Skip navigation

Multiemployer pension plans touted

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

Research shows they typically have higher returns, pay lower fees on their investments and manage risk better to provide more stable funding for workers ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. jann7 lake from Canada writes: yes, yes, yes, please make pensions more portable! I have 3 different pension plans from 3 different employers, none of whom were able to take my previous plan's investment...changing jobs is the reality for a lot of people and will only become more common, so it's time the pension plans started addressing this issue!
  2. Sue W from Canada writes: ....A survey conducted for HOOPP by the Gandalf Group between Nov. 26 and Dec. 4 found 50 per cent of Ontarians over age 55 reported they have a defined benefit pension plan. Only 25 per cent of those under 45 had a traditional pension....

    As per Statscan.....There are approximately 6,687,300 workers in Ontario. 2,129,016 are covered by RPP (32%). 1,704,462 (25.5%) are covered by DBP & 355,122 (5.3%). The majority of taxpayers in Ontario (68%), in Canada, are NOT covered by a RPP.

    When are the Politicians, the Bureacrats going to REFORM the inequities which exist between their DBP and the pensions of the 68% who don't have one?

    Are they in their position working to better their entitlements only?
  3. All About The Money from Canada writes: Problems:

    The choice to remove their own accumulation (along with any matching funds) to their own RRSP must be included so that employees can vote with their feet when mismanaged (like Que's recent incompetence with FX hedging and ABCP).

    Employees must have the choice to receive the payout at retirement in either cash (for management in own RRIF) or annuity. Union plans of this type currently force the employee to buy the annuity.

    Management of the plans must accept responsibility for political action on behalf of investors (vis a vis management). The concentration of investor-power in a smaller number of people will make the present situation even worse, because currently all institutional investors refuse to p..o.. management by saying 'boo'.
  4. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Phase out defined benefits plans. They're an albatross around the neck of every company that has them.
  5. scamp the from Canada writes:
    No private pension plans!

    Companies can go bust.
    Legacy costs can bankrupt companies and hurt competitiveness.

    I'm good with an RRSP right now, but the only pension plan I would ever support would be one run and backed by the government with set contribution rates by employee/employer. Either the province could run its own on top of CPP or we could just extend CPP to have an optional contribution component.
  6. scamp the from Canada writes:
    "When are the Politicians, the Bureacrats going to REFORM the inequities which exist between their DBP and the pensions of the 68% who don't have one?"

    they will never. This is union country brother. Will you take to the streets to make it happen? No you won't, so nothing will happen.

    Your best bet is to make sure you marry a spouse in the public sector. It's the best pension insurance you can have.
  7. Sue W from Canada writes: Why is no one addressing the huge gap between the $249,000 HOOPP pensioner and the RRSP pensioner.

    And in todays economy who is to say that the gap may not even be greater, and yet the HOOPP pensioner, is still assured of receiving his regualar payments, year-in, year-out.

    This is really criminal.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top