Anyone up for a bailout of union pensions?

[ArlJim78]

Oh yeah thats right. A bill is being introduced to do just that.
__________________________________________________ __

A Democratic senator is introducing legislation for a bailout of troubled union pension funds. If passed, the bill could put another $165 billion in liabilities on the shoulders of American taxpayers.
The bill, which would put the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation behind struggling pensions for union workers, is being introduced by Senator Bob Casey, (D-Pa.), who says it will save jobs and help people.

As FOX Business Network’s Gerri Willis reported Monday, these pensions are in bad shape; as of 2006, well before the market dropped and recession began, only 6% of these funds were doing well.

Although right now taxpayers could possibly be on the hook for $165 billion, the liability could essentially be unlimited because these pensions have to be paid out until the workers die.

It’s hard to say at the moment what the chances are that the bill will pass. A hearing is scheduled Thursday, which will give the public a sense of where political leaders sit on the topic, said Willis.

Just last week President Obama said there would be no more bailouts.
__________________________________________________ ________
Sorry, unions aren't too big to fail. Everyone could see that these plans were being mismanged for years. Like BP, they created this mess, they will pay to clean it up. No taking from the treasury for your lavish benefits while most taxpayers have no golden pensions to look forward to.

[boxcar]

I wonder how a pension bailout would save jobs???

Boxcar

[GaryG]

The Teamsters pension fund was what Jimmy Hoffa let the mob use to build Vegas. Some thanks he got....

[prospector]

unions are part of the reason this country is screwed up...don't save any union...ban them

[LottaKash]

Sure, why the hell not ?....

Obammy, tell your dudes to fire up those presses again, we need some more of that "out of thin air kash"....

best,

[mostpost]

You guys are worse than Pavlov's dogs. Every time you hear the word union, you start salivating. You obviously know nothing about the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation.
In the first place the PBGC already guarantees the pensions of 44 million Americans who are covered under company pension plans. This would add the pensions run by the unions to these guarantees.
Here is something else you are not well informed on. Read the following carefully. It is from the PBGC website. I have bolded the pertinent part.

Welcome To PBGC PBGC is a federal corporation created by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. It currently protects the pensions of more than 44 million American workers and retirees in more than 29,000 private single-employer and multiemployer defined benefit pension plans. PBGC receives no funds from general tax revenues. Operations are financed by insurance premiums set by Congress and paid by sponsors of defined benefit plans, investment income, assets from pension plans trusteed by PBGC, and recoveries from the companies formerly responsible for the plans

.

So, what Sen. Casey wants to do is provide union pension funds with the same service already provided to corporate pension funds. At no cost to the taxpayers.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by mostpost

You guys are worse than Pavlov's dogs. Every time you hear the word union, you start salivating. You obviously know nothing about the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation.
In the first place the PBGC already guarantees the pensions of 44 million Americans who are covered under company pension plans. This would add the pensions run by the unions to these guarantees.
Here is something else you are not well informed on. Read the following carefully. It is from the PBGC website. I have bolded the pertinent part.

.

So, what Sen. Casey wants to do is provide union pension funds with the same service already provided to corporate pension funds. At no cost to the taxpayers.

Wrong.......... ~~~!!! The new plan takes those pensions and makes them whole! The PBGC is only on the hook for as little as 25% of the pensions......depending on the total payout............

This new bailout would fund them totally.....from what I have heard on the radio. That is a huge difference.

The PBGC is on the hook for only $54,000 a year as of 2009, and many of the Union Pensions that are out there now.......are for much more.

From Wiki:
Maximum guaranteed benefit

The maximum pension benefit guaranteed by PBGC is set by law and adjusted yearly. For plans that end in 2009, workers who retire at age 65 can receive up to $4,500.00 per month (or $54,000 per year) under PBGC's insurance program for single-employer plans.[8]
Benefit payments starting at ages other than 65 are adjusted actuarially, which means the maximum guaranteed benefit is lower for those who retire early or when there is a benefit for a survivor. Likewise, the maximum guaranteed benefit is higher for those who retire after age 65. Additionally, the PBGC will not fully guarantee benefit improvements that were adopted within the five-year period prior to a plan's termination or benefits that are not payable over a retiree's lifetime.
For the multiemployer plans, the amount guaranteed is based on years of service. For plans that terminate after December 21, 2000, the PBGC insures 100 percent of the first $11 monthly payment per year of service and 75 percent of the next $33 monthly payment per year of service. For example, if a participant works 20 years in a plan that promises $19 per month per year of service, the PBGC guarantee would be $340 per month.[9]
Multiemployer plans that terminated after 1980 but before December 21, 2000, had a maximum guarantee limit of 100 percent of the first $5 of the monthly benefit accrual rate and 75 percent of the next $15.

[Tom]

At no cost to the taxpayers.

Oh man, and you buy that?
Wow.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Tom

Oh man, and you buy that?
Wow.

Did you read the information I provided from the PBGC website? Here it is again.

Welcome To PBGC PBGC is a federal corporation created by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. It currently protects the pensions of more than 44 million American workers and retirees in more than 29,000 private single-employer and multiemployer defined benefit pension plans. PBGC receives no funds from general tax revenues. Operations are financed by insurance premiums set by Congress and paid by sponsors of defined benefit plans, investment income, assets from pension plans trusteed by PBGC, and recoveries from the companies formerly responsible for the plans

That part about "PBGC receives no funds from general tax revenues" is still in there.

[Tom]

Oh man, and you buy that?
Wow.

[RaceBookJoe]

Originally Posted by Tom

Oh man, and you buy that?
Wow.

He buys it as fast as we should buy houses next door to him...in Fantasyland. rbj

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

This new bailout would fund them totally.....from what I have heard on the radio. That is a huge difference.

What you hear on the radio isn't always true. It is usually wrong. On the other hand I am unable to find the bill on line, so I can't absolutely say you are wrong.
My question would be; if you wish to "Bailout" union pension funds using taxpayer money why would you do so using a mechanism (PBGC) which does not use taxpayer funds?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by mostpost

What you hear on the radio isn't always true. It is usually wrong. On the other hand I am unable to find the bill on line, so I can't absolutely say you are wrong.
My question would be; if you wish to "Bailout" union pension funds using taxpayer money why would you do so using a mechanism (PBGC) which does not use taxpayer funds?

Maybe the "bailout" bill is going to change all that?

Boxcar

[delayjf]

Operations are financed by insurance premiums set by Congress and paid by sponsors of defined benefit plans, investment income, assets from pension plans trusteed by PBGC, and recoveries from the companies formerly responsible for the plans

Who would be the sponsors of City / State pensions? The Taxpayers perhaps?

[HUSKER55]

If the unions are already covered then why the act of congress for a bailout?


If it is not needed then it is just more greed.