Ford says pensions are a plan of the past

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Ford CEO, you don’t say

What a load of horse patootie.

CEO and executive pay has ballooned since the 60s, yet there isn’t money for pensions.

Than I suggest you go to CEO school to get paid like one.

Otherwise pensions are a thing of the past and if UAW wants to die on that hill, they won't have any jobs sooner rather than later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just wait until our society has a generation of seniors without pensions - the first big wave will be Gen X. Unless the government steps in, there will be poverty like we have never seen.

Genx are boomer enablers, serves them right

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Ford CEO, you don’t say

What a load of horse patootie.

CEO and executive pay has ballooned since the 60s, yet there isn’t money for pensions.

+1

Another +1.

Then that make three blithering idiots on this thread. The amounts required to operate defined pension plans dwarf CEO and executive comp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for workers' rights, OP, but pensions are a thing of the past for sure. There are other ways of making working lives more safe and comfortable, and it starts with health, both physical and mental. We need to fix the dreadful healthcare costs in this country, offer workers way more paid leave for the sake of their mental health and have subsidized daycare so parents, especially mothers, can be more productive in their careers.

Why ask for so little? Why not all of that and pensions, too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only ones guaranteed them in this country are feds.

The split on "retirement security" isn't disputed by Ford, as its executives say they are not agreeing to a union demand to resume traditional pension plans for those hired since 2007.

Ford CFO John Lawler called those defined benefit plans that pay a guaranteed monthly benefit until a retiree dies, "a plan of the past."

Feds only get a portion of their retirement from a pension. Much of it is through TSP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for workers' rights, OP, but pensions are a thing of the past for sure. There are other ways of making working lives more safe and comfortable, and it starts with health, both physical and mental. We need to fix the dreadful healthcare costs in this country, offer workers way more paid leave for the sake of their mental health and have subsidized daycare so parents, especially mothers, can be more productive in their careers.

Why ask for so little? Why not all of that and pensions, too?

I think unions should stop demanding pensions and start demanding really good 401k matches. I think the real problem is 401k benefits do not have nearly the same value as pensions do. If employers were paying in 8% of comp instead of 4% that would go a long way. It would also offer workers more flexibility than a pension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for workers' rights, OP, but pensions are a thing of the past for sure. There are other ways of making working lives more safe and comfortable, and it starts with health, both physical and mental. We need to fix the dreadful healthcare costs in this country, offer workers way more paid leave for the sake of their mental health and have subsidized daycare so parents, especially mothers, can be more productive in their careers.

Why ask for so little? Why not all of that and pensions, too?

I think unions should stop demanding pensions and start demanding really good 401k matches. I think the real problem is 401k benefits do not have nearly the same value as pensions do. If employers were paying in 8% of comp instead of 4% that would go a long way. It would also offer workers more flexibility than a pension.

Huh. I think it's an interesting take, but I disagree. I feel like with a 401K, the individual assumes too much risk. I'm not an expert in investing money. I would like to outsource this function to someone who is, as part of a larger group intending to mitigate risk by pooling together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Ford CEO, you don’t say

What a load of horse patootie.

CEO and executive pay has ballooned since the 60s, yet there isn’t money for pensions.

+1

Another +1.

Then that make three blithering idiots on this thread. The amounts required to operate defined pension plans dwarf CEO and executive comp.

That’s because they hide the comp in stock grants which they then goose with stock buybacks

[Anonymous]

Gen Xers and we are well prepared for early retirement. Most of our friends and family are also.
We grew up solid MC with 1rst/2nd generation parents.

Smartest thing I did was live at home for 2 years and start 401K as soon as I started working. Next was go to the college that offered the best financial package.

I have had ~ 6 jobs (mid 50s), and I am glad I had 401 options vs pension.

I do think Social Security needs to start later nowadays.
I also think we need to allow death to occur more naturally and sooner for those at end of life stage. Prolonging it is often not humane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In addition to eliminating the ability to job hop, you lose your pension if you are terminated. I work in an environment where some have pensions and some don’t. It’s painful when someone who has a lot of years in loses their job. And while it’s simple to say, don’t do anything to make that happen, sometimes people make mistakes or have bad managers, etc and it happens.

I definitely think retirement benefits are something to fight for but I’m not sure that pensions are so desirable and that they are not antiquated.

Don't they get vested after some time? That's awful. In government, once vested, even if you are fired for misconduct, they can't take it away, except in some states that have laws that say you can lose your pension if convicted of crimes involving your official duties, which is fair.

Not in our case. If you’re tired for cause before eligible for retirement it’s gone.

Are you sure??? ERISA requires vesting after 5 years, and those benefits generally can't be taken away, unless there is something like criminal misconduct, so yes for embezzlement, no for being a slowpoke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for workers' rights, OP, but pensions are a thing of the past for sure. There are other ways of making working lives more safe and comfortable, and it starts with health, both physical and mental. We need to fix the dreadful healthcare costs in this country, offer workers way more paid leave for the sake of their mental health and have subsidized daycare so parents, especially mothers, can be more productive in their careers.

Why ask for so little? Why not all of that and pensions, too?

I think unions should stop demanding pensions and start demanding really good 401k matches. I think the real problem is 401k benefits do not have nearly the same value as pensions do. If employers were paying in 8% of comp instead of 4% that would go a long way. It would also offer workers more flexibility than a pension.

Huh. I think it's an interesting take, but I disagree. I feel like with a 401K, the individual assumes too much risk. I'm not an expert in investing money. I would like to outsource this function to someone who is, as part of a larger group intending to mitigate risk by pooling together.

There are income annuities for that - immediate and deferred - but then people get upset about "losing control of my money".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wait until our society has a generation of seniors without pensions - the first big wave will be Gen X. Unless the government steps in, there will be poverty like we have never seen.

Genx are boomer enablers, serves them right

Eh, the boomers hated us. And most of us don't have pensions like the boomers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for workers' rights, OP, but pensions are a thing of the past for sure. There are other ways of making working lives more safe and comfortable, and it starts with health, both physical and mental. We need to fix the dreadful healthcare costs in this country, offer workers way more paid leave for the sake of their mental health and have subsidized daycare so parents, especially mothers, can be more productive in their careers.

Why ask for so little? Why not all of that and pensions, too?

I think unions should stop demanding pensions and start demanding really good 401k matches. I think the real problem is 401k benefits do not have nearly the same value as pensions do. If employers were paying in 8% of comp instead of 4% that would go a long way. It would also offer workers more flexibility than a pension.

Huh. I think it's an interesting take, but I disagree. I feel like with a 401K, the individual assumes too much risk. I'm not an expert in investing money. I would like to outsource this function to someone who is, as part of a larger group intending to mitigate risk by pooling together.

There are income annuities for that - immediate and deferred - but then people get upset about "losing control of my money".

Income annuities carry the risk of the insurer failing and charge CRAZY fees because we are buying retail while pension gets services in bulk wholesale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for workers' rights, OP, but pensions are a thing of the past for sure. There are other ways of making working lives more safe and comfortable, and it starts with health, both physical and mental. We need to fix the dreadful healthcare costs in this country, offer workers way more paid leave for the sake of their mental health and have subsidized daycare so parents, especially mothers, can be more productive in their careers.

Why ask for so little? Why not all of that and pensions, too?

I think unions should stop demanding pensions and start demanding really good 401k matches. I think the real problem is 401k benefits do not have nearly the same value as pensions do. If employers were paying in 8% of comp instead of 4% that would go a long way. It would also offer workers more flexibility than a pension.

Huh. I think it's an interesting take, but I disagree. I feel like with a 401K, the individual assumes too much risk. I'm not an expert in investing money. I would like to outsource this function to someone who is, as part of a larger group intending to mitigate risk by pooling together.

Well you could structure it as a 401k with a guaranteed return. Employer takes on the investment risk, employee takes on the life expectancy risk.

When I was job hunting a hated pensions. Would much rather have a more portable retirement benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feds haven’t had DB plans for years of new hires.

Only teachers, firemen/police, state workers and maybe very senior feds or legacy ones.

And dont forget to juice it with disability pay the year after your retire.

Virginia's VRS has been a hybrid defined contribution/benefit plan since 2014.