Bailout Committee To Hear Current Workers and Retirees

The Joint Select Committee on the Solvency of Multiemployer Pension Plans (Bailout Committee) just announced they will convene a hearing this Friday (July 13) in Columbus, Ohio to get an “understanding [of] what’s at stake for current workers and retirees.”

The witnesses:

  • Ms. Roberta Dell, Chief Union Steward, Spangler Candy Company, Bryan, OH
  • Mr. David A. Gardner, Chief Executive Officer, Alfred Nickles Bakery Inc., Navarre, OH
  • Mr. Bill Martin, President, Spangler Candy Company, Bryan, OH
  • Mr. Brian Slone, Apprentice Instructor, Millwright Local 1090, Dayton, OH
  • Mr. Mike Walden, President, National United Committee to Protect Pensions, Cuyahoga Falls, OH
  • Mr. Larry Ward, Retired Coal Miner and Former President of United Mine Workers of America, District 6, Hopedale, OH

42 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Tough Love on July 10, 2018 at 5:28 pm

    What a one-sided circus to justify the unjustifiable.

    Taxpayers had NOTHING to do with these Plans, and no taxpayer funds should be used to bail them out.

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on July 10, 2018 at 9:04 pm

      And start fixing your own roads basically say goodbye to all public services since you don’t want to pay for them

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on July 10, 2018 at 9:35 pm

        Sure we do ………….. but no more (in pay, in pension/401K, and in benefits) than what the job would pay in the Private Sector.

        Reply

        • Posted by PS Drone on July 11, 2018 at 11:47 am

          There are very few “public” services that could not be done better and cheaper by well managed private enterprise. Once again we can thank public sector unions and their captive crooked politicians (who are empire builders/maintainers) for that. I cannot fathom the $ that decades of such cronyism has cost the private sector taxpayer.

          Reply

          • Posted by El gaupo on July 11, 2018 at 2:21 pm

            You mean like the N.J. MVC and the lottery just to name 2 of the top of my head. How about prisons for profit?? And this is cmon from a tough on crime police officer.

      • Posted by NJ2AZ on July 11, 2018 at 12:07 am

        i want to pay for public services

        i don’t want to also pick up the tab for services received by the previous generation that they did not pay for

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on July 11, 2018 at 7:25 am

          or paying for a supervisor and 3 additional guys to fix a pothole when all that was really “needed” was a crew of 2.

          Reply

      • Posted by SeeSaw Jr on July 11, 2018 at 5:17 am

        “…basically say goodbye to all public services since you don’t want to pay for them.”
        I think the more accurate statement is the public does not want t $1.00 in taxes for .10 cents of public employee “services”. In other words we don’t won’t to keep getting ripped off by the pubic sector, who have taken the country to the cleaners….

        Reply

      • Posted by bruce paterson on July 11, 2018 at 1:00 pm

        i thought heavy construction and paving contractors were hired to fix our roads?

        Reply

  2. Posted by A watcher on July 10, 2018 at 11:12 pm

    Tough Love, you are sadly mistaken. These pensioners ARE TAXPAYERS, AND EVEN THEIR PENSIONS ARE TAXED. Their jobs were taxed.
    You don’t get it. These older Americans did not have 401ks or other forms of investments. They didn’t have access to the ticker tapes, in the market.
    Obviously you are young, or you are a Millennial. Private Sector? Seriously? These people were dock workers, truck drivers, and factory workers, miners, steel workers, and construction workers.
    Private Sector?
    They were blue collar workers, and most worked twice as many hours as most people would.
    Private Sector? What are you some CEO that pays people minimum wage or what? Sorry, but you sound almost childish…..or…..bitter. Like you are jealous people had opportunities you are not getting.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on July 11, 2018 at 7:38 am

      Quoting …………

      “These pensioners ARE TAXPAYERS, AND EVEN THEIR PENSIONS ARE TAXED. ”

      So what ? Did the Taxpayers have ANYTHING to do with the pension terms, of funding with was EXCLUSIVELY a contractual arrangement between the Unions and the participating companies ?

      I’ll answer that for you …………….. NO. So Why should taxpayers fund a “bailout” ?

      Would you like it if your neighbor stopped by, stated that he/she couldn’t afford to keep paying for their mortgage, and insisted that YOU make the future payments?

      Reply

      • Posted by A watcher on July 11, 2018 at 1:02 pm

        Uh, I believe that already happened, except the “neighbors” were the Wall Street Banks. I have a question for you. How old are the people you are talking about? What is the average age of a participant in Central States? We are talking loans. Now if the same corrupt people manage it, and the same corrupt actuaries, and I hate to point fingers, but obviously there is more to this math and even honest actuaries know it.
        Now, we are talking billions of dollars that everyone has their hands on and have for years, We are talking about one fund that the Federal Government gave to Wall Street to manage, but you probably don’t even have a clue about that. So, you believe the numbers don’t lie?
        Yeah, tell that to the idiots who bundled bad mortages and sold them as good. They lied. They lied and they were given loans. Sorry, but you don’t have the research to understand the bigger picture, and there is most definitely one here you know nothing about.
        321 billion in fines paid from these banks for fines from 2008 would most certainly help these funds, and not come from “taxpayer” money, but no one talks about what the Government uses that money for, now do they?

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on July 11, 2018 at 4:02 pm

          Quoting …………… “We are talking loans.”

          Oh please. BROKE organizations don’t repay loans, especially when there is ZERO collateral, and zero consequences for non-repayment.

          Reply

      • Posted by bruce paterson on July 11, 2018 at 1:04 pm

        TL-show a little empathy at least, please. I look at govt as the final fallback of issues that are beyond our personal control. But yes this fallback would come at some price.

        Reply

        • Way, way off topic…

          (But, speaking of empathy.)

          Huge thanks to all the cave divers, especially Saman Kunan, who gave it all.

          Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on July 11, 2018 at 4:06 pm

          Open the “door” here, and the soon-to-be-broke” Public Sector pension Plans will be lining up for a ME-TOO bailout.

          Reply

          • Posted by El gaupo on July 11, 2018 at 6:36 pm

            TL. Enlighten me please. When exactly will the PRFS system. Whoops. No need to say system. Like atm machine. Lol.
            When is the Pfrs going to go broke exactly? We have over $26 billion in assets.
            I agree with what the saying it just seems that everyone from folks w shore houses to failing auto industries get bailed out.

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 11, 2018 at 8:07 pm

            Yup $26 Billion in “assets”, and when PROPERLY VALUED, about $50 in accrued “liabilities” ….. that cash that should ALREADY be in-hand now.

            Sure, keep buying the BS from your Union (woophs …”association”).

          • Posted by El gaupo on July 12, 2018 at 1:50 pm

            Still didn’t answer my question. Again!! Just like the “vote” question u didn’t answer until pressed. You stated that the pensions were “soon to be broke” (back to the quotes) I assume u also mean Pfrs. Please. Tell me when the fund will go broke. (Direct—no quotes needed for the word broke). Anything other than a narrow date range with a factual reason why you beleive that to be the case, shows me that you have absolutely no idea if and when Pfrs will go broke.

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 12, 2018 at 3:25 pm

            Remember what happens when you ….”assume”?

            To many current unknowns to predict (with reasonably probability) when the PFRS will go bust, but your stated PRFS survival to 2055 is EXTREMELY optimistic.

      • Maybe partly because of the sheer number of “victims”, through no fault of their own.

        The taxpayers didn’t cause this crisis either…

        House passes $7.85 billion aid package for Hurricane Harvey victims
        By Marisa Schultz September 6, 2017

        Reply

        • Posted by El gaupo on July 11, 2018 at 2:29 pm

          Yes. But all the red state folks didn’t vote for Suoerstorm Sandy Aid. Some then had the balls to ask for handouts of their own. Gov Haley Barbour comes to mind. Hates the federal govt until his state gets swamped by a hurricane and he has no money to fix anything.
          Then again with fat ass Christie giving Dems in northern N.J. storm money to rebuild senior centers miles away from storm and no damage in order to gain votes, maybe they were on to something.
          Three men sit down to share a pizza pie. A ceo, a union worker, and a non union worker. The ceo takes 7 slices then turns to the non union worker and says “watch out, he’s taking your pizza”.
          The pensioners are the union folks and the public is the non union folks being told by the owners that they are getting their pizza taken. Even though the union folks paid for it.

          Reply

          • Posted by Stanley on July 11, 2018 at 5:46 pm

            Senor Gaupo Uno: “The pensioners are the union folks and the public is the non union folks being told by the owners that they are getting their pizza taken. Even though the union folks paid for it.”

            LAME!

          • Posted by El gaupo on July 11, 2018 at 6:40 pm

            Maybe. I wonder how hard you fight as a retiree, if they came after your SS and Medicare??
            You only feel that way you do cause you don’t get the benifits I do. I’m sure you doing just as well, just compensated differently. Talk about a bill of goods.
            Like the farmers who all voted trump, then cried when he raised tariffs that hurt them. I know the feeling

          • Posted by Stanley on July 11, 2018 at 10:30 pm

            Senor Gaupo Uno: “I wonder how hard you fight as a retiree, if they came after your SS and Medicare??
            You only feel that way you do cause you don’t get the benifits I do.”

            Sorry, I believe that some reductions are in order. It is very unfortunate but I believe that reality will be imposing most of the reductions as the public face disappearing home equity, failing equity and fixed instrument markets and a failing currency (failing currencies world wide). Sennholz used to write that when you live beyond your means today, you will live beneath them tomorrow.

          • Posted by El gaupo on July 12, 2018 at 1:53 pm

            I can’t argue with a man who truly believes he should have his own SS and Medicare cut. Bravo. You are in the minority and I can’t condemn you for that. Even TL can’t/wouldn’t agree to that in any universe. Full disclosure—I might not either. Lol.
            Kudos too you sir.

  3. What’s at state for other workers, the ones who won’t even get a pension and whose Social Security is scheduled to be cut by 30 percent? Do they count?

    No. Including younger unionized workers on the wrong side of “screw the newbie, flee to Florida” deals.

    The executive/financial class, the political/union class, and the serfs.

    Reply

  4. Never say never, but it looks like it’s almost a done deal, not “if”, but “when and how much”.

    Joint Committee on Solvency of Multiemployer Pension Plans

    Employer statements.

    Do you believe that there will be negative impacts on the economy if we stick with the status quo and do nothing to help the declining multi-employer plans?
    Yes.
    Yes.
    Yes.
    Yes.

    Do you support the concept of a loan program for critical and declining multi-employer plans?

    Employers…
    Yes.
    Yes.
    Yes.
    Not without structural changes.

    https://burypensions.wordpress.com/2018/06/13/bailout-committee-hearing-employers/

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on July 11, 2018 at 4:14 pm

      Too bad the Taxpayers can’t jam material pension reductions down the Public Sector Union/workers throats just like Congress is going to jam a MEP bailout down the taxpayer’s throats.

      Reply

      • Posted by Stanley on July 11, 2018 at 6:07 pm

        “…just like Congress is going to jam a MEP bailout down the taxpayer’s throats.”

        This is more of a regional issue although a huge festering tar baby. How can the government bail out MEP plans without underwriting all of the troubled pension plans? The Butch Lewis Act is retroactive for all of the MEP plans that have put reductions under Kline-Miller in to operation. And public employee pensions? And defined benefit pensions go to a minority; what about cash for those folks who don’t get a pension? And what about younger people taking it in the shorts? The whole mess is just plain crazy and as unpleasant as it is, the best solution is for individuals involved to make whatever adjustments to their own spending that is necessary to balance their books. Even Cnut the Great knew that he couldn’t hold back the tide.

        Reply

    • Posted by Stephen Douglas on July 11, 2018 at 5:20 pm

      “Not without structural changes.”

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on July 11, 2018 at 5:40 pm

        The “structural change” we need ARE material Public Sector pension reductions.

        Reply

        • Posted by El gaupo on July 11, 2018 at 6:41 pm

          Your “opinion”.
          Do something about it and run for office.

          Reply

        • Steve Adubato / Tom Keane

          “But won’t you be hurting public employees who are not overpaid as it is?”

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 11, 2018 at 8:12 pm

            Adubato said that, not Kean.

          • And it was Tom Kean who said “We can find common ground here.”

            We have already agreed that there are some public employees who are not overpaid. “Common ground” is… not hurting those employees.

            That’s one step

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 12, 2018 at 8:25 am

            Agreed SD/EARTH, “some” Public Sector workers are not overpaid and not even over-compensated, but when the Total Compensation (including pay, pensions, and benefits) PLUSES & MINUSES for ALL Public Sector workers are added up, there is a huge PUBLIC Sector Total Compensation ADVANTAGE ………. amounting to 23% of pay in both our home STates of CA and NJ.

            That needs to END………… and not just for new workers, but for all CURRENT workers.

          • Posted by Stephen Douglas on July 12, 2018 at 10:50 am

            “some” Public Sector workers are not overpaid and not even over-compensated,…”

            Step one, do not hurt those public employees who are not overpaid as it is.”

            Primum non nocere.

            Given an existing problem, it may be better not to do something, or even to do nothing, than to risk causing more harm than good.

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 12, 2018 at 1:19 pm

            Quoting ……………

            “Step one, do not hurt those public employees who are not overpaid as it is.”

            I have no problem with that, but I have a BIG problem compensating lower (many middle, and some high … such as Police) income PublicSector workers MORE than they would get in a comparable Private Sector job ……. of if not directly comparable (such as in the case of Police) a job requiring reasonably comparable experience, education, skills, and knowledge.

          • We seem to keep coming full circle.

            Tough Love on February 9, 2018

            “Well, as Taxpayer I see no justification for paying the Public Sector workers even in the lowest skilled job more in Total Compensation (the split by pay, pensions, benefits not really being material) than what that compensation would be if doing the SAME job in the Private Sector.”
            —————————————————–
            Well, there you go! Back on the same page. Reduce the compensation of all those public workers who now earn more than their private sector equivalents, till they are roughly equal. Your alleged 23%-of-pay ADVANTAGE is gone. It’s tautological.
            —————————————————-
            TL…
            “I DON’T CARE how it’s accomplished …..
            You can get there (in CA and NJ) by decreasing everyone’s compensation by 23% of pay, or more/less by individual or group however you please ….as long as the NET IMPACT is to eliminate the 23% of pay Public Sector Total Compensation ADVANTAGE.”
            —————————————————
            No, you cannot. We have already agreed to step one… “do not hurt those public employees who are not overpaid as it is.”
            To get EQUAL, you have to reduce compensation only for those who are actually overpaid.
            —————————————————-
            TL…
            (the split by pay, pensions, benefits not really being material)
            —————————————————–
            Of course it’s material. The entire compensation advantage at the lowest levels is in the pension and benefits. You couldn’t cut there wages back enough without violating the minimum wage laws.

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 12, 2018 at 8:45 pm

            SD/EARTH …………….

            If the comparable Private Sector worker typically doesn’t get a pension or retiree healthcare benefits, neither should the Public Sector worker.

            Clear enough ?

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: