A blog of things I find interesting. Mostly revolving around unions, workers rights, politics, and too much of my amateur photography. I am a Michigan labor union staffer, MSU alum,and a politics junkie.

Posts Tagged: pensions

Link

Link
1 year ago    |   Tags: postal service postal bill unions labor pensions government USPS NALC APWU NARLC mail politics  

NALC disappointed, but determined, as Senate passes S. 1789

“Keep your chin up; this fight is far from over,” Rolando says

Amendment to save door-to-door passes

April 25, 2012 — The United States Senate adopted a deeply flawed postal reform bill on Wednesday, voting for S. 1789, the 21st Century Postal Service Act, by a vote of 62 to 37.

The legislation embraces a downsizing strategy and fails to fully lift the onerous burden to fund decades of future retiree health benefits decades in advance. If it were to become law, it would be almost impossible to save Saturday mail delivery for the American people and their businesses.

The bill gives the postmaster general the authority to propose a switch to five-day delivery in two years—at a cost of 80,000 jobs—if he believes such a change is necessary to preserve the “solvency” of the Postal Service, subject to review by the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Although the bill reduced the level of required pre-funding, the cost of the mandate is still too heavy to allow the USPS to regain a sound financial footing.

“We’re disappointed, but we are determined to fight on,” NALC President Fredric Rolando said after the vote. He reminded letter carriers that the legislative process is far from over. “It may take months to get a bill through the House of Representatives,” he said, “but we will not rest in this struggle to defend a strong and viable Postal Service.”

Despite the truly regressive nature of the House Republican bill, H.R. 2309, the NALC’s top priorities—preserving six-day delivery and fixing the pension and health care funding provisions of the law—have a lot of bi-partisan support in the House. Indeed, a majority of representatives support both H. Res. 137 (regarding six-day service) and H.R. 1351 (regarding pension equity). President Rolando vowed a spirited campaign in the House. Once that body acts, the process will not be over. A conference committee would have to reconcile the competing bills, and President Obama would be able to weigh in on the legislation—since a final bill that passed both houses would not become law unless he signed it.

“I want to thank the thousands of letter carriers who joined together to lobby the Senate this week,” Rolando said. “We flooded the Senate this week with tens of thousands of calls and other contacts. We did not prevail in striking the five-day delivery provision or the regressively unfair FECA cuts in S. 1789, but we did protect tens of thousands of letter carrier jobs by winning the adoption of the door-to-door delivery amendment sponsored by Senator Chuck Schumer [D-NY]. We also removed an anti-FEHBP health care proposal thanks to an amendment from Senator Jay Rockefeller [D-WV].

“We thank both of those senators as well as Senators Udall of New Mexico and Akaka of Hawaii for leading the fight on all our amendments. Thanks also go to Senator Bernie Sanders [D-VT] for his months of relentless work to support the Postal Service and its workers.

“Last, but not least, I want to thank the staff of our Legislative and Political Affairs Department who worked ’round the clock for the members. We are grateful for all their hard work.”

“Keep your chins up, brothers and sisters,” Rolando concluded. “This fight to save America’s Postal Service is far from over.”

Link

Link
1 year ago    |   Tags: union labor workers airlines american airlines pensions bankruptcy bullshit  

Union Pensions Under the Knife

American Airlines has used bankruptcy to bludgeon its unions into accepting a freeze on pensions.

The airline will stop contributing to the pension funds for ground crews, ticket agents and flight attendants. Ironically, the freeze won’t apply to pilots because their pension plan includes a lump-sum payment upon retirement, and the company is afraid that too many pilots would take the chance to retire.

American was threatening to ask a bankruptcy judge to cancel the pension plans entirely. That would have meant that some workers would lose pension benefits. The unions were afraid to take a chance on the judge.

The entire bankruptcy system is stacked against workers and unions. It is designed to favor creditors at the expense of workers’ wages and pensions. Bankruptcy is increasingly being used to make companies more profitable by slashing wages and pensions.

Decisions are made by bankruptcy judges who typically come from large corporate law firms. Sean Lane, the bankruptcy judge in the American Airlines case, was a partner in the firm of Baker Hostetler, whose clients include companies like ExxonMobil, IBM, Morgan Stanley and ABC. Later, he was a top federal prosecutor, an assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.

Another company, Hostess Brands, is also using bankruptcy court to threaten to void its contracts with the Teamsters and other unions. The Teamsters has countered with an offer to take $150 million in concessions, which would include the suspension of pension payments for a year. These givebacks would follow some $110 million in concessions made three years ago.

The United Auto Workers has urged Congress to reform the bankruptcy laws to stop companies from using it against workers. Unfortunately, the labor movement hasn’t made this a political priority. And the chances that President Barack Obama or the Democrats in Congress will fight for it are approximately those of a snowball in hell.

The American Airlines pensions freeze is only the latest development in the ongoing attack on workers’ pensions—especially public employee pensions. Since 2008, 43 states have reduced pension benefits for new public-sector employees, according to a report by the National Conference of State Legislatures. Public workers are especially dependant on their pensions because 25 percent of them are not eligible for Social Security.

New Jersey and New York have become the latest states to cut their workers’ pensions. Both were truly bipartisan efforts. In New Jersey, a right-wing Republican governor cooperated with some Democratic legislators. In New York, a liberal Democratic governor proposed pension cuts that were passed by both the Democratic State Assembly and Republican State Senate.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a rising star in the national Republican Party, is trying to blame public employees for the state’s deficit. But he needed Democratic votes to cut the pensions.

Their deal will eliminate cost-of-living adjustments entirely. New workers will have to work longer to earn smaller pensions, and all public employees will have to pay more into their pension fund.

The CWA, one of the largest public employees unions in New Jersey, attacked the pension cuts. Its political director, Bob Master, told the Wall Street Journal, “This is an outrageous attack on the collective bargaining rights of New Jersey’s public workers and their standard of living. Nowhere else in the country have Democrats turned their backs on working people.”

Unfortunately, Masters didn’t need to look any further than neighboring New York to see Democrats doing just that. Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who reportedly wants to run for president, forced through a plan that will create a lower pension level for new hires in the public sector.

Cuomo’s deal will also raise the retirement age. Workers who retire early will collect pensions that are 6.5 percent lower per year because most overtime won’t count toward their pensions. All government workers will have to pay more into their retirement plans. Municipal as well as state workers will have their pensions cut.

Union leaders who backed Cuomo when he ran for governor in 2010 reacted with shock and outrage. Lillian Roberts, executive director of AFSCME District Council 37, the largest New York City union, released a statement saying, in part, that it was “a sneaky way to privatize the state and city pension systems—modeled on George W. Bush’s defeated plan to privatize Social Security. It would funnel huge profits to the bankers who sent our economy into recession and leave retirees at the mercy of the stock market.”

Danny Donohue, president of the Civil Service Employees Association, the largest union of state employees, issued a press release stating that, “This deal is about politicians standing with the 1 percent—the wealthiest New Yorkers—to give them a better break while telling nurses, bus drivers, teachers, secretaries and laborers to put up and shut up.”

But by November, these same union leaders will be back endorsing Democratic politicians. They will say that they have no choice because the Republicans are even worse. In the real world, this means it’s better to have Cuomo cut your pension than a Republican do the job.

Unions could change all this by running their own independent candidates. Democrats would think twice about attacking labor because they might actually be voted out. At the very least, they would face losing the unions’ endorsement and their contributions.

Independent labor candidates would dramatically transform the whole political spectrum. Suddenly, there would be candidates for the 99 percent, saying tax the rich to pay for jobs, education and public services. There could be a coalition of the dispossessed—everyone from Occupy Wall Street, to tenants, to African Americans, Latinos and Asian Americans.

Labor has a simple choice. If they keep supporting Democrats, there will be more cuts in wages and pensions for public employees. The cuts to social services will become even more severe. If labor dares to run its own candidates, a whole new political world is possible.

By
Sandy Boyer
April 17, 2012

This article was originally published by Socialist Worker.

Link

Link
1 year ago    |   Tags: Teachers workers unions labor Detroit Pensions Health Care Benefits GOP republicans anti worker  

The Detroit News: Teachers decry changes to pension, retirement health care plans

Lansing — Steve Goff has taught high school history in a rural Midland County school district for 18 years since spending 10 years in the U.S. Army.

To make up for those lost years in his teaching career, Goff bought 10 years of credit in the public school employee pension system with plans of retiring in summer 2014 at age 54.

But Goff said he might have to work another six years at the Meridian School District if state lawmakers approve legislation overhauling the retirement system and requiring school and community college employees to be 60 to qualify for retiree health care. The father of five said the legislation disrupts his and his wife’s retirement plans.

“It fundamentally alters our plans, our hopes and our dreams,” Goff said during a Senate committee hearing Wednesday that drew dozens of public school and community college educators and retirees who decried sweeping changes to their pension and retirement health care plans as unfair.

Facing a $45.2 billion unfunded liability in the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System, GOP lawmakers are hoping to fast-track the bill this spring to Gov. Rick Snyder’s desk to relieve rising retirement costs for school districts and community colleges.

The legislation is a priority for Snyder and GOP legislative leaders, the governor’s spokeswoman Geralyn Lasher said. Senate Bill 1040 would impose higher pension contributions on most employees hired before 2010. Critics say the bill upends retirement plans for employees in their late 40s and 50s whose combined years of service and age would have to equal 85 for them to qualify for health insurance.

“I’m potentially three years from retirement and now I’m looking at another 14,” said Terri List, an English teacher in Saginaw Township Community Schools who also bought several years of credit to speed up her retirement. “I understand times are tough and we all need to tighten our belts a bit, but we don’t need to use the tourniquet.”

The bill also would require retirees to pay 20 percent of their health care premiums — mirroring new co-pays the Legislature imposed on public sector employees last year. Under the bill, most educators, administrators and support staff hired between 1990 and 2010 would see their pension contribution rise to 8 percent of annual salary, up from between 3 percent and 6.4 percent, depending on when they were hired and their salary.

About 30,000 employees hired before 1990 who contribute nothing to their pension would have to begin paying 5 percent per year into MPSERS. The bill allows employees to opt out of the higher payments by accepting a lower pension calculation, moving to a 401(k)-style retirement plan for their remaining years of service or freezing their pension.

Gary Olson, former director of the nonpartisan Senate Fiscal Agency, questioned the constitutionality of changing pension contribution rates for existing employees. When the lawmakers overhauled the retirement system for state employees in 1997, the Attorney General’s Office said they could not alter promised pension benefits for existing employees, Olson said.

Olson, a consultant, was hired by a coalition of employee labor unions to study the legislation.

Mary Reynolds, finance director of Farmington Public Schools, said the bill is a welcome financial relief for cash-strapped school districts. Her district faces a $3.5 million increase in pension and retirement contributions for employees next school year.

The Senate Appropriations retirement subcommittee has scheduled a second hearing April 18 on the bill. State Sen. Roger Kahn, R-Saginaw, who sponsored the bill, said he expects the Senate will pass a version of the bill by the end of the month.

clivengood@detnews.com

(517) 371-3660

Detroit News Staff Writer Karen Bouffard contributed.


From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120412/METRO/204120384#ixzz1rr0tJ4di