Help Our UAL Friends

Matt you are just talking out of your ass now. You jumped into a thread you
obviously hadn't read. Just so you know here was the original message I
responded to.


Montblack wrote:

The company has an obligation to provide benefits and has to fund
the plan to provide for those benefits.

Agreed - however on the back end, not the front end based on outmoded
projections.

Why does the company have an *obligation* to provide benefits?

--
John T


My response was based on what looked like John T's belief that there was no
obligation to provide benefits promised.

Where you came up with your version of the thread I have not a clue but as
far as I'm concerned it ends now.




"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:ayVYe.76341$7f5.16514@okepread01...


And taking a walk is all good and fine if you find out they screwed you
over after a week. But after 20 years just going to work for the
competition isn't going to help you much.

If it takes you 20 years to figure that out, then you're pretty much
helpless.


--

Matt, Are you just being an asshole for the fun of it. The post that I
posted my original reply to was one that asked the question of why the
carrier had an obligation to pay the pension.

Contractual obligation.

I compared it to the $10 $9 example.

An entirely different context. Under the scenario you painted in this
instance, the proper move was to complain, then quit if there was no
satisfaction.

Now let me ask you something: Are you being childish for a reason? Did you
get burned by being naive and now are unwilling to face up like an adult?

So far, the points I've seen from so many are more what I'd expect from
adolesants. If that means I'm an asshole, the maybe I am, but there are
some real spoiled brats running loose.


If I work somewhere for 20 years and during that entire time they promise
me a pension after 20 years yes I expect them to pay it.

Get a book on contract law, and lookup "impossibility of performance".

If you'd rather a candyass whose shoulder you can cry on after messing up
your worklife/career for 20 years, then that's not me. I treat people in
their 40's like adults, not kids, and I expect that by the time Daddy
kicks them out of the nest they can handle their lives and careers.

Hey, it's a shame your employer "died". but when you started with them YOU
handed them the Vaseline jar.

Just make damn sure your own kids don't make the same mistakes. Better
yet, get them a copy of Kiyosaki's "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" and make them read
it. It's got some ephemeral tales, but the gist is dead on.

Sorry if that comes off like an "asshole", but I've already raised three
kids that were on their way to financial independence since their teens
and I'm not up for raising any more kids, especially ones that are damn
near my own age.




--
Matt

---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:HEXYe.77098$7f5.3618@okepread01

My response was based on what looked like John T's belief that there was
no obligation to provide benefits promised.

No, that wasn't my point at all. My question remains: Why does an employer
have an *obligation* to provide benefits?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

In article ,
"John T" wrote:

No, that wasn't my point at all. My question remains: Why does an employer
have an *obligation* to provide benefits?

do you mean benefits other than those required by state and/or federal law?

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"John T" wrote:

No, that wasn't my point at all. My question remains: Why does an
employer
have an *obligation* to provide benefits?

do you mean benefits other than those required by state and/or federal
law?



In addition to Bob's question can I add... do you mean other than those that
the employer promised to provide at the time of hire?

Bob Noel wrote:

do you mean benefits other than those required by state and/or
federal law?

My question stands. State law varies, obviously, but what benefits does the
federal government require of employers?

As for promises: If it's not in writing, it's worth about as much as the
lint in my pocket. I agree it reflects very badly on the company and should
be advertised so other potential employees know what kind of company it is.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

John T wrote:

As for promises: If it's not in writing, it's worth about as much as the
lint in my pocket.

Most of the benefits discussed in this thread are put in writing repeatedly by
an employer. I used to get statements detailing my pension at least once a year.

The problem is that *those* promises are worth little more than the paper
they're written on. When a corporation gets to the point where the chief
executives feels that their only choice is violation of the law or going out of
business, they will usually violate the law. If they can manage to avoid that by
bankruptcy, they will usually declare bankruptcy. Either way, their promises are
history.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

In article ,
"John T" wrote:

do you mean benefits other than those required by state and/or
federal law?

My question stands. State law varies, obviously, but what benefits does the
federal government require of employers?

Would you consider the Family Medical Leave Act (or some such name) a
benefit?

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

Bob Noel wrote:

My question stands. State law varies, obviously, but what benefits
does the federal government require of employers?

Would you consider the Family Medical Leave Act (or some such name) a
benefit?

For limited numbers of employees. Even then it only guarantees unpaid leave
and has nothing to do with retirement plans (the genesis of this thread).

Got any other benefits the Feds require of employers?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

In article ,
"John T" wrote:

Would you consider the Family Medical Leave Act (or some such name) a
benefit?

For limited numbers of employees.

huh? it only applies to limited number of employees? I don't think
we are talking about the same thing.

Even then it only guarantees unpaid leave

among other things.

and has nothing to do with retirement plans (the genesis of this thread).

so what? you asked: "what benefits does the federal government require
of employers?"

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule