Breaking News: Fourth Union Union Plan Gets MPRA Letter

On September 25, 2015 the Central States Pension Plan was the first multiemployer plan to apply to the Treasury Department to reduce benefits under the Multiemployer Pension Reform Act of 2014 (MPRA). On May 6, 2016 that application was denied.

March 15, 2016 – Road Carriers Local 707 Pension Fund also applied. June 24, 2016 – denied.

March 26, 2016 – Ironworkers Local 16 Pension Plan applied.  November 3, 2016 – denied

Yesterday the Teamsters Local 469 Pension Fund out of Hazlet, New Jersey which applied first on 12/28/15 but withdrew that application and refiled on 3/31/16 got their letter….

Denied….specifically on account of:

  1. zero-takeup assumption regarding spousal survivor benefits not being reasonable;
  2. 7.25% investment return assumptions over 45-year solvency projection period not being reasonable;and
  3. 5 other miscellaneous unreasonable assumptions.

Pertinent data from latest 5500 filing:

Plan Name: Teamsters Local 469 Pension Fund
EIN/PN: 22-6172237/001
Total participants @ 12/31/15: 1,762 including:
Retirees: 1,026
Separated but entitled to benefits: 586
Still working: 150

Asset Value (Market) @ 1/1/15: $121,130,134
Value of liabilities using RPA rate (3.51%) @ 1/1/15: $279,448,861 including:
Retirees: $165,400,516
Separated but entitled to benefits: $89,330,065
Still working: $24,718,280

Funded ratio: 43.35%
Unfunded Liabilities as of 1/1/15: $158,318,727

Asset Value (Market) as of 12/31/15: $113,946,473
Contributions: $3,970,391
Payouts: $14,436,899
Expenses: $1,085,950

9 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by skip3house on November 11, 2016 at 11:44 am

    Should be clear by now how to identify pension plans that are filled mostly with ‘hot air’ projections by ‘paid for’ Actuaries.

    Reply

  2. So dumb question but how will they be paid?

    Reply

    • Posted by skip3house on November 11, 2016 at 12:57 pm

      Logic says you must be aware of your system, Always understand you get only what is funded, not the actuary promises……

      Reply

      • Posted by dentss dunnigan on November 12, 2016 at 4:54 am

        Well said sir ,but logic is sometimes lost on those that “wants was was promised” …until it hits them in the face

        Reply

  3. Posted by George on November 11, 2016 at 12:53 pm

    Would they have been better off doing this 6m or a year ago so it might be an election issue? I was surprised Central States was not an issue in the election, or mentioned in the Why Hillary lost type postmortem (even though she came close to winning, and may even have an electoral vote deadlock now).

    In France I regularly see video of Truckers, farmers, and just about anyone else blocking traffic and protesting. Would the truckers be better off if they used more aggressive tactics?

    Reply

  4. Posted by Bpaterson on November 11, 2016 at 1:10 pm

    so what are all these denial letters saying? The plans are actually worse off than what they make their plans out to be?

    Reply

  5. […] are 11 applications listed with Teamsters Local 469 Pension Plan counted twice under withdrawn and […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: