Retirement Blog

Finance Blogs » Retirement Blog » Should union pensions be cut?

Should union pensions be cut?

By Jennie L. Phipps ·
Friday, June 6, 2014
Posted: 4 pm ET

Congress is expected soon to consider the recommendations of a coalition of unions, pension administrators and employers supporting tough measures to save its pensions. The National Coordinating Committee on Multiemployer Plans, or NCCMP, offers several solutions to the problem of pension underfunding in its report, "Solutions not bailouts."

One of its solutions calls for drastic cuts to the benefits of current as well as future recipients.

"Find a better solution," says Karen Ferguson, director of the nonprofit Pension Rights Center. She calls the suggested cuts "draconian. ... They are saying to older people with no other resources -- many barely making it already -- 'We’re going to break the promise that you would have a secure lifetime income.' It's unconscionable."

Multiemployer pension plans require companies that employ union workers in a particular industry to contribute to the retirement plans at levels negotiated through union bargaining. When employees retire, they receive benefits from the pooled contributions. Many of the 1,510 active multiemployer old-fashioned, defined benefit pension plans covering about 10 million participants are in good shape. But some of them -- notably, some of the largest -- are deeply troubled. The Pension Rights Center estimates that 150 to 200 plans covering 1.5 million workers could run out of money in the next 20 years, according to information from the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, or PBGC, the quasi-government organization that guarantees private pensions.

One pension fund facing eventual bankruptcy

The Teamsters' Central States Pension Fund is one of the largest multiemployer plans -- and one of the least solvent. The plan covers 212,000 retirees and about 65,000 current workers, and it reportedly has liabilities that are nearly double its assets. If nothing is done, Central States' Executive Director Tom Nyhan told Congress in 2010 that the fund will be bankrupt in "10 to 15 years," a retirement planning disaster.

One solution crafted by NCCMP would cut average current pensions by at least two-thirds, Ferguson says. Her organization has posted two online calculators, and she is urging union members and their families to plug in what they currently are receiving or expect in pension benefits and see what the proposal would do to that number. A second calculator shows what would happen if the PBGC took over. Note that the PBGC guarantees multiemployer pensions at a much lower level than it guarantees single-employer pension plans.

How retiree pensions may look after cutbacks

Monthly Annual
Typical Teamster pension $3,000.00 $36,000.00
Pension after NCCMP* cutbacks $983.13 $11,797.50
Pension if PBGC** takes over $893.75 $10,725.00

*NCCMP = National Coordinating Committee on Multiemployer Plans

**PBGC = Pension Benefits Guaranty Corporation

Source: Pension Rights Center. Calculations assume 25-year work history.

Ferguson's organization supports other changes to the plans to improve their financial stability, including thoroughly analyzing each plan to evaluate exactly how insolvent it is and what can be done to fix that plan specifically. She's in favor of allowing more mergers among plans to cut administrative costs, and also advocates getting rid of the "13th" bonus check, an extra check that retirees get at the end of a year if the pension fund performed better than expected. They date from the time when these plans were overfunded and in some cases are still mandated.

The Pension Rights Center also suggests finding new ways to raise money, including increasing the PBGC's employer premiums and, perhaps, spending tax dollars. In its report, the center writes: "Plans are facing funding stresses in large measure because of the actions of financial institutions that caused the recession. Our country infused money into those institutions. Should consideration be given to assisting troubled pension plans that are facing problems not of their own making?"

Says Ferguson, "These are problems that can be solved over the long term. There are lots of ways to go, but cutting benefits to the already retired shouldn't be one of them."

What do you think? Is it fair to cut pensioners' benefits after they've already begun receiving them?

Read more about multiemployer plans.

Bankrate wants to hear from you and encourages comments. We ask that you stay on topic, respect other people's opinions, and avoid profanity, offensive statements, and illegal content. Please keep in mind that we reserve the right to (but are not obligated to) edit or delete your comments. Please avoid posting private or confidential information, and also keep in mind that anything you post may be disclosed, published, transmitted or reused.

By submitting a post, you agree to be bound by Bankrate's terms of use. Please refer to Bankrate's privacy policy for more information regarding Bankrate's privacy practices.
Darnell Stage
April 20, 2015 at 11:27 pm

This is SO wrong! We worked many years for this pension. It is ours, not the governments! Let's cut Washington's fat cat's salaries. The majority of them do not work as hard as most of us have worked for our pensions. We do not believe there are not other places to cut! How about welfare? Half of them never worked a day in their lives! Why are we sending money to other countries when we can't honor the contracts made to our own people! Why are we bringing illegals in when we can't take care of our own people?

Mike Sobaszko
February 27, 2015 at 1:04 pm

Its a shame that our government has no issues with giving money to other countries to help them with their problems. Or giving Social Security Disability money to people whose problems stem from their abuse of drugs or alcohol or just plain not taking care of themselves. But when it comes to hard working citizens that have worked all of their lives and have paid their own way thru life - the financial burdens of losing a pension isn't a priority!

Lawrence Bauknecht
February 19, 2015 at 11:52 am

It is unbelievable that Washington Would turn it's back on Hard working people who had planned for their retirement. Why is it they can not help to keep this from happening. Washington didn't have a problem giving billions to bail out banks that failed because of pure greed. Now the people that worked all their lives contributing into a pension plan stand to lose everything because of government policy's that work against unions and the people.

Dan Merten
February 04, 2015 at 10:34 pm

It's clearly unfair to current workers who are contributing far larger sums to the plan then current retires to see their benefis being reduced while current retires see no reduction to their benefits. Both current workers and their employers are being hurt by the current environment.

Ralph Jones
January 19, 2015 at 4:26 pm

My company paid the full amount for 29 years and i get 2300.00 & 2000 after taxes if they cut that i will probably be on food stamps and probably loose my home. I paid my dews for that pension worked every shift their was in all kinds of weather loaded tires everyday for 5 years.We paid into it and we should have the right to draw the amount we suppose to get.Where did the money go that i paid in for it.It should be there for us.

wife if a oensioner
January 15, 2015 at 5:43 pm

My husband worked 31yrs on the dock in every kind of weather, on any crazy shift hours, to earn his pension. We are one of the unfortunate families that have already been hit with a cut of 1100.00 a month that happened in 2012. If we are hit again, we will be crushed. We are barely making it as it is. They should have cut smaller amount from everyone at that time and maybe everyone wouldnt face such a large cut now. My husband deserves his pension as much as anyone and probably mire so than some. No one cared when we were going through it, but now that it affects all, its a problem. It wont be fair to us to be cut again, but nothing is fair, obviously!

tom streyle
January 12, 2015 at 10:22 am

I'm a Western Pennsylvania Teamster with 37 years working for Roadway Express. Everyone knows the demands that Roadway Express put upon us, but I always thought that someday when I retired I'd finally enjoy life with a solid pension. Now being retired and on a fixed income, I,m faced with all the rising health costs, the increased taxes, utilities and life's necessities, they want to reduce my pension by two-thirds. Wow what a country!!!

William L LaPrade
December 28, 2014 at 7:55 pm

Ditto to what Jim Allen said above. I worked very hard for 31 years to retire with my pension. My wife and I depend ( as others do) on this income for health insurance supplement, taxes, for necessities to live. You will be hurting the people who worked very hard and did not depend on the government to bail them out as the majority of the people do these days.

Thomas Conti
December 21, 2014 at 1:48 pm

I seems to me that years of republican control in many states has contributed to this problem.Why,because of the policies put forth,Ex:Indiana 4yrs ago put in place "Right to work state" allowing any worker to be in a union shop and enjoy all the benefits the union has to offer,but not pay any union dues.If you don't contribute into the systematic,it will erode.Another Ex.Why does the Post Office have to pay 75 yrs of retiery benifits in a 10 yr period.No companies in existence has to go through this.This bill was crafted in 2006 lame duck congress under Bush who signed it.So what I'm getting at is I feel the GOP has contributed greatly.It is not fair to the hard working people of this nation to give up what they had worked for most of their lives.I feel its going to get wosrt until unions have been eliminated by the GOP control.One more Ex:In Tennessee the Volkswagen plant workers wanted union representation,but two republicans stood in the way.Retirees should keep their pensions in tacked.Stop ALEC and further erosion of the unions.Look at the Teachers union the past 4yrs.

jim allen
December 18, 2014 at 6:32 pm

Why is it that the Senate and Congress do not have to cut their pensions by 50% or 60%? We worked hard for our pensions. Please come up with some other way to solve this issue without hurting those of us that worked to get what we deserve in our later years. You will be hurting us drastically if you allow this to happen to the retirees.

Add a comment

(Comments may take 5-10 minutes to appear)