Update on Council Pensions

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Update on Council Pensions

Patrick Nee
Update on just how generous a pension the Council Reps get. The contribution rate for the UBC pension was increased from 21% to 25% last month. This increases the Council Reps pensions which were already exceedingly generous. Every Council Rep now gets a contribution to the  UBC Pension Plan which is worth 25% of  their annual salary and the accrual rate for this pension plan is 3%.
So if a council rep is making over $100,000 a year, (this is starting pay, they get raises of over ten per cent a year while you get a two and a half per cent raise.) based on this there is a contribution of over $25,000 made to the UBC Pension Plan, for which the Council Rep accrues a pension worth $750 a month in the first year they work at the council.
When they get to $160,000 a year the contribution is $33,600 which equates to a pension worth  $1,200 a month for every year they work at the district council.
So if a council rep earning $160,000 puts in ten years, his/her combined pensions would be worth $14,400 a month or  $172,800 a year. And they also get an annuity worth 8% of their salary or $128,000 for those 10 years.
A journeyman working 2,000 hours a year for that same 10 year period would have a pension worth $2,400 a month or $28,400 a year.
Now quite a few Reps have come up to me and told me my figures are wrong and quite a few of them have told me they will show me documentation showing me I am wrong, but since no one has ever produced anything, I see no reason to doubt the numbers given to me by the District Council.
Now as you should all be aware the contractual raise of $2.40 kicks in on July 1. Two dollars going to the paycheck and forty cents going to annuity. This was the recommendation of the District Council's Executive Committee, which is comprised of District Council employees who get the pensions listed above with one exception and that guy wanted to put more money into the annuity but was voted down.
The District Councils salaries are based on the Wall and Ceiling rate, so they all get a minimum of a four thousand dollar a year raise in their paychecks plus whatever percentage the personnel policy allows for. But then it gets interesting, because so many of their perks are based on a percentage of their salary, they also get another $1,350 in their annuities and pensions.
The forty cents put into the journeyman's annuity is worth eight hundred dollars a year,  but the five reps who were just hired and are the lowest paid in the council just got a bump of one thousand, three hundred and fifty dollars to their pensions.
Members simply have to come to terms with the fact that as much as you may like any particular rep, they are not in the same boat as you and will not want what you want, Council Reps already make a lot of money, Council Reps get pensions worth almost five times what you get, Council Reps do not work on PLA jobs and were enraged at the last Delegate meeting when it was suggested that there should at least be a pay freeze at the council if the members are going to be getting paycuts. One Council Rep attacked several members and told them that anyone who would even consider freezing their pay was an asshole.  That same Rep has voted in favor of every PLA ever presented, and thinks that it is a great idea to cut the guys in the fields pay by 10% and replace half of them with B rate carpenters. He will never vote the way that you would because he is not in the same boat as you are, he just has to do as he is told and the big salary and the big pensions keep rolling in.
???
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Update on Council Pensions

???
1%'s leading the rightful owners of this union -

WHAT A FUCKING TRAVESTY !

WHAT A FUCKING DISGRACE !

Tell me Mr. "Voice" candidate even the total compliment of 40 on the handbill were elected what three things will they do to reverse the DC injustices?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Update on Council Pensions

TRUTH
                                     ""Update on just how generous a pension the Council Reps get"".



  How about exposing exactly what they actually do in exchange for such exorbitant rewards?  Everyone knows that their only desire is to get more, and the only way to do that is to take more, and give the rank and file less.

                   But how?

  Can you state the obvious?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Update on Council Pensions

RichardDorrough
This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by Patrick Nee
This fund is the UBC Pension Plan US Segment EIN 526075035.$1.2 billion.. Lets not forget the The Retirement and Pension Plan for Officers & Employees of the NYCDCC and Related Organizations EIN# 510167964..."One Council Rep attacked several members and told them that anyone who would even consider freezing their pay was an asshole." and what did Murphy who Berman says is liable for the conduct at the meetings say to the Councl scum bag?? Let me guess. Nothing..R. DUFFEY: Jim Murphy from our office goes. And I believe Adrian Healey, another colleague of ours, has attended the meetings as well with Mr. Murphy. And I think the review officer described the role accurately which is to advise the president and officers as to any issues that arise, including of particular relevance to the issues here.
 
THE COURT: So if they go and something happens, does that mean that they've approved it?

THE Court: If you're going and if you are the counsel and something happens, you know, one could fairly conclude that it was approved by counsel or certainly wasn't objected to by counsel


THE COURT: I'm sure it's helpful, but I'm making a different point here and I think you need to discuss this with Mr. Murphy. Unless Mr. Murphy wants to get tagged with all the results of the meetings, or maybe he does, or if he didn't, then there would have to be some way for him to object or some legal notation perhaps in the minutes that he was consulted and thought this or he wasn't consulted or he thinks that this is not what should be reflected. It seems to me there needs to be a tighter involvement, is what I'm trying to say, of counsel at these meetings.

What about McWorthless .Is he present or to busy trying to get the Section 52 Kangaroo system back, appointing hand picked stooges for a year per the guidelines to suppress opposition and trying to undermine the consent decree so Dougy can rape all your benefit hours.

Loading...