.N. social and development goals. In a brief address, Strong lauded the assembled executives as "the most important meeting of Rio + 20," and noted the number of corporate representatives attending from "the country where I live, which is called China."

    "If we are going to achieve the world we want, and not just the world we are going to get if we stay on the same course, it's got to be led by the business community," he said. "The real actors, the people who are going to make the change are the people in this room."

    While Strong's presence is low-key, there is no doubt the U.N. has brought him to Rio in an official capacity, if nothing else as a living relic of the successful 1992 Earth Summit, where Strong served as conference secretary general. Strong has recently described himself as a "senior advisor to the secretary general" of the Rio + 20 conference, a high-level Chinese bureaucrat named Sha Zukang, who is also a top member of the U.N. Secretariat.

    Documents examined by Fox News show that the Beijing office of the United Nations Development Program has paid Strong's way, with a $13,000 round-trip air ticket from Beijing to New York to Rio and back. His hotels and living expenses are also being picked up, in what amounts to a three-week Rio + 20 junket.

    Along the way, Strong has stirred up controversy, after he stopped off in Canada late last month to slam the incumbent Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, as a man whose "ideology seems to over-ride his understanding" on issues of climate change. Many Canadians were dismayed by the comments.

    Conservative Party leader Harper, withdrew Canada late last year from the Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, citing its crippling costs. Betwixt and between his many U.N. postings, Strong has been associated with the opposition Liberal Party.

    Controversy, along with radical environmental and economic views, is what Strong has long been known for. He took up residence in Beijing in 2005, after serving as the U.N.'s special envoy to North Korea, when investigators of the Oil for Food scandal uncovered the fact that he had cashed a check for nearly $1 million from Tongsun Park, a South Korean political fixer later convicted of conspiring to bribe U.N. officials on behalf of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

    CONTINUED...

    ReplyDelete

  3. Strong was never accused of any wrongdoing, and said his move to China at that time was no more than a coincidence.

    Since then Strong, an avowed life-long socialist, has been engaged, in low-key fashion, in a number of business deals involving the Chinese government. He also served as a director of the Chicago Climate Exchange, one of the first attempts to create a commercial cap-and-trade market in the U.S. Recently, he has also taken part in preliminary walk-up meetings for Rio + 20 in China, though without official title.

    Giving Strong one last star turn on a U.N. environmental stage, despite his past brushes with scandal, is an interesting gambit for the U.N, though it has apparently approached the matter cautiously.

    The fact is that Strong is the closest thing to global environmentalism’s patron saint--or, to conservative critics, the foremost grey eminence of the movement to expand "global environmental governance"--which is once more on the international agenda at Rio + 20. His presence adds another dimension of historical luster among fervent environmentalists, something that has been lacking as the gathering bogged down in negotiating acrimony in its preliminary stages.

    Rio + 20 conference: Negotiators producing a mammoth, messy and expensive grab bag of regulations and demands

    Three of the continuing, controversial themes of Strong's long U.N. career, are uppermost at Rio + 20: strong support for China as a world power, a greater role for global regulation of the environment, and a radical overhaul of the world’s economic system.

    All three will be on prominent display in Rio, where Sha Zukang serves as conference secretary general, "global environmental governance" is a conference theme, and developed and developing countries are battling over wealth transfers worth trillions in the context of "sustainable development" and measures to establish a new, "global green economy,"

    For his part, Strong has been publicly arguing the need for urgent action on the Rio + 20 conference agenda, extolling the need for a revitalized greenhouse gas suppression agenda and a "revolution" in the world economy in, a June 4 article in Latin America that used his senior advisor title.

    "Rio+20 must reinforce international efforts to reach agreement and renewal of the Climate Change Convention and its implementation," he declared.

    The Environmental and Economic Crises Share the Same Cause

    The article was published by a news service, Tierramerica, which says it is a joint project of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), and the World Bank. Strong has been writing similar pieces for Tierramerica for a number of years.

    Using a UNEP-created news agency as the vehicle for an article by a former UNEP executive director to further the cause of greater global sway for UNEP is the kind of inventive but also self-aggrandizing public relations thinking that Strong has long brought to the U.N., and that played no small part in his long ascent to prominence.

    Strong has spent nearly half of his life promoting a U.N.-centered vision on environmental issues. In 1972, he served as secretary-general of the U.N.'s Conference on the Human Environment--which, in turn, helped to spawn the United Nations Environmental Program later that year--whereupon Strong became its first executive director.

    After filling a number of business roles back in his native Canada, Strong returned to run the Earth Summit, which gave global environmentalism another huge boost. He became a close advisor to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, helping him to generate a still unfulfilled blueprint for U.N. reform.

    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/06/20/godfather-global-green-thinking-steps-out-shadows-at-rio-20.html

    ReplyDelete