Central States Trustee Promises Move to Withdraw Pension Cut Plan!

Standing before 300 active and retired Teamsters at a meeting of the Cincinnati Area Teamsters Retiree Club, Bill Lichtenwald – Central States Fund Trustee -- stated he would put a motion forward at the next Central States Trustees meeting to withdraw the Plan Reduction submitted to the Treasury Department and allow for another year before putting forward any new proposal. 


A motion to withdraw would give the IBT, Teamster locals and also active and retired Teamsters involved in the campaign to protect our pensions, breathing space to continue to build the movement and formulate alternatives to the proposed cuts. Lichtenwald sits on the Board with three other Teamster trustees and four Trustees representing contributing employers. The goal would be to get a motion passed with the support of the other Teamster Trustees – Chuck Whobrey, George Westley and Marvin Knopp.

Lichtenwald heard plenty from angry retirees and Teamsters

Pension Protection Committees throughout the Central States need to contact Lichtenwald regarding this promise and encourage him to make it happen. Committees and concerned Teamsters also need to press the other Teamster Trustees for their support. It’s also time for James Hoffa and the IBT to call on the Trustees to make this happen.  

Showing 70 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Stephanie McAllister
    followed this page 2016-10-11 16:07:53 -0400
  • Tom Dolyniuk
    commented 2015-12-14 12:58:12 -0500
    Mitzi, I understand, but what is the RESOLVE. I think executive compensation is too much, and should be cut. Have you read ALL of my postings? The problem is that the fund is over $30 BILLION underfunded. Five or 10 million, relatively speaking, is pocket change, not saying it should be neglected. If $10 million more were given out annually then that would amount to $50/retiree per year. The problem is MUCH bigger. If pensions are cut in half, then that saves roughly 1,4 BILLION /year. I realize that this is not a wanted solution for many. But, in my opinion , it is the most reasonable, UNLESS we get bailout money!! I too have given up raises, because pension costs have skyrocketed. Currently I pay in 15k/year into a pension for a job that pays 45k/year. Read ALL of my posts below.
  • Mitzi Baker
    commented 2015-12-14 12:32:18 -0500
    Tom, I know you are still working however you need to understand a lot of the folks did without raises or just 5 cent raises to allow their Employers to pay in more, so they’d get a liveable income at retirement. When CSPF saw they were flush with money, they increased management compensation. Before the recession, there was no issues, however, during the recession, WHILE the fund was losing money leadership was still giving themselves big raises. In fact I read this morning the cost of running the fund increased a whopping 2 or 3 million from 2014 to 2015 while the number of retirees declined. Our problems are mis management, corruption and outright thievery. Plus Nyhan used 6 million of OUR (yours and mine) to lobby against US without our knowledge or permission! How many cuts would that reverse?
  • Tom Dolyniuk
    commented 2015-12-12 22:09:58 -0500
    First and foremost let’s all hope that the resolution to this crisis is the signing of the KOPPA bill into law! However, given the unlikelihood of this or any other bailout , we are left with the facts. Did Central States give excessive compensations to Nyhan and his staff? YES. Did some retirees get " too good of a deal" relative to what they contributed and may have received, given the critical status of the fund??? I say YES!! MOVING FORWARD, the fund has Given the Dept. of Treasury their proposals under the DOT’s guidance. We cannot afford to kick the can further down the road anymore. Given no bailout, we must adjust NOW. Otherwise cuts will be even more severe, later! Unfortunately, we ALL must take cuts to ensure that the fund will continue to pay out pensions long into the future. MPRA was passed to give troubled pension funds the tools to adjust (cut) pensions to avoid insolvency!! If no changes were made CSPF would go to ZERO in only 12 years, despite 7% returns!! Cuts should NOT be the first alternative, but with no bailout money, it is the only “fair” alternative!! END OF STORY!!!
  • Paul Dillon
    commented 2015-12-12 22:04:12 -0500
    To the best of my knowledge, that 13th check goes back a lot of years and was for people that retired when pensions were low, like 600 a month?
  • Lori Essig
    commented 2015-12-12 20:08:24 -0500
    When did they give out a 13th check in Dec? I have never heard of that and I have been retired since 2000.
  • Paul Dillon
    commented 2015-12-12 19:48:39 -0500
    Some of the moves our union leaders have made seem suspicious? UPS buys Overnite in 2005, two years later the union allows them to exit the pension fund? I guess the union dues money now paid by Overnite drivers pays their salaries? Maybe they made a deal?
  • James Morris
    commented 2015-12-12 17:52:11 -0500
    And also after reading the comment about the conspiritors getting a 60% reduction in there pension???? Why are they still elgible for a pension check? 300,000 of us are going to lose what little we have accumilated over the years or going to have to sell out and down size to make it.
  • James Morris
    commented 2015-12-12 17:43:54 -0500
    I understand completely what you are saying but you have the option to have made plans for less income as #1 reason #2 reason My company Jack Cooper Trnsp. has been one of the few that have made ALL pension payments, I know that will not be a consideration but the one thing I believe should be made known the first 21 years I was in the Union it was illegal for me to have a 401K acct. and only my wife I believe could have an IRA.After I retire and am promised this amount, 2 YEARS!! AFTER I retire I get a letter saying sorry BROTHER we are going to have to take away almost HALF of your income.
    That being said I was being sarcastic… Also if you have any connections would you please have the people in charge of pension funds How they explain how for several years retirees received a 13 pension check in December because there was so much money in the fund? Just ask the question and see the looks on the faces. I did on a local level in Kansas City and I think they were so very happy to go to the next question
  • Mike Webb
    commented 2015-12-12 06:49:17 -0500
    Here’s some more simple math: Sentence Tom Nyhan and the executive board to prison for 5 to 10 years. Place all trustees in prison for 2 to 3 years and suspend their membership in the union for 5 years. Charge and imprison the brokerage firms who “invested” the money for 20 years at hard labor and make the companies who employed them to pay back 100% of the funds they lost. Investigate the D.O.L. and find out who was in collusion with Wall Street and Central States and fire them and cut their pensions 60%. Round up the scoundrels at the PBGC who lost 23% of the funding in 2008. Put them in with their Wall Street buddies busting rocks. When you add this all up it comes out to a grand total of JUSTICE!
  • Tom Dolyniuk
    commented 2015-12-12 00:47:14 -0500
    Simple math……..17.3 billion in the fund. $700 million inflows (.7Billiion). Now cut the 2.8B in outflows (pension payments) in half, giving 1.4B. The new operating deficit is .7 B not 2.1B (old operating deficit) 17.3bx 5% =.865B. With 50% cuts the fund will need only 5% investment gains to cover the operating deficit This should keep the fund solvent! There is always a chance the that stock market does less, like Japan did for years, but relying on 5% returns is much better than relying on the 12% returns now needed!!
  • Tom Dolyniuk
    commented 2015-12-12 00:33:26 -0500
    Lorelyn Essig. You mentioned that we will be in great shape? How do you figure? All of our future contributions will accrue at the .75 rate. And we have to work until age 65 or get the 6% deductions per year. All of out past contributions are figured in at the 1% as our yours!!
    Assume that you (any retiree) only put in 90kfor total contribution and have at least 20 years of contributions, and were getting $3000/month. Your new monthly payment will be $ 1500 , not the $900 ( which is 1% of the 90k) because you cannot be cut more than 50%( unless an orphan). Clearly this is a better deal than actives get. Not to mention the money (pension payments) that you have already received!!! Don’t think of what you are getting cut, think of what you are getting( and have received) relative to what you have contributed. Retirees(even with 50% cuts) are getting a much better deal than the actives!!
  • bob krouse
  • bob krouse
    commented 2015-12-11 14:05:59 -0500
  • Lori Essig
    commented 2015-12-11 13:52:28 -0500
    No wonder you didn’t find it! It is Regulations.gov

  • Lori Essig
    commented 2015-12-11 13:50:20 -0500
    Bob, if you found Regulation.gov go to the right side above comments and click down to newer posts. It should be about the 4th one down. A bit long at 13 pages but very much info in there.
  • bob krouse
    commented 2015-12-11 13:45:45 -0500
    Cannot find it……
  • Lori Essig
    commented 2015-12-11 13:19:29 -0500
    To everyone: Go check out the letter on Regulation.gov from Norman Stein from the Pension Rights Center. You have to scroll down to newest posts on the right hand side.
  • Rhonda Welk
    commented 2015-12-11 13:12:39 -0500
    Tom you mustbe psychic. You can fore see it will be solvent for 50 years? Plus you are not getting the picture what these people are telling you. We are NOT robbing you of YOUR pension. Your paying like we did for 37 years+.Been there done that, it’s your turn. Guaranteed for the next 50 years solvent. Looked was has happened just in the last 10-15 years to the fund. I see no common sense or smarts on your end.
  • Lori Essig
    commented 2015-12-11 12:36:29 -0500
    I hate to break it to you, Tom D, but you answered on the wrong thread.

    Elmer did have a point, though. Just like Social Security, the CSPF does not say anything about people who paid in and worked for most of their lives and retired only to tip over dead a few weeks later having only gotten one or a very few SS/CSPF checks.

    If you were a retiree, you would be screaming like a wounded bear about this, also.
    We have pointed out to you numerous times that if this cut takes place and WE fix the Fund by losing 1/2 or thereabouts of OUR pensions; WE will never get that loss back and you actives will be in great shape.

    Personally, I believe it is the massive corruption in the upper management of CSPF and IBT that caused this as well as the Fed for allowing Wall Street banksters to get their big cuts also. It will never come back until Nyhan and crowd is gone and we bring someone in who knows what they are doing.
  • Tom Dolyniuk
    commented 2015-12-11 11:49:29 -0500
    No Elmer, I had a co-worker die of cancer at age 50. he made contributions for 25 years and never collected a penny of it. He worked up to three months of his death. His contribution went for people like Rob Ban. Now Rob wants to ROB the actives of their contributions also. He wants mine too!!
  • Kenneth Gardner
    commented 2015-12-11 07:52:51 -0500
    what about a straight across the board 15% cut like they shoved down our throats for years
  • James Morris
    commented 2015-12-11 07:51:21 -0500
    Please have the Pension executives explain all the years they gave out a 13 the retirement check in December because their was SO much money in the Fund? And now I am getting mine sliced by 50%???
  • Tom Dolyniuk
    commented 2015-12-11 02:01:00 -0500
    I disagree, Rhonda Welk, if the current proposals are accepted by the Dept. of Treasury and go into effect on July1, 2016, then the fund will remain solvent for 50 or more years.The fund ’s investments would have to do about 5% annual returns to break even, not the current 12% or 13% .
  • Tom Dolyniuk
    commented 2015-12-11 01:49:34 -0500
    Mitzi ,I agree, first Nyhan and his staff should pay CUTS. At least 50% across the board. Some should possibly be fired!
  • Mitzi Baker
    commented 2015-12-11 00:54:26 -0500
    Tom, Many of these folks can’t go back to work, nor will they make enough to pay their bills and perhaps buy medications so the cuts that most folks face of 40 to 90 percent, (which is more accurate as a “mean” of the cuts) is unacceptable and when the compensation of even one incompetent manager would support more than 20 retirees at their current rate, well I vote for pay cuts and downsizing, common business practices for businesses in crisis. After all Tom, the fund is support Teamsters not managers!
  • Mitzi Baker
    commented 2015-12-11 00:41:28 -0500
    I agree with Jimmy, where did the
    money go? I lost 30% in 08, however it was back by late 09, and it’s been gaining since then. Second point, their total compensation packages are costing the fund in the millions annually and have outpaced Teamsters compensation exponentially. Pay cuts and downsizing are in order, not pension cuts of 40 to 90 percent. Their skewed average of 23% is absolutely false, created by those because of age or disability can’t be cut!
  • Mike Webb
    commented 2015-12-11 00:22:19 -0500
    “In an interview, Feinberg said he was not aware of the Portman bill before the event, but found it intriguing.” How could have not known about this bill?
  • Paul Dillon
    commented 2015-12-10 23:19:56 -0500
    How many are veterans? Call your people in congress and ask why they are not supporting you now? Taxpayers can do the same, a few billion off the defense budget or foreign aid to pay Americans for their years of support?
  • Rob Ban
    commented 2015-12-10 19:03:40 -0500
    Tom D, Can`t be trusted he is a spy
Get Advice Join TDU Donate

Recent News

Building for the Future: New TDU Dues Rates

TDU is on a drive to increase our membership and our war chest. At our recent Convention, members voted to increase TDU membership dues for the first time in 17 years.

Pension Protection Committee Responds to Grassley Bill

The National United Committee to Protect Pensions (NUCPP) has issued a statement in response to the Multiemployer Pension Recapitalization and Reform bill introduced by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN)

View More News Posts