» Sponsored ads

» Sponsored ads

» Sponsored ads


Go Back   Cafepharma Message Boards > Pharma/Biotech Companies > GlaxoSmithKline
Register Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

GlaxoSmithKline Anonymous board for GlaxoSmithKline

Reply

 
Bookmark and Share Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 5 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-11-2013, 12:25 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Benefits

Does GSK offer a pension? How about medical and dental for retired employees?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-11-2013, 06:55 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Lol Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Does GSK offer a pension? How about medical and dental for retired employees?
Pension plan is Powerball!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-11-2013, 07:03 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Gold watch and a swift kick in the arse?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-11-2013, 08:35 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

The last two posts are made by the moron that posts 99% of the garbage on this board.

Yes, we have a pension and there are retirement healthcare benefits based on age and years of service.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-12-2013, 08:54 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
The last two posts are made by the moron that posts 99% of the garbage on this board.

Yes, we have a pension and there are retirement healthcare benefits based on age and years of service.
In all due respect, this is not entirely accurate. GSK does NOT have a defined-benefit pension plan. The "cash balance" pension is really a defined-contribution benefit. Big difference.

In addition, it appears that GSK has, or is ready to announce to retirees that the company will drop the retiree medical plan. Retirees will be give a subsidy and then must purchase a plan on their own. Apparently, GSK will do what IBM and H-P have announced. Retirees will moved into health exchanges, newly created under "Obamacare".
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-12-2013, 03:40 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
In all due respect, this is not entirely accurate. GSK does NOT have a defined-benefit pension plan. The "cash balance" pension is really a defined-contribution benefit. Big difference.

In addition, it appears that GSK has, or is ready to announce to retirees that the company will drop the retiree medical plan. Retirees will be give a subsidy and then must purchase a plan on their own. Apparently, GSK will do what IBM and H-P have announced. Retirees will moved into health exchanges, newly created under "Obamacare".
Only retirees over the age of 65.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-12-2013, 03:53 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
In all due respect, this is not entirely accurate. GSK does NOT have a defined-benefit pension plan. The "cash balance" pension is really a defined-contribution benefit. Big difference.

In addition, it appears that GSK has, or is ready to announce to retirees that the company will drop the retiree medical plan. Retirees will be give a subsidy and then must purchase a plan on their own. Apparently, GSK will do what IBM and H-P have announced. Retirees will moved into health exchanges, newly created under "Obamacare".
Wrong on both counts. Even if it is a cash balance plan, it is still a pension plan. Since most people do not spend their entire career at a company, it is actually a good thing that it is set up as a cash balance plan.

Secondly, GSK has NOT dropped the retirement healthcare plan. The retirement healthcare plan stays the same when you retire before 65. With the old plan, you still has to rely on Medicare after 65. The change is that you will now get money through the HRA to buy your supplemental insurance. If you do the math, it is not much of a change.

Those darn pesky facts just keep getting in your way, don't they.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-12-2013, 07:31 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Dropping dental and the GSK prescription drug with no copay is a big change in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-12-2013, 07:38 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Dropping dental and the GSK prescription drug with no copay is a big change in my opinion.
Dental was only preventative. It didn't cover the main costs. The company will now offer you the ability to get a group rate on comprehensive. The prescription drug benefit is there up until 65. At 65 you use Part D.

Did you even bother to look at the numbers they gave? Overall, you come out about the same or a bit better (depending on years of service).
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-12-2013, 08:56 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Wrong on both counts. Even if it is a cash balance plan, it is still a pension plan. Since most people do not spend their entire career at a company, it is actually a good thing that it is set up as a cash balance plan.

Secondly, GSK has NOT dropped the retirement healthcare plan. The retirement healthcare plan stays the same when you retire before 65. With the old plan, you still has to rely on Medicare after 65. The change is that you will now get money through the HRA to buy your supplemental insurance. If you do the math, it is not much of a change.

Those darn pesky facts just keep getting in your way, don't they.
I beg to differ. The GSK "Cash Balance" plan still pays out less than a traditional defined benefit plan. It is not a true "pension plan" as we would think in the context of traditional defined benefit plans. What you gain in portability, you lose in total lifetime benefits.

GSK is forcing those over 65 to shop for a supplemental plan in the new exchanges. That is a fact and it has been announced to current employees.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-13-2013, 06:15 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
I beg to differ. The GSK "Cash Balance" plan still pays out less than a traditional defined benefit plan. It is not a true "pension plan" as we would think in the context of traditional defined benefit plans. What you gain in portability, you lose in total lifetime benefits.

GSK is forcing those over 65 to shop for a supplemental plan in the new exchanges. That is a fact and it has been announced to current employees.
WRONG. With traditional plans, you have to be at a company for a very long time (in most cases over 25 years) to have a plan pay more than cash balance. Most people do not stay and work for 1 company.

As to the retirement plan, what did you not understand about the previous post. You must be a moron.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-13-2013, 09:35 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
WRONG. With traditional plans, you have to be at a company for a very long time (in most cases over 25 years) to have a plan pay more than cash balance. Most people do not stay and work for 1 company.

As to the retirement plan, what did you not understand about the previous post. You must be a moron.
I still disagree and, I believe others would as well. The GSK Cash Balance plan is different from a traditional defined benefit plan. Over time, the beneficiary receives a significantly lower pay-out. Have you not the numerous articles on this subject in reputable publications such as The Wall Street journal? Unions have come out against defined contribution plans as well. I agree with your statement with regard to portability. That is a major advantage. However, the fact remains, that upon retirement, a defined benefit plan pays out more in lifetime benefits than does a defined contribution plan.

As far as your assertion that I am moron with regard to my statements about the retiree medical benefits; watch your mail. Employees have just been informed of the coming changes. Those over 65 will now be given an annual subsidy to purchase a supplemental plan through the open ACA exchanges. That is a fact.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-13-2013, 10:09 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
I still disagree and, I believe others would as well. The GSK Cash Balance plan is different from a traditional defined benefit plan. Over time, the beneficiary receives a significantly lower pay-out. Have you not the numerous articles on this subject in reputable publications such as The Wall Street journal? Unions have come out against defined contribution plans as well. I agree with your statement with regard to portability. That is a major advantage. However, the fact remains, that upon retirement, a defined benefit plan pays out more in lifetime benefits than does a defined contribution plan.

As far as your assertion that I am moron with regard to my statements about the retiree medical benefits; watch your mail. Employees have just been informed of the coming changes. Those over 65 will now be given an annual subsidy to purchase a supplemental plan through the open ACA exchanges. That is a fact.
Yes, you are a moron. Did you even bother to read what was posted before about the changes. Run the numbers, stupid. It has relatively little economic impact whatsoever.

As to the pensions, did you even care to read that as well. In traditional plans, you have to be a very long term employee for it to even pay off. If you are like most, where you spend less than 15 years at a company, a traditional plan will pay very little. You need to be a career employee for it to pay more than a cash balance plan.

It is no wonder we have problems with our sales team when we have morons like this working here.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-13-2013, 06:01 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Yes, you are a moron. Did you even bother to read what was posted before about the changes. Run the numbers, stupid. It has relatively little economic impact whatsoever.

As to the pensions, did you even care to read that as well. In traditional plans, you have to be a very long term employee for it to even pay off. If you are like most, where you spend less than 15 years at a company, a traditional plan will pay very little. You need to be a career employee for it to pay more than a cash balance plan.

It is no wonder we have problems with our sales team when we have morons like this working here.
Yo Duffus above, this Bud is for you! I am near retirement age myself and i can tell you, yes we have a pension plan, but it is a fricking pittance as to what i would have had had I worked for most other pharma companies. I see a lot of folks retiring who are my age and I can tell you what I will get is, as I said above, a frikin pittance compared to those retiring from most other company's, So shut your pie hole, as you talk because you have a tongue and not much else!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-13-2013, 06:03 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Yes, you are a moron. Did you even bother to read what was posted before about the changes. Run the numbers, stupid. It has relatively little economic impact whatsoever.

As to the pensions, did you even care to read that as well. In traditional plans, you have to be a very long term employee for it to even pay off. If you are like most, where you spend less than 15 years at a company, a traditional plan will pay very little. You need to be a career employee for it to pay more than a cash balance plan.

It is no wonder we have problems with our sales team when we have morons like this working here.
PS: by the way jackass, you will be hitting retirement age quicker than you think, and I hope you choke on your stupidity
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-13-2013, 07:01 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Wow people were fired up on the benefits conference call today.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-13-2013, 07:15 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Yo Duffus above, this Bud is for you! I am near retirement age myself and i can tell you, yes we have a pension plan, but it is a fricking pittance as to what i would have had had I worked for most other pharma companies. I see a lot of folks retiring who are my age and I can tell you what I will get is, as I said above, a frikin pittance compared to those retiring from most other company's, So shut your pie hole, as you talk because you have a tongue and not much else!
And yet another idiotic poster checking in. In case you haven't looked, most companies have dumped their pensions and GSK is one of the few that still offers one. So, why don't you tell us which companies you are talking about and give us the details of those plans.

We will all wait right here for your answer.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-13-2013, 08:01 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

J&J
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-13-2013, 08:53 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
J&J
Oh really??? Well, let's just hear what the J&J employees have to say:

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/sho...d.php?t=411844



You said it was a pittance compared to most other companies. That must mean you have a long list. Looks like the J&J attempt was a fail......try again. We are still sitting here waiting.....get going....give us that long list....and also give us the details to tell us how you came to the conclusion that most others have a better program.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-13-2013, 11:32 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

You guys are nuts, anyone who is hanging around for these incredible medical benefits are crazy, if you don't think affordable care act is going to change everything, you are missing the boat. Once enacted, all this work to get this protection will be lost, most companies are already making the change. Same shit they pull in the military and not a damn thing you can do about it. Get your head out of the sand. If you disagree, let's talk in 10 years. I might as well be Vegas and you the gambler.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-14-2013, 07:03 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
You guys are nuts, anyone who is hanging around for these incredible medical benefits are crazy, if you don't think affordable care act is going to change everything, you are missing the boat. Once enacted, all this work to get this protection will be lost, most companies are already making the change. Same shit they pull in the military and not a damn thing you can do about it. Get your head out of the sand. If you disagree, let's talk in 10 years. I might as well be Vegas and you the gambler.

The main benefit of getting retirement healthcare coverage is to have something to cover you in the event you retire before 65. Try getting affordable coverage when you retire between the ages of 55 and 65. You are too young for Medicare, yet private insurance will cost an arm and a leg. Most companies have dumped their plans, so consider yourself lucky if you work somewhere that still has this benefit.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-14-2013, 07:41 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Yo Duffus above, this Bud is for you! I am near retirement age myself and i can tell you, yes we have a pension plan, but it is a fricking pittance as to what i would have had had I worked for most other pharma companies. I see a lot of folks retiring who are my age and I can tell you what I will get is, as I said above, a frikin pittance compared to those retiring from most other company's, So shut your pie hole, as you talk because you have a tongue and not much else!
Still waiting for your long list. You said most other pharma companies have better pension programs. You must have that long list ready to go by now. Just give us the names and the details. Tick, tick, tick, tick.......
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-14-2013, 08:33 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Pfizer
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-14-2013, 09:19 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

F the pension.

There is no way to make bonus money here. You can't "blow it out anymore" and make 30K in a quarter. There are MANY other companies where you can still do this.

Your gay little 5% pension comes nowhere near compensating for this.

GSK's compensation is now way below average because the managers are threatened to be put on a coaching memo if they rate their reps too high on the COTS where they can make a decent bonus.

This is a total loser company with incentive comp plan that's a joke and WAY below top industry standards. GSK is a 2nd to 3rd tier job based on total compensation. I would put them on par with a contract company in terms of bonus. Place is a joke.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-14-2013, 09:21 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Arms Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Still waiting for your long list. You said most other pharma companies have better pension programs. You must have that long list ready to go by now. Just give us the names and the details. Tick, tick, tick, tick.......
OK Duffus, sorry to take so long to get back to you, but some people have a life and are not on Cafe Pharma on a Friday night. Just some recent retirees in our area were Novartis, Merk, Abbott and Meade Johnson. Merk rep with 30 years bringing home 75k. Novartis rep with less than 30 years and in early 50's bringing home 65K per year. Abbott rep with 29 years and in early 50's bring home 63k per year. Mead Johnson with 33 years bringing home 95k per year. Any other question DUFFUS?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-14-2013, 10:08 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Yo Duffus above, this Bud is for you! I am near retirement age myself and i can tell you, yes we have a pension plan, but it is a fricking pittance as to what i would have had had I worked for most other pharma companies. I see a lot of folks retiring who are my age and I can tell you what I will get is, as I said above, a frikin pittance compared to those retiring from most other company's, So shut your pie hole, as you talk because you have a tongue and not much else!
I don't know how to spell duffus, but that is a good try! I am a 20+ year employee, in my early 50s, I have low 6-figures in my cash balance pension. That does not seem like very much. I know it is nothing to sneeze at, but; how much longer do I have with this company? Maybe 3-5 years MAX? The company that said, upon my hire, I would get 70% of a calculation of my career salary upon retirement, will be paying me much less in an annuitization of my cash balance pension plan.

I think it is a situation where "I will get much less, AND LIKE IT" as Judge Smales eloquently states...
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-14-2013, 10:11 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Lol Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
OK Duffus, sorry to take so long to get back to you, but some people have a life and are not on Cafe Pharma on a Friday night. Just some recent retirees in our area were Novartis, Merk, Abbott and Meade Johnson. Merk rep with 30 years bringing home 75k. Novartis rep with less than 30 years and in early 50's bringing home 65K per year. Abbott rep with 29 years and in early 50's bring home 63k per year. Mead Johnson with 33 years bringing home 95k per year. Any other question DUFFUS?
Yes, you are a Duffus. Your homework on pensions shows your lack of intellect as well. Mead Johnson changed their program:

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/sho...d.php?t=381355

Novartis??? You should have checked as well:


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_1...rabbing-is-in/

As for Merck and Abbott, take a look at those as well. Unless you have 25 years of service or more, take a look at what you get......not much. By the way, take a look at the Merck funding level of the pension and note that it is subject to change.

You really need to keep up with the times. Most companies have cancelled their plans. Read this article on Pfizer and the comments it makes about other companies:


http://www.pharmalive.com/going-goin...nates-pensions


Note the following:

Of course, many companies have been eliminating or altering the terms of their defined benefit pensions plans in recent years as a way to cut expenses, a trend that has accelerated during the recent recession (here is a list of companies that, since 2005, have either terminated plans, frozen plans for new and/or current employees, or made changes to the formula by which pension benefits are calculated).

Any other questions, Duffus????
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-14-2013, 10:14 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Beyond the 5% in the cash balance plan, we get 2% in stock and 4% in the 401K match. At at total of 11%, that is not too bad compared to what other people get. If you put another 15% away on your own, you should have a nice retirement. If not, it is your fault for being a financial moron.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-14-2013, 01:44 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Lol Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Beyond the 5% in the cash balance plan, we get 2% in stock and 4% in the 401K match. At at total of 11%, that is not too bad compared to what other people get. If you put another 15% away on your own, you should have a nice retirement. If not, it is your fault for being a financial moron.
Duffus, my hand is starting to hurt from slapping you around so much, but what the hell!
In the first place I am sitting in the top 5% of investors for my 401k, so don't lose sleep over me! Secondly, I was just trying to explain to a shlupp like you that the majority (that means most Duffus) of pharma companies have maintained the traditional pension for their employees. New hires are coming under a less generous plan with a cash balance plan. Now Duffus, what that means is that most all the other reps you run into in the field (if you ever leave your house) have a traditional big time payout pension. GSK bailed out of a traditional pension back around 1989 (mommy was still scrubbing your butt and teaching you about your "special purpose"). It was one of the few cheap outfits that did so. Hope you loearned something Duffus!
PS:if your wondering what your "special purpose" is, google Steve Martin and special purpose. Gosh i love having a fool like you around. Like Deputy Dog used to say "don't go away mad, just go away!" LOLOLOL
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-14-2013, 02:06 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Lol Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Yes, you are a Duffus. Your homework on pensions shows your lack of intellect as well. Mead Johnson changed their program:

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/sho...d.php?t=381355

Novartis??? You should have checked as well:


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_1...rabbing-is-in/

As for Merck and Abbott, take a look at those as well. Unless you have 25 years of service or more, take a look at what you get......not much. By the way, take a look at the Merck funding level of the pension and note that it is subject to change.

You really need to keep up with the times. Most companies have cancelled their plans. Read this article on Pfizer and the comments it makes about other companies:


http://www.pharmalive.com/going-goin...nates-pensions


Note the following:

Of course, many companies have been eliminating or altering the terms of their defined benefit pensions plans in recent years as a way to cut expenses, a trend that has accelerated during the recent recession (here is a list of companies that, since 2005, have either terminated plans, frozen plans for new and/or current employees, or made changes to the formula by which pension benefits are calculated).

Any other questions, Duffus????
Duffus, tell me something new. Of course company's are changing their pension plans, but for the most part it is for new hires. GSK was probabley THE FIRST to jump to the cash balance plan screwing thousands of employees. Flap your gums on that one Duffus!
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-14-2013, 04:01 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Duffus, my hand is starting to hurt from slapping you around so much, but what the hell!
In the first place I am sitting in the top 5% of investors for my 401k, so don't lose sleep over me! Secondly, I was just trying to explain to a shlupp like you that the majority (that means most Duffus) of pharma companies have maintained the traditional pension for their employees. New hires are coming under a less generous plan with a cash balance plan. Now Duffus, what that means is that most all the other reps you run into in the field (if you ever leave your house) have a traditional big time payout pension. GSK bailed out of a traditional pension back around 1989 (mommy was still scrubbing your butt and teaching you about your "special purpose"). It was one of the few cheap outfits that did so. Hope you loearned something Duffus!
PS:if your wondering what your "special purpose" is, google Steve Martin and special purpose. Gosh i love having a fool like you around. Like Deputy Dog used to say "don't go away mad, just go away!" LOLOLOL

I think we all know what you are slapping. Face it, you just made yourself look like a fool. I just pointed out that the majority have either changed their plans or have eliminated them. If you read further, many have forced over existing employees to the new plans. What's the matter, can't read? Maybe your low intelligence level doesn't allow you to comprehend.

Based on your inability to understand basic retirement plan documents, I suspect your 401K is sitting in the bottom 5%. Don't worry. Obama is keeping that safety net in place for you, so you should be able to live a somewhat comfortable life in your doublewide.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-14-2013, 06:27 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Duffus, my hand is starting to hurt from slapping you around so much, but what the hell!
In the first place I am sitting in the top 5% of investors for my 401k, so don't lose sleep over me! Secondly, I was just trying to explain to a shlupp like you that the majority (that means most Duffus) of pharma companies have maintained the traditional pension for their employees. New hires are coming under a less generous plan with a cash balance plan. Now Duffus, what that means is that most all the other reps you run into in the field (if you ever leave your house) have a traditional big time payout pension. GSK bailed out of a traditional pension back around 1989 (mommy was still scrubbing your butt and teaching you about your "special purpose"). It was one of the few cheap outfits that did so. Hope you loearned something Duffus!
PS:if your wondering what your "special purpose" is, google Steve Martin and special purpose. Gosh i love having a fool like you around. Like Deputy Dog used to say "don't go away mad, just go away!" LOLOLOL


Looks like you got slammed pretty good. Maybe you should do a little homework next time before you post.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-14-2013, 10:27 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Lol Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
I think we all know what you are slapping. Face it, you just made yourself look like a fool. I just pointed out that the majority have either changed their plans or have eliminated them. If you read further, many have forced over existing employees to the new plans. What's the matter, can't read? Maybe your low intelligence level doesn't allow you to comprehend.

Based on your inability to understand basic retirement plan documents, I suspect your 401K is sitting in the bottom 5%. Don't worry. Obama is keeping that safety net in place for you, so you should be able to live a somewhat comfortable life in your doublewide.
Duffus, Duffus, Duffus, playing with your "special purpose" is making you stupid. You still do not get the point Duffus. Sure, more companies have changed over the last year or two to cash balance plans. But GSK did this in 1998 Duffus, that was 15 years ago. You remember what I told you, that was when mommy was still scrubbing your butt and tickling your dingaling. Since then Duffus a whole lot of GSK people have retired and gotten screwed while those working for other pahrma companies have had great retirement plans. Surely,even a duffus like yourself can understand that? Well Duffus?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-14-2013, 11:39 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Talking Re: Benefits

Dinosaur here....laugh if you may gen X......Massengill, Beecham-Massengill, Beecham Inc. , SmithKlineBeecham, then GlaxoSmithKline { GSK pronounced with the G silent } and I can promise you boys the retirement was super. We didn't even have it in the early days. You fellows can keep whining and crying....ever think about one of those tenured government jobs ?
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-15-2013, 07:49 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Duffus, Duffus, Duffus, playing with your "special purpose" is making you stupid. You still do not get the point Duffus. Sure, more companies have changed over the last year or two to cash balance plans. But GSK did this in 1998 Duffus, that was 15 years ago. You remember what I told you, that was when mommy was still scrubbing your butt and tickling your dingaling. Since then Duffus a whole lot of GSK people have retired and gotten screwed while those working for other pahrma companies have had great retirement plans. Surely,even a duffus like yourself can understand that? Well Duffus?
And, again, you can't read. It doesn't matter when companies changed the plans because many of those had the benefits changed while employed. If you read the plan documents, the company (each company) has the right to change the plan at any time. You will note comments from employees indicating how much they lost with the change at previous companies. At least with GSK, they grandfathered in those in the plans at that time and provided offsets. Further, companies like Pfizer has ELIMINATED their plans. So, if we go back to your original point in which you claimed most other companies have better plans, we can see that you opened up your trap before actually looking into the plans of other companies.

As to your "mommy" comments, it seems you had some weird issues with your mom when you were growing up and you are trying to find a way to talk about them. Sorry, but I don't think any of us can help you with that. I suggest you go get yourself some mental help from a psychiatrist.

So the lesson learned here yet again, is for you to actually read and understand information before making additional comments that make you look even more pathetic.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-15-2013, 03:13 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Lol Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
And, again, you can't read. It doesn't matter when companies changed the plans because many of those had the benefits changed while employed. If you read the plan documents, the company (each company) has the right to change the plan at any time. You will note comments from employees indicating how much they lost with the change at previous companies. At least with GSK, they grandfathered in those in the plans at that time and provided offsets. Further, companies like Pfizer has ELIMINATED their plans. So, if we go back to your original point in which you claimed most other companies have better plans, we can see that you opened up your trap before actually looking into the plans of other companies.

As to your "mommy" comments, it seems you had some weird issues with your mom when you were growing up and you are trying to find a way to talk about them. Sorry, but I don't think any of us can help you with that. I suggest you go get yourself some mental help from a psychiatrist.

So the lesson learned here yet again, is for you to actually read and understand information before making additional comments that make you look even more pathetic.
Duffus, I could sit here, continue slapping you around and trying to educated you, but they do not pay me enough to deal with retards like you. Just go back to being Duffus with your communications degree or whatever schlupp degree you have and remain STUCK ON STUPID. Best of luck to you and god bless those that you work with!
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-15-2013, 04:24 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

" god " is capitalized Einstein.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-15-2013, 05:17 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Duffus, I could sit here, continue slapping you around and trying to educated you, but they do not pay me enough to deal with retards like you. Just go back to being Duffus with your communications degree or whatever schlupp degree you have and remain STUCK ON STUPID. Best of luck to you and god bless those that you work with!
Hahahahahahahahahahaha.........not that great at the spin, are you. Once the links were provided and everyone read for themselves that you were WRONG, it was all downhill from there for you.

Yes, I guess you will have to resort to slapping yourself silly, Duffus.

By the way, did you get your "mommy" issues resolved yet?

Man, do you have some problems.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-16-2013, 08:48 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Lol Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Hahahahahahahahahahaha.........not that great at the spin, are you. Once the links were provided and everyone read for themselves that you were WRONG, it was all downhill from there for you.

Yes, I guess you will have to resort to slapping yourself silly, Duffus.

By the way, did you get your "mommy" issues resolved yet?

Man, do you have some problems.
Yo Duffus, my hand has healed from slapping you so i am back. You can add Bristol Myers Squib to the list that have up until this time honored their reps with a full pension plan. I met a BMS rep today with 25 years and 60 years old and he will retire with 75K per year. Get it Duffus, most of these big pharma companys are STILL paying the fat pensions to those retiring and have been doing so so all along. We stopped that back in 1989 Duffus. Get it through you thick fricking skull that that is better than the small amount GSK pays its' reps with the cash balance plan. Or put it this way Duffus, if you were 60 years old and 30 years with a company would you want a one time payout of 250K or 75k per year for life? Go ask mommy Duffus!
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-17-2013, 12:41 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Yo Duffus, my hand has healed from slapping you so i am back. You can add Bristol Myers Squib to the list that have up until this time honored their reps with a full pension plan. I met a BMS rep today with 25 years and 60 years old and he will retire with 75K per year. Get it Duffus, most of these big pharma companys are STILL paying the fat pensions to those retiring and have been doing so so all along. We stopped that back in 1989 Duffus. Get it through you thick fricking skull that that is better than the small amount GSK pays its' reps with the cash balance plan. Or put it this way Duffus, if you were 60 years old and 30 years with a company would you want a one time payout of 250K or 75k per year for life? Go ask mommy Duffus!
Actually(and I agree with you in principle) I would prefer the 250K. Those 75K a year pension plans are way under funded and cannot pay those obligations. It's a pipe dream and the unions that think they "won" and think they can retire at 50 with 75k a year for life are in for a rude awakening.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 09-17-2013, 09:36 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Actually(and I agree with you in principle) I would prefer the 250K. Those 75K a year pension plans are way under funded and cannot pay those obligations. It's a pipe dream and the unions that think they "won" and think they can retire at 50 with 75k a year for life are in for a rude awakening.
I would be willing to take my chances!
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-17-2013, 12:22 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

The public sector union pensions are the ones that are underfunded. Google BMS defined pensions. The funding of their pension is easily found. Medical benefits can be pulled. Defined pensions can only be discontinued and stopped at a certain point in time. Unless the company goes bankrupt and they go unfunded. Big Pharma is not going bankrupt
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-17-2013, 06:06 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
The public sector union pensions are the ones that are underfunded. Google BMS defined pensions. The funding of their pension is easily found. Medical benefits can be pulled. Defined pensions can only be discontinued and stopped at a certain point in time. Unless the company goes bankrupt and they go unfunded. Big Pharma is not going bankrupt
Almost all private pension plans allow a company to change the deal at any time. If you spent more time researching the BMS plan that you think is so great, you would find out that they changed their plan midstream on people and many lost $$$$. Read this:

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/sho...d.php?t=379752
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-17-2013, 06:08 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

And, look at this one on BMS:

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/sho...d.php?t=381355
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-20-2013, 08:53 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Almost all private pension plans allow a company to change the deal at any time. If you spent more time researching the BMS plan that you think is so great, you would find out that they changed their plan midstream on people and many lost $$$$. Read this:

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/sho...d.php?t=379752
Yah right Duffus, i get my information from Cafe Pharma! Do they offer information on investing too? Can't wait for that!
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-23-2013, 04:19 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Retiree healthcare changes, let's get it right. For current retirees 65 and over they have the option to continue with the current plan. For those not yet Medicare eligible, employees and retirees (<65) will move to the new plan. The company currently pays about $5600 for the Medicare gap coverage, this will move to a contribution of $1500, this is a 70%+ reduction in the subsidy. The new plan requires the employee to shop for a Medigap policy; moreover, these do not provide prescription coverage which needs to be purchased under a Medicare Part D plan at an additional cost. As long as you are healthy the new plan will not add much cost. If you get sick however it is a significant disadvantage. If the new plan was as wonderful as presented why not offer an option to continue with the old plan. The company will save significant money, that is fine but it should have been done on a more balanced basis and provided a softer landing to those retirees near age 65. GSK should give more considered thought when it needs to break a social agreement with its retirees.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-23-2013, 09:18 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Benefits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Retiree healthcare changes, let's get it right. For current retirees 65 and over they have the option to continue with the current plan. For those not yet Medicare eligible, employees and retirees (<65) will move to the new plan. The company currently pays about $5600 for the Medicare gap coverage, this will move to a contribution of $1500, this is a 70%+ reduction in the subsidy. The new plan requires the employee to shop for a Medigap policy; moreover, these do not provide prescription coverage which needs to be purchased under a Medicare Part D plan at an additional cost. As long as you are healthy the new plan will not add much cost. If you get sick however it is a significant disadvantage. If the new plan was as wonderful as presented why not offer an option to continue with the old plan. The company will save significant money, that is fine but it should have been done on a more balanced basis and provided a softer landing to those retirees near age 65. GSK should give more considered thought when it needs to break a social agreement with its retirees.
First of all, the company contribution varies based on years of service and maxs out at 20 years. Secondly, you have not compared the real out of pocket. Third, the primary benefit has always been the coverage before 65. Medicare covers most after 65, and the subsidy will cover most of the gap insurance. Most companies have tossed this benefit, so be grateful you have something.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.