Posted on 11/28/2008 2:04:29 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
Ford retirees worry about future
BY ANDREA HOLECEK
holecek@nwitimes.com
| Friday, November 28, 2008 | No comments posted.
Local Ford Motor Co. retirees say they are worried about the fate of U.S. auto makers and how the industry's problems could affect their comfortable retirements.
"I'm very much concerned," said Charles Cupp, 50, of Morocco, who retired in 2007. "It's very concerning for every one of the retirees I've talked to. It seems like the first place they always cut is on retirees."
Cupp, who worked as an hourly employee at the Chicago Ford Assembly Plant for 30 years, and other retirees said they are paying close attention to the U.S. economy, the domestic auto industry's downturn and General Motors, Ford and Chrysler's recent quest for government aid to stave off bankruptcy.
"I'm watching it on TV every day," said Tony Slusarczyk of Hammond, who retired last year at age 55 after 36 years as a United Auto Workers member at the Chicago Ford Assembly Plant. "I'm watching it more and more. All of us feel the same thing. You feel like you're in limbo, and there's nothing you can do about it."
(Excerpt) Read more at nwitimes.com ...
Leftists hate us because we point out that a 50-year-old can really keep working for a while longer, and that up until recently, the trade-off for extorting exorbitant benefits out of your employer was the real possibility that you would kill the goose that laid the golden egg.
But now it appears that we are supposed to feel bad for Jack, and when he kills the goose to get all the eggs at once we are supposed to give him OUR eggs.
Sorry, the world doesn’t, and shouldn’t, work that way.
When you are asking your employer for compensation, you really SHOULD take into account the fact that in a free market, your employer has to compete with other employers, and therefore not ask your employer to compensate you twice as much as other employers would.
Of course, the unions were a monopoly in the United States (which is one of the big problems, that we didn’t write the monopoly laws to include unions). So the unions thought they could drive up the costs for ALL the auto-makers, so that the only people who suffered were the American Consumer who paid too much for cars.
Let that sink in for a minute. This guy can retire to Morocco when he is 50 years old, and make more money than the average american makes WHILE THEY ARE WORKING 40 hours a week. And he could do so because for his entire life, his salary and benefits were paid for by overcharging Americans for cars.
And when Americans realised what was happening, the response was for the UAW to spend a decade convincing those americans that it was UNPATRIOTIC to not pay too much for their cars.
Nobody said it was unpatriotic for the autoworkers to steal our money for their rediculously over-priced benefits. No, WE were unpatriotic because we were not “buying american”.
Eventually, americans came to their senses, and now those big 3 automakers can’t compete. And yet we are supposed to feel bad NOT for the americans who paid to much for cars, NOT even for the workers at those plants right now who apparently see only about 60% of the money they make for the companies, while the non-workers siphon off over 40% of the money.
No, I’m supposed to feel bad that this guy living in Morroco might have his pension turned over to the federal government, where I WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR IT, but he won’t get any better pension that I do when I turn 67.
This guy is one year older than I am. If My employee gave me benefits twice what other companies in my field got, I would know that it was unsustainable.
Working as an union employee and as a active-duty servicemember does share at least this common ground - the unions have negotiated a defined benefit pension that is substantially similar in kind (even if not amount) to the military pension - and veterans have rioted over less (Bonus Army).
Instead of throwing stones at metesky, you should be thanking him for his service to our country.
Three points:
1. I misinterpreted metsky's comment; he has not served.
2. It is not "throwing stones" in a discussion to tie the issue to someone's personal experiences. There was no personal attack in the question.
3. As an active-duty servicemember, you can bet I'm not throwing stones.
metesky just said that since napscoordinator had been in the military for 21 years, naps should know that metesky has the right to express his opinion.
The way metesky said that did allow for some to think he was saying that HE Was in the military for 21 years.
IF I got this wrong, I'm sure I'll be corrected. I think I pinged all the people I needed to.
Obligations of the U.S. government are different than extorted future payouts by a private company. The law is clear that companies can cancel their pension benefits, and that the only promises that are contractual are the contributions made up to the time they cancel their benefits.
I hope nobody here is under the illusion that their company has to provide their promised retirement benefits. You are only entitled to the minimum set by the federal pension guarantee.
It is a good thing to remember, because it will keep you from asking your employer for so much that they are forced to change the rules later. Like the unions did to the auto companies.
Also, remember that no company that is bankrupt can afford to pay a pension. And that parts of your pension are paid for by the sweat of the workers who are still working.
That’s cool. Apparently we defined success as a race to the bottom. Ford’s not going to live up to the contracts? Tough darts. Should have been born with a trust fund, doncha know.
Thanks for your service to this great country.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand how defined-benefit pension plans work. Defined-benefit pension plans are supposed to be funded as you go, with only limited room for deferred funding. Ford was supposed to - and indeed did -set aside money to invest to pay retiree's pensions. This money doesn't belong to the corporation anymore - it is held in trust for the beneficiaries.
If Ford goes bankrupt, the pension survives. If Ford terminates their pension, only current employees legally will lose their benefits. The retirees may not get all they were promised if Ford can't afford to completely fund their liabilities, but Ford's creditors don't get a claim on the pension funds.
And that is the problem - Ford promised more than they saved up for. That's where the retirees are going to get hit. And it sucks for them, because they negotiated their labor agreements in good faith and lived up to their end of the bargain. It isn't the union's fault that Ford vehicles suck.
I respect that you work hard and think you deserve to give your opinion.
I didn’t mean anything negative to it. I guess I should have said I respect that you work hard and I definitely without reservation know you deserve to give you opinion. Seriously I did not mean anything snarky about my comment.
Hey, I'm 48-- can I stay at home while the rest of you send me a check and pay for all my medical care?
Thanks, I appreciate it./s
“I’m very much concerned,” said Charles Cupp, 50, of Morocco, who retired in 2007.
50 years old and retired? Yea, I would be concerned too. This guy could draw retirement longer than he worked at Ford.
That won't be a UAW retiree, that would quite likely be a non-union worker or management retiree whose pension is based on his base salary......
For example, the Chrysler UAW pension plan is currently paying approx. $50.25 per year of service. An employee retiring today with 30 years of service and age 62 or older would receive approx. $1507.00 per month from the UAW pension plan.
A 65 year old Chrysler UAW making $3000 per month would have had to have approx. 60 years of service.
"I'm very much concerned," said Charles Cupp, 50, of Morocco, who retired in 2007.
I just turned 50 and I have a good 12-15 years to go working as a Civil Engineer for the State of California before I expect to be able to retire.
The CNNMoney story last week feature a worried GM employee who retired at 52. I can't see how these UAW employees are all able to routinely retire at 50 to 52 years old and frankly, I am finding it very hard to muster any sympathy for these retirees. I don't wish them ill, but I'm too jealous of them to muster any sympathy. I am in a work crunch. Monday I worked from 8 am to 1:20 am the next morning. Tuesday I worked from 8 am to Midnight. Extra hours beyond 8 each day were worked for free. I did not charge the State any overtime for my work.
So excuse me if my own weakness in the form of jealous, makes me unable to muster any sympathy for these 50-year-old retirees while I continue to bust my ass. Never mind that from 18-24 they were making good money, while I was pouring money into the University system and racking up a nice Student Loan debt.
Don't take this personally Mr. Cupp, but frankly I don't give a damn if your grave train is coming to an end. I really don't. And I'm one of the LUCKY ones that is going to have a guaranteed government pension when I retire at 65. I feel deeply for all those who are getting the Golden Shaft for their retirement -- all those who's 201ks are heading to 101k territory.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand how defined-benefit pension plans work. Defined-benefit pension plans are supposed to be funded as you go, with only limited room for deferred funding. Ford was supposed to - and indeed did -set aside money to invest to pay retiree's pensions. This money doesn't belong to the corporation anymore - it is held in trust for the beneficiaries.
You are correct - to a point. Federal law requires corporations to put aside sufficient funds, when invested at a stated rate of return, that will satisfy the future value of the current cost of the pension obligations. Many of these funds have lost significant value during the recent financial melt down. Several state and municipal funds have claimed to be in this type of difficulty.
One area that your comment ignores is the cost of health care promised in these agreements. Federal law evidently doesn't require these obligations be funded in the same way as direct pension payments. As a dinosaur working for one of the last companies to offer a defined benefit pension plan, I have been told by my employer that health costs for retirees are paid from current earnings. I recall reading that one of or more of the Big Three were paying $1000 per vehicle cost in health care for retirees. As companies cut back, this is getting increasingly nasty.
Thank you for your true Christian insight. Since you made reference to your "Pastor" (note the correct spelling) then I will assume you are a Baptist.
I will keep your comment as well as your admission of your pastor's presumed compliance in mind as I attempt to find a religion that is not hypocritical to the teachings of bible.
Considering the Swaggerts, the Bakers, and now your own pastor, it is unlikely the Baptist faith is one that I am willing to embrace in my own search for faith.
While I was a little upset at your assumption that I am a RINO, at least it provided me with a means to ascertain what your religion is all about.
Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.