Brothers and Sisters,
I have been talking to members about the next move by the company that would net them $100 million. Most have no clue about this major give back in SERVICES RENDERED (what they call "unfunded Liability"). The company signed off on this as well as the union in good faith back in 2003; now they have buyer’s remorse and want to cut their way out of their part in all this. Although this "bit" of news should have been put out in the news as part of every "press release" that has been put out; to inform the general public that the union "is not" to blame for the predicament of this company (which was made up), and the massive spending of our pension funds on projects that are liabilities and not assets.
In some of these conversations with various members and leaders of our group, I asked them this question, "what category is the company going after in order to collect $100 million?" Everyone did not know, so I told them, "Death Benefit, or better yet Survival Benefits." The Gaba decision that "we" lost, the company claimed "unsustainability" and won, they will attempt to use that again in the next arbitration (which I think will happen), based solely on Survival Benefits and they "will win" on this category alone. Just like in the last go around, I said that we would lose and we did. Now you can throw in the ERB decision as another lost.
If we don't change the Survival benefit in any way "we will lose." In their proposal, they would reduce "everyone’s" Survival Benefit (those who retire after the arbitration), to just 1 year (which will net them a lot of money). This is not fair for those who have worked for years and expected to get what they were promised back in 2003. My suggestions is that we "Grandfather" members that were hired before the official expiration of the old contract from 2009 and reduce the Benefit thereafter to 2-5 years, thus making it hard for the next Arbitrator to side with the company.
I have been talking to members about the next move by the company that would net them $100 million. Most have no clue about this major give back in SERVICES RENDERED (what they call "unfunded Liability"). The company signed off on this as well as the union in good faith back in 2003; now they have buyer’s remorse and want to cut their way out of their part in all this. Although this "bit" of news should have been put out in the news as part of every "press release" that has been put out; to inform the general public that the union "is not" to blame for the predicament of this company (which was made up), and the massive spending of our pension funds on projects that are liabilities and not assets.
In some of these conversations with various members and leaders of our group, I asked them this question, "what category is the company going after in order to collect $100 million?" Everyone did not know, so I told them, "Death Benefit, or better yet Survival Benefits." The Gaba decision that "we" lost, the company claimed "unsustainability" and won, they will attempt to use that again in the next arbitration (which I think will happen), based solely on Survival Benefits and they "will win" on this category alone. Just like in the last go around, I said that we would lose and we did. Now you can throw in the ERB decision as another lost.
If we don't change the Survival benefit in any way "we will lose." In their proposal, they would reduce "everyone’s" Survival Benefit (those who retire after the arbitration), to just 1 year (which will net them a lot of money). This is not fair for those who have worked for years and expected to get what they were promised back in 2003. My suggestions is that we "Grandfather" members that were hired before the official expiration of the old contract from 2009 and reduce the Benefit thereafter to 2-5 years, thus making it hard for the next Arbitrator to side with the company.
Lastly, I put an attachment from Section 9 of "their" proposal,
spelling out where they are getting the $100 million from. Plus,
something that we should remember, they are overreaching this time, if
they win, we will lose; BIG TIME.
More to come in part II
I do not support this commentary, people that are retiring now and who have retired before and after Gabba's last decision deserve the retirement package that was promised at the time they retired. The fact that the scum that rule trimet think they can go back and time and rip up those contracts is an abomination. The ruthless Trimet management who makes such a big deal out of 'contracts' like the one with Clackamas county put forth the argument that once a contact is entered it must be followed. Apparently that only applies to contracts involving construction and money not people. This company cannot be allowed to continually destroy the benefits of the people that have recently retired. We have gone out with a 'contract' although the greedy executives believe that all the contracts they have with their employees should be thrown in the trash, they need to come up with a better plan.
Meanwhile Fred Hansen continues pulling in his pornographic pension of just under $17,000 a month, Mcfarlane is stuffing his cronies wallets, contractors as well as all his old pals he has brought back while whining about union employee costs. The man is robbing the bank while pointing at the guy sweeping the bank floor and the public is lost in distractions
I do not support throwing the current retirees under the bus
SECTION 9 HEALTH AND WELFARE BENEFITS HERE!
No comments:
Post a Comment