Reform IBEW LOCAL 332 PENSION TRUST

If “Occupy San Jose” is an attempt to get the attention of Wall Street and affect some reforms then perhaps this blog is “occupy IBEW Local 332 Pension Trust”. Just as Wall Street has proven reforms are needed so has our pension plan. Paul Harvey (not always loved in union circles) once told a gathering of business leaders that he was against government reforms. They applauded. He went on to say, reforms are the answer to businesses that are not honest. They were silent. The same goes for the pension plan. When they can’t follow their own rules. And, don’t know the ERISA rules; they need to be reformed. By the way ERISA was folded into the plan and is therefore part of the plan itself.

If you are a divorced member with pension benefits accrued you should be asking questions of the trustees about the charges in this blog. It is way to late if you get surprised at your retirement party. We think of the Pension people as an extension of our union. They are Not! You can’t talk to the trustees and UAS is just there to do what they are told. If an error pops up the Plan may just stonewall you like they did me.

In 2005 I contacted the Plan lawyers, as suggested by UAS, with my complaint of low benefits. Kraw and Kraw e-mailed me a reference to the “Brown v. Brown” case. I looked it up. Not a single reference to averaging all earned benefits as in the Plans “Time Rule”. I replied that Brown was mute on time rule. They gave me another case; I replied still no time rule. They gave me a third case, my reply was the same. The Kraw organization did not know their case law. All you gotta do is go down to the law library on First Street and look these things up. The clerk is very helpful. After the third case communications from Kraw stopped. They would not answer another email.

UAL could not explain, Kraw did not explain, the Business Manager had no comment. I ran for a lawyer and he alerted the Plan of their error. Put yourself in my place and you may wish to get the pension plan correct before your retirement request goes to the board.

Here is some interesting history. I don’t know the exact dates but when ERISA started only a class of retirees could sue a pension plan. An individual could not sue over benefits. In about 2008 the Supreme Court ruled in the case of “LaRue V DeWolff” that individual participants in plans such as ours could sue. Why, because the plan in which LaRue had an account screwed up and lost him $100,000. The mistake was big enough the court realized that pension plans needed some reforming in this area. Along with the screw-up his plan would not make it right just as our plan refuses to fix my account.

Now things have gotten even better for the participant. The Supreme Court ruled this year in “CIGNA CORP v. AMARA” that participants can recover compensation if injured by a Pension plan. Therefore we are now talking about all the costs of litigation, not just the reimbursement of the lost benefits. Good for me who has run up some bills pushing the Plan, but bad for the members who will suffer lower benefits because of the Plan error. Not to worry, the Plan spent plenty last year on insurance ($90,000.00), my compensation would hardly affect the Trustee’s seminar budget ($23,000.00).

Fun car history. In 1896 Great Britain raised the automobile speed limit from four (4) miles per hour to fourteen (14) mph. And also dropped the requirement that all cars have a signalman with red flags to warn of there approach.

“Chaotic action is preferable to orderly inaction.” Will Rogers

Happy Trails