Thread regarding Verizon Communications Inc. layoffs

Does This Proposed Agreement Protect Retirees From Financial Ruin?

I have a concern regarding the tentative agreement in the Northeast.
I realize we paid a heavy price in 1989 and, as a result of that sacrifice, were able to keep essentially cost-free medical benefits for the next two-and-a-half decades.
However, uncertain economic times in 2016 resulted in us, fairly or not, shouldering more of the burden, not only the men and women that had 20, 25, 30, 35... years on the job under their belt already, but also the retirees now had to unexpectedly pony up and adjust to this new and unexpected financial burden on a fixed income based on earlier reasonable expectations and assumptions, if I understand correctly.
I am now hearing murmurings about about retiree healthcare skyrocketing, from, say, $60 a month to 10X that amount, $600 a month, for example. I hope these rumors are wrong and that I am needlessly worrying about something that will never come to be.
Are there any guarantees built into this new tentative agreement that shield both our current retirees, as well as those that will eventually be joining their ranks, from the future uncertainty of exorbitant increases that will make affordability a larger hurdle, if not an impossibility, for the elderly who served their union and their company well?


by
| 121 views | | 28 replies (last March 21) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kkavmkfh

28 replies (most recent on top)

@OP other than what they already agreed on ,no
And the company will not re visit it!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xd+1kkavmkfh

@13a let’s be clear with the final statement.. By voting, we’ll assume you mean by those who are legally domiciled card carrying US citizens.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wr+1kkavmkfh

@OP Corporations are NOT people. Citizens United was never logical.
Let’s be precise, not emotional.
A corporation is a legal fiction—an artificial construct created by state law to limit liability and pool capital. It has no heartbeat, no conscience, no capacity for empathy, and no right to vote. It exists solely to generate returns for shareholders. That’s not ideology; that’s black-letter corporate law and the fiduciary duty confirmed in countless court cases (Dodge v. Ford, 1919, and its modern progeny).
Citizens United v. FEC (2010) didn’t magically turn corporations into human beings. The 5–4 majority simply ruled that the First Amendment bars the government from banning independent political expenditures based on the speaker’s identity. The Court treated corporate treasury money as protected speech, equating it with individual speech. That leap is where logic collapses:
Humans have inalienable rights derived from existence. Corporations have only the rights legislatures choose to grant them.
Humans can be imprisoned, drafted, or executed. Corporations cannot.
Humans die; corporations can exist forever by charter amendment.
A corporation’s “opinion” is whatever maximizes profit this quarter. It has no soul to persuade—only a balance sheet.
Empirical reality confirms the mismatch. Study after study (Center for Responsive Politics data, Princeton’s Gilens/Page 2014 analysis, and subsequent replications) shows that when corporate and mass-public preferences diverge, policy tracks the corporate side far more often. That’s not conspiracy; it’s rational self-interest. A CEO who puts “the common good” above shareholder returns risks lawsuits, firing, or takeover. Purdue Pharma, Boeing’s safety shortcuts, tobacco’s decades of denial, and oil majors’ climate filings versus lobbying records—all textbook examples of profit-first incentives, not malice.
We keep pretending corporations “care” because it’s psychologically comforting: someone powerful will fix climate, wages, healthcare, inequality. They won’t. Their governing equation is ROI, not rescue. Expecting benevolence from an entity whose charter forbids it is like expecting a vending machine to hand out free food after you’ve fed it quarters.
The fix isn’t rage; it’s clarity. Treat corporations as the powerful but soulless tools they are. Regulate their political spending the same way we regulate every other artificial legal privilege—through transparent, content-neutral rules that pass strict scrutiny. Demand disclosure, reject the fiction that unlimited dark money equals democracy, and remember the Constitution was written for “We the People,” not “We the LLCs.”
No white knight in a boardroom is coming. That’s not pessimism; that’s pattern recognition. The responsibility remains where it always belonged: with actual citizens who can vote, feel consequences, and choose differently.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @13a+1kkavmkfh

Just checked… Paying for weddings and college is not in the Constitution. Imagine the compounding interest on those two beauties better spent on a well deserved retirement?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @10e+1kkavmkfh

@ns is posting from the Union Hall.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qe+1kkavmkfh

@ns are you with HR now?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qd+1kkavmkfh

The condescending emails the union are now sending are downright silly. How stupid do they think people are?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qc+1kkavmkfh

@ja unlike most union members, I can multitask. It is a nearly magical ability to do or think about more than one thing at a time. This skill is particularly easy when you do simple things. Like our job.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ny+1kkavmkfh

I am retired and can say from first handv experience if 5k a year for healthcare is breaking you, you have no business retiring. If you look at the rates in the new contract they are quite reasonable up until 2030. If you got a job elsewhere you would undoubtedly be paying more and you might be surprised how much Medicare actually cost when it comes time and with less coverage. Depending on your retirement income level it could easily exceed the rates this contract locks in for 4 more years. It was obviously better in the past but compared to most we make out well. Ask a manager friend what they get it is absolutely pathetic and outright insulting what they are offered.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ns+1kkavmkfh

@OP This only pre medicare healthcare. Once the retire hits medicare it will get cheaper. So 500 a month for a few years. You can always work another year.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @n7+1kkavmkfh

?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @k4+1kkavmkfh

...plus, the kids weddings, plus...
We are squeezed to the breaking point and, despite promises, nothing gets better.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @k3+1kkavmkfh

@jr $6K a year medical? plus dental?, plus vision?, plus inflation?, plus mortgage?, plus car/life/homeowners insurance?, plus tuition?, plus car loans?, plus a working spouse?
There is a breaking point when the increased cost of daily living is beyond two salaries, when one used to suffice well.
We work hard - deserve a vacation and reimbursement for dedication and going above and beyond.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @k2+1kkavmkfh

We may be from Boston, but Union takes us for Mass. holes.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @k1+1kkavmkfh

@j9 retiree medical is about $6,000 a year. Union sc--wed retirees big time

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jr+1kkavmkfh

@hd, you just sit around and watch your partner do the work?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ja+1kkavmkfh

I guess the $64,000. question is, aside from dental and vision payouts, what is the monthly maximum a retiree currently can expect to pay for medical coverage that is similar to the coverage they had while working, for themself and their family pre medicare?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @j9+1kkavmkfh

I was on a job this morning. My coworker, one of the privileged members, was climbing a ladder and all I could think was, "have we gone too many days without an accident?"

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hd+1kkavmkfh

@ec by silly emails, do you mean the facts?
You better wise up son, vote yes!!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gh+1kkavmkfh

@c1 you’ll only be f”ing yourself.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gg+1kkavmkfh

I was told 1101 is advising Members to vote a hard "NO" on the TA, but that the National, and those carrying their water, are pushing hard against that via silly emails and meetings in which reality holds no place.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ec+1kkavmkfh

We need a new order. Burn the old union down and make a new one that works!!! F those that F'd us!!!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c1+1kkavmkfh

@bx, When I was hired there was free medical healthcare for active and retirees.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bz+1kkavmkfh

OMG Stop your crying, when you were hired you agreed to terms of employment, no pension and no retirement health care. Your still making twice what your worth, dry your eyes a nd go polish your last place trophys.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bx+1kkavmkfh

@bp nurse he got ahold of a cell phone again

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bt+1kkavmkfh

@OP union sc--wed the retirees big time! And when union agreed to a 2 tier system back in the early 2000’s, they put the last nail in their own coffin. Absolutely no bargaining power. Why would someone strike for a retiree benefit that a member knows he isn’t gonna get at retirement ?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bn+1kkavmkfh

Yeah that su-ks go get Medicare. Why are current members forced to fight for benefits of past members that don’t even work here anymore? We already got a ton of sh-t to worry about without this in the contract. Let’s go bargain for the same generation that sold us down the river causing a 2 class system in the union.. NO THANKS! I can’t wait until the second class members are a majority. Coming soon to a ratification vote near you!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a6+1kkavmkfh

Medicare@65 TG.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a3+1kkavmkfh

Post a reply

: