Sentences with phrase «defined benefit pension plan which»

Yes, but this does not take into account their defined benefit pension plan which will have a present value of a couple million or more when they retire.

In my personal case, I contribute to a defined benefit pension plan which is fully funded and which should provide a very solid income stream when I am ready to begin collecting (55 is the minimum retirement age).

Not exact matches

Perhaps the biggest sticking point is the company's pension plan, which Canada Post is proposing be changed from a defined benefit plan to a defined contribution plan.

While Torstar has no bank debt, it does have a major financial obligation to its defined benefit pension plan, which is in a solvency deficit position.

Trapani and Shindler have also discarded their old pension plan entirely since the «defined benefit plan» was set up to provide payouts only to employees who stayed until age 60, which just didn't meet the needs of the company's somewhat transient work force.

Both of our jobs currently have defined benefit pension plans in place, both of which we are vested in — I don't put a dollar figure on those but figure those will provide 3k to 4k in retirement income when we retire, depending upon when we retire and then when we choose to draw it.

(a) Schedule 2.7 (a) of the Disclosure Schedule contains a list setting forth each employee benefit plan, program, policy or arrangement (including any «employee benefit plan» as defined in Section 3 (3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended («ERISA»)(«ERISA Plan»)-RRB-, including, without limitation, employee pension benefit plans, as defined in Section 3 (2) of ERISA, multi-employer plans, as defined in Section 3 (37) of ERISA, employee welfare benefit plans, as defined in Section 3 (1) of ERISA, deferred compensation plans, stock option plans, bonus plans, stock purchase plans, fringe benefit plans, life, hospitalization, disability and other insurance plans, severance or termination pay plans and policies, sick pay plans and vacation plans or arrangements, whether or not an ERISA Plan (including any funding mechanism therefore now in effect or required in the future as a result of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or otherwise), whether formal or informal, oral or written, under which (i) any current or former employee, director or individual consultant of the Company (collectively, the «Company Employees») has any present or future right to benefits and which are contributed to, sponsored by or maintained by the Company or (ii) the Company or any ERISA Affiliate (as hereinafter defined) has had, has or may have any actual or contingent present or future liability or obligatplan, program, policy or arrangement (including any «employee benefit plan» as defined in Section 3 (3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended («ERISA»)(«ERISA Plan»)-RRB-, including, without limitation, employee pension benefit plans, as defined in Section 3 (2) of ERISA, multi-employer plans, as defined in Section 3 (37) of ERISA, employee welfare benefit plans, as defined in Section 3 (1) of ERISA, deferred compensation plans, stock option plans, bonus plans, stock purchase plans, fringe benefit plans, life, hospitalization, disability and other insurance plans, severance or termination pay plans and policies, sick pay plans and vacation plans or arrangements, whether or not an ERISA Plan (including any funding mechanism therefore now in effect or required in the future as a result of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or otherwise), whether formal or informal, oral or written, under which (i) any current or former employee, director or individual consultant of the Company (collectively, the «Company Employees») has any present or future right to benefits and which are contributed to, sponsored by or maintained by the Company or (ii) the Company or any ERISA Affiliate (as hereinafter defined) has had, has or may have any actual or contingent present or future liability or obligatplan» as defined in Section 3 (3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended («ERISA»)(«ERISA Plan»)-RRB-, including, without limitation, employee pension benefit plans, as defined in Section 3 (2) of ERISA, multi-employer plans, as defined in Section 3 (37) of ERISA, employee welfare benefit plans, as defined in Section 3 (1) of ERISA, deferred compensation plans, stock option plans, bonus plans, stock purchase plans, fringe benefit plans, life, hospitalization, disability and other insurance plans, severance or termination pay plans and policies, sick pay plans and vacation plans or arrangements, whether or not an ERISA Plan (including any funding mechanism therefore now in effect or required in the future as a result of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or otherwise), whether formal or informal, oral or written, under which (i) any current or former employee, director or individual consultant of the Company (collectively, the «Company Employees») has any present or future right to benefits and which are contributed to, sponsored by or maintained by the Company or (ii) the Company or any ERISA Affiliate (as hereinafter defined) has had, has or may have any actual or contingent present or future liability or obligatPlan»)-RRB-, including, without limitation, employee pension benefit plans, as defined in Section 3 (2) of ERISA, multi-employer plans, as defined in Section 3 (37) of ERISA, employee welfare benefit plans, as defined in Section 3 (1) of ERISA, deferred compensation plans, stock option plans, bonus plans, stock purchase plans, fringe benefit plans, life, hospitalization, disability and other insurance plans, severance or termination pay plans and policies, sick pay plans and vacation plans or arrangements, whether or not an ERISA Plan (including any funding mechanism therefore now in effect or required in the future as a result of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or otherwise), whether formal or informal, oral or written, under which (i) any current or former employee, director or individual consultant of the Company (collectively, the «Company Employees») has any present or future right to benefits and which are contributed to, sponsored by or maintained by the Company or (ii) the Company or any ERISA Affiliate (as hereinafter defined) has had, has or may have any actual or contingent present or future liability or obligatPlan (including any funding mechanism therefore now in effect or required in the future as a result of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or otherwise), whether formal or informal, oral or written, under which (i) any current or former employee, director or individual consultant of the Company (collectively, the «Company Employees») has any present or future right to benefits and which are contributed to, sponsored by or maintained by the Company or (ii) the Company or any ERISA Affiliate (as hereinafter defined) has had, has or may have any actual or contingent present or future liability or obligation.

Saunders, the president of the Vancouver and District Labour Council, says that Canadian workers and their pensions are more exposed to risk during market trouble because of the successful campaign over the past decades to move from defined benefit pensions, which guarantee a certain monthly amount when you retire, to defined contribution plans, promoted by market enthusiasts.

My sense is that it is still mainly defined benefit pension plans that are interested in hedge funds and private equity, which are the focus of the Intel case.

When the process has run its course, they threaten their work force with bankruptcy that will wipe out its pension benefits if employees do not agree to «downsize» their claims and replace defined - benefit plans with defined - contribution plans (in which all that employees know is how much they pay in each month, not what they will get in the end).

The problem is that the state - mandated pension plans for school - district employees are defined benefit plans, which means the amount of future benefits is guaranteed and has to be funded by the taxpayers and / or investment income.

While employers would be required to pay one half of the cost of the modest premium increase required to finance an enhanced CPP, companies which sponsor defined benefit pension plans would not face additional costs since the great majority of these plans are fully integrated, meaning that they would pay out less as CPP benefits were increased.

Some folks have no pensions; some have a defined contribution plan, which depends on the market; others, including most public employees and more than half of the private - sector ones have a defined benefits plan — you get a guaranteed pension based upon years of service.

The party's new policy expresses great concern that the current methods used to evaluate defined benefit (ie final salary and career average) pensions have been unable to cope with these unprecedented market conditions, and this, coupled with over-regulation on the part of the Pensions Regulator, had produced wildly volatile deficits which no - one could predict — wholly unsatisfactory for schemes that have to plan over half a pensions have been unable to cope with these unprecedented market conditions, and this, coupled with over-regulation on the part of the Pensions Regulator, had produced wildly volatile deficits which no - one could predict — wholly unsatisfactory for schemes that have to plan over half a Pensions Regulator, had produced wildly volatile deficits which no - one could predict — wholly unsatisfactory for schemes that have to plan over half a century.

We need repeal of union give - aways like the Triborough Amendment which rigs union contracts and benefits, repeal of the Wicks Law which raises public construction costs, reform of binding arbitration rules affecting police and fire contracts, and movement toward defined contribution pension plans for public employees.»

Pensions and health costs for teachers and other staff are substantially higher for the traditional, unionized public schools compared to charters, which offer their employees 401ks rather than more generous defined benefit plans.

Yesterday, the Fordham Institute released a new paper from Marty West and Matt Chingos analyzing a 2002 policy change in Florida which allowed teachers to choose between a traditional defined benefit pension plan and a 401k - style defined contribution plan.

Nationally, 9 out of 10 teachers participate in a «defined benefit» pension plan, which guarantees a set monthly payment as long as a retiree lives.

The root of this difficulty is that both sides in public - employee negotiations find it in their interest to reduce the wage portion of the overall collective bargaining agreement — which, in the case of the Chicago public school teachers, is quite high at over $ 75,000 per year — in favor of larger pension benefits under a «defined benefits» plan.

Most public school teachers participate in defined benefit (DB) pension plans, which because of different accounting rules contribute significantly less today for each dollar of future retirement benefits than private - sector DB pensions or defined contribution (DC) pension plans.

There are better and worse choices on this list, and states could choose to pursue more than one of them at a time, but regardless of which path a state chooses, none of them are permanent solutions unless they're also paired with broader structural changes that close existing defined benefit pension plans to new members.

This topic is particularly relevant in K - 12 education, where debates are waged over whether teacher pension plans should be maintained as defined benefit (DB) systems or if they should transition to defined contribution (DC) systems which are, by definition, fully - funded.

In fact, he and hundreds of thousands of teachers from Philly have been and will be recipients of a defined benefit pension and fight any bill — like Senate Bill 1, which would have moved teachers into a more taxpayer - friendly 401 (k) plan.

This paper studies the pension preferences of Washington State public school teachers by examining two periods of time during which teachers were able to choose between enrolling in a traditional defined benefit plan and a hybrid plan with defined benefit and defined contribution components.

Not including the cost of its defined benefit pension plans, which will be discussed below, fringe benefits grew from 13 percent of salaries, in 1999, to 19 percent of salaries, in 2014.

And just how do the teachers unions, which demand defined benefit pension plans for its members, treat their own employees?

Last week the New York State Teachers» Retirement System (NYSTRS), which provides a defined benefit pension plan to public school teachers and administrators outside of New York City, announced it was raising the required employer contribution rate * from 16.25 to 17.53 percent of payroll.

Statewide defined benefit pension plans, which today serve 90 percent of public school teachers, were originally justified on the grounds that pension plans were ideally suited to the needs of long - term female employees.

I also have a private defined benefits pension plan in which I contribute 10k per year plus my employer's contribution.

In addition to his two rental properties, Gabriel is fortunate to be enrolled in his employer's defined benefit pension plan and also has $ 205,000 in RRSP money, which makes up the bulk of the couple's liquid assets.

Surely by now everyone's heard of defined benefit (DB) plans — the Cadillac of all workplace pensions — which are professionally managed and dole out guaranteed retirement income.

At retirement, the worker has the option of purchasing an annuity, which is similar to Social Security benefits and traditional defined benefit pension plans insofar as they provide a steady income stream for life.

Whether you're leaving an employer - sponsored defined - benefit or defined - contribution pension plan, a LIRA will be the tax - sheltered structure in which your funds will be held.

Most teachers in the United States are covered by a public defined - benefit pension plan in which the employer agrees to provide a guaranteed payment at retirement.

I have one defined benefit pension plan from which I am collecting income from while I still work full time.

There are two main types of RPPs: defined benefit plans, in which pension benefits are specified in the plan, and money purchase (or defined contribution) plans, in which pension benefits are based on combined employer and employee contributions, plus earnings in the plan.

The dollar amount used to determine excess employee compensation with respect to a single - employer defined benefit pension plan for which the special election has been made is $ 1,115,000.

Q: I have a defined benefit pension plan with OMERs which will pay $ 24,000 a year.

As he outlines in Pensionize Your Nest Egg, Milevsky has always emphasized the distinction between what he calls «real» pensions (guaranteed - for - life Defined Benefit pensions) and capital - appreciation vehicles like RRSPs or Defined Contribution plans, which have to be «pensionized» (or «annuitized») before they can be considered to be «real» pensions.

Roughly 32 % of Canadians have a workplace pension plan, of which a smaller percentage have a defined benefit pension plan (versus defined contribution) which guarantees certain payouts in retirement.

I replied that my father was a high school teacher with security and a Defined Benefit pension plan, which may have explained why I tended to stick with salaried employment within other people's businesses.

They should know that Social Security and company pension plans are no longer reliable retirement income options — especially the latter, as private - sector employers eschew defined - benefit plans in favor of defined - contribution plans such as 401 (k) plans, which shift much, if not all, of the savings burden onto the employee.

In this column I'll take a careful look at the pros and cons of both types of workplace retirement savings plans, and you should prepare to be surprised: In many ways the group RRSPs and defined contribution (DC) plans which are usually regarded as the poor cousins of the traditional defined benefit (DB) pensions actually come out ahead.

Jonathan Chevreau, Retired Money columnist for MoneySense, says the strength and predictability of defined benefit pensions (which pay out until death based on your earnings) is disappearing, as corporate plans move to defined contribution pensions (which build wealth based on employee and corporate contributions but do not pay out based on guaranteed formulas).

Unfunded Benefit Liabilities - The amount by which the value of a defined benefit plan's promised pension benefits exceeds the plan's Benefit Liabilities - The amount by which the value of a defined benefit plan's promised pension benefits exceeds the plan's benefit plan's promised pension benefits exceeds the plan's assets.

2016 is the tenth anniversary of the Pension Protection Act, or PPA, which was largely designed to shore up financially troubled defined benefit plans, and their insurer, but the legislation also vastly improved the health of defined - contribution plans including 401 (k) s, now the dominant individual retirement savings vehicle for those Americans who are offered such plans at work, mostly at large companies.

And many employers who sponsor defined benefit pension plans will be pleased by this morning's Ontario government announcement about an entirely new framework for funding defined benefit pension plans, which will come into effect «in the coming weeks».

A defined benefit pension plan is a type of pension plan in which an employer / sponsor promises a specified monthly benefit on retirement that is predetermined by a formula based on the employee's earnings history, tenure of service and age, rather than depending directly on individual investment returns.