Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

  1. #1
    Member Gainesville Red's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,168

    Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/ey...rmed-personnel





    From the article:

    "MLB is an $8 billion industry, and revenue streams are going nowhere but up. Cutting the pension plan for non-uniformed personnel -- many of whom earn less than $40,000 per year -- comes off as incredibly greedy on the part of owners."

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,713

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    Geez, they could at least do a 401(k) with an employer match or discretionary profit sharing (which they have complete control over how much they contribute) and share some of the wealth with non-players. Penny wise, pound foolish thinking, which means that the "unnamed small market owner" is probably not doing well for a reason.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  4. #3
    I don't want to grow up Red Raindog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northern Indiana
    Posts
    1,138

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor View Post
    Geez, they could at least do a 401(k) with an employer match or discretionary profit sharing (which they have complete control over how much they contribute) and share some of the wealth with non-players. Penny wise, pound foolish thinking, which means that the "unnamed small market owner" is probably not doing well for a reason.
    I will say it first -- those that have want to keep it that way.
    The older I get - the better I was

    and yes - I hate the Cardinals (Reds fan since 1958)

  5. #4
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,345

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    Looks like Bud is 20 years behind the rest of the industries.. Not many companies have pensions anymore lol

    Of course it's greed, baseball is yet another cooporation that wants more profitability at the expense of the lower paid workers.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  6. Likes:

    marcshoe (03-19-2013), RedEye (03-20-2013)

  7. #5
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,294

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    No surprise, the Lords had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century in the 70's, looks like they want to gain back ground and undercut the less powerful part of their work force.

  8. Likes:

    BoxingRed (03-19-2013), RedEye (03-20-2013)

  9. #6
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,629

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    Why didn't Marge think of this?

  10. #7
    KungFu Fighter AtomicDumpling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hamilton, OH
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    Just because they want to stop offering pensions doesn't mean franchises are greedy and want to screw their employees. Very few companies offer pensions anymore. 401k is how companies help their employees fund their retirements in the modern world and I am sure this is what the teams will do in the future. This is better for the workers as they are not compelled to stay with a single employer for decades if they want a comfortable retirement. 401k funds can be transferred wherever you go and make your future much less dependent on the good will and financial stability of your employer.

  11. #8
    Red's fan mbgrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    2,061

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    I agree that there is a trend away from pensions in many businesses.

    That being said, what the heck? MLB is doing very well. The owners and players are thriving, and this strikes me as just plain greedy.

    I have nothing against a well matched 401(k) plan. But the truth is that this a money saving move, period. Sure, there are some advantages (like portability) with 401(k) plans, but the real reason employers like them is that total responsibility for how the plan does is placed on the employees back. There is no hidden liability for the company should life expectancies lengthen or the markets crash.

    Many young employees opt out completely (which is dumb), and many others cash out their plans when they switch jobs (also dumb, but sometimes necessary).

    The long range problem will be that with fewer people on defined benefit pensions, older people will eventually be less affluent and more likely to need public assistance in their golden years (tax burden for younger folks). Smart and careful people (like AD) will do well with 401(k) plans. Dumb people(like me) will be buying Apple at $600 and losing their shirts.... I'm glad to be vested in a pension. MLB should offer at least that option to their employees as well.
    __________________
    ďA healthy Reds team is a strong Reds team"

  12. Likes:

    REDREAD (03-20-2013)

  13. #9
    Viva la Rolen kaldaniels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    8,190

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    If this were isolated to MLB I'd be outraged but there are many 8 billion dollar (revenue) companies doing very well that don't offer pensions. No sense busting MLB's chops too hard over this.

  14. Likes:

    remdog (03-20-2013)

  15. #10
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,939

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    Quote Originally Posted by mbgrayson View Post
    I agree that there is a trend away from pensions in many businesses.

    That being said, what the heck? MLB is doing very well. The owners and players are thriving, and this strikes me as just plain greedy.

    I have nothing against a well matched 401(k) plan. But the truth is that this a money saving move, period. Sure, there are some advantages (like portability) with 401(k) plans, but the real reason employers like them is that total responsibility for how the plan does is placed on the employees back. There is no hidden liability for the company should life expectancies lengthen or the markets crash.

    Many young employees opt out completely (which is dumb), and many others cash out their plans when they switch jobs (also dumb, but sometimes necessary).

    The long range problem will be that with fewer people on defined benefit pensions, older people will eventually be less affluent and more likely to need public assistance in their golden years (tax burden for younger folks). Smart and careful people (like AD) will do well with 401(k) plans. Dumb people(like me) will be buying Apple at $600 and losing their shirts.... I'm glad to be vested in a pension. MLB should offer at least that option to their employees as well.
    Don't want to worry about your retirement being backed on the market? Then don't opt in to the 401K and handle your own retirement.

  16. #11
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,294
    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Don't want to worry about your retirement being backed on the market? Then don't opt in to the 401K and handle your own retirement.
    I believe you are confused on what is what

    A 401k is not a traditional pension plan, a pension is funded by the employer and traditionally used as part of an employees compensation package

    Lots of companies do offer the 401k as opposed to a pension but in MLBs case a pension is a pension in the traditional sense

  17. #12
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,939

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    Quote Originally Posted by westofyou View Post
    I believe you are confused on what is what

    A 401k is not a traditional pension plan, a pension is funded by the employer and traditionally used as part of an employees compensation package

    Lots of companies do offer the 401k as opposed to a pension but in MLBs case a pension is a pension in the traditional sense
    I am not confused by it. The poster said that some people aren't happy with their 401K because it relies on things outside of their control (market crashing was an example used).

  18. #13
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,294

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    I am not confused by it. The poster said that some people aren't happy with their 401K because it relies on things outside of their control (market crashing was an example used).
    Missed that, didn't see that seque...anyway as far as MLB

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...onnel/2001513/

    "It's inaccurate,'' Manfred told USA TODAY Sports. "There has been no discussion of eliminating employee pension plan

    "The clubs would be given the flexibility to design a plan appropriate for their workplace,'' Manfred said. "They wouldn't be mandated by a defined pension plan. This has been talked about for years.''

  19. #14
    No half measures, Walter RedEye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    8,448

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    After 2008, I know a lot of folks who are thinking twice about the idea of a 401K. In an ideal world, it would be a better solution than a traditional pension since it tracks more closely with the market and doesn't depend on the solvency of the employer. Unfortunately, we are in far from an ideal world.
    "Iíll kind of have a foot on the back of my own butt. Thatís just how I do things.Ē -- Bryan Price, 10/22/2013

  20. #15
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,713

    Re: Report: MLB looking to cut pensions for non-uniformed personnel

    Quote Originally Posted by kaldaniels View Post
    If this were isolated to MLB I'd be outraged but there are many 8 billion dollar (revenue) companies doing very well that don't offer pensions. No sense busting MLB's chops too hard over this.
    Frog in the kettle effect. While I agree that "well everyone else did away with those dinosaurs years ago," it doesn't make it the right option necessarily.

    I am an accountant by trade, but also wear an HR hat in my current position. As an accountant, pensions are horrible for employers. Put on my HR hat, and it is an employee friendly perk. I see both sides, that's why a 401(k) with an employer match or a discretionary profit sharing setup (for a cyclical company that has inconsistent bottom lines from year to year) is a nice compromise for the company that does not want to expose itself to a pension liability. Perhaps MLB already has that in place, but it is a bit cheesy at this stage. Pensions could return if healthcare costs get under control, but probably not until that area of employee benefits stabilizes.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25