Nfl Union Pertaining To Retired Players

[ajcardfan]

Anyway, my point remains the same--I don't think people should expect to cash in on an ex-employer's success after you've stopped working for them.

Most of these guys are simply looking for the NFL to cover their medical expenses due to the injuries they suffered while playing. Dobler, for instance. If you worked for WalMart, you'd get better compensation for on-the-job injuries. I'd agree with you, if they were just simply looking to get rich, but that's not really the case.

 

[Pariah]

Most of these guys are simply looking for the NFL to cover their medical expenses due to the injuries they suffered while playing.

If that's the case, then I'm with them on that. But that wasn't the question in the original post.

 

[NuttinButTDs]

I didn't know that. They did that before they went public?

I am not sure about that before they went public... In the dotcom years, all employess would get some options based on their position and then most of them busted , except for the owners who sold....

Anyway, my point remains the same--I don't think people should expect to cash in on an ex-employer's success after you've stopped working for them.

Agreed - that ususally depends on the charter of the retirement plan.

..

 

[CardLogic]

Jim Rhome had Jerry Kramer on his radio program yesterday talking about this subject.

He and some others, Ditka, Willie Davis, Harry Carson, Gale Sayers, and Joe DeLamielleure had organized a non-profit fund to help former NFL players who are in dire need.



The are accepting donations and are also having an auction of some great memoribilia:

Some of the items that have been donated and will be featured in the auction include Mike Ditka’s NFC Championship ring, an autographed football customized by Dwight Clark with a drawing of the famous "Catch" play, celebrity experiences with Howie Long, Merlin Olson, and Harry Carson, hand-drawn plays by Vince Lombardi donated by the legendary coach’s son, Eli Manning’s Cleats, a Fearsome Foursome signed print, and much more. Some of the other players who are donating items to be included in the Super Bowl week auction include Gale Sayers, Sam Huff, Willie Davis, Lem Barney, Don Shula, Archie Manning, Jan Stenarud, Paul Hornung , Joe Thiesman, Mel Renfro, Marv Levy, Deacon Jones, many members of the New England Patriots Alumni group, and many more. An auction item preview will be featured on the web site starting Sunday, January 28. The donation drive begins Monday, January 29.​

Go to the following links:


http://www.jerrykramer.com/

http://www.jerrykramer.com/ggaf-fact-sheet.html

http://www.jerrykramer.com/ggaf-auction-preview-page.html

 

[Shane]

retirement benefits from tax qualified plans are basically untouchable. creditors cannot get at them and thus they cannot be attached by a court order. the only way they can be accessed by an individual other than the participant is if a QDRO or QMSCO is filed for a divorce or child support order or by a designated beneficiary upon the death of a participant.

Well that explains why they cant get their retirement. But if there retirement is so bad like people are saying why is OJ's so damn high? Especially considering he played 30 years ago almost?

 

[Captain Matt]

I do agree that the guys making the big bucks shouldn't be getting the pensions, though. They don't need it. If they simply invest a small portion of their salary, they'd be set for life. Why not give better pensions to those that need it most?

Ouch.... Should I happen to make "Admiral" before I retire I'd be getting something like 5X the salary of some of the lowest ranking enlisted folks. Does that mean they should get a pension (retirement) and not me? I worked damn hard to pay for college and to get good grades. Then as a junior officer I stayed out of trouble and took assignments no one else wanted. Just because someone works harder, invests more time and effort in their job, and probably scarifices more, they don't deserve equal treatment???? I'm sure some of the abilities that NFL players have are God-given but many of those guys are the ones who just worked wayyyy harder than everyone else to get where they are. I don't begrudge them their efforts, though I do sometimes question their motives....

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

You're right, pension and medical are very different for ex-NFL players. The old-timers mentioned here get ZERO medical coverage, and much of their health problems stem from their playing days. Players then weren't taken care of as well medically, often played with injuries today's players wouldn't (especially concussions), and weren't protected by the rules like they are now. They *should* get medical care now.

I'm not sure what O.J. Simpson gets in his pension, but I can't believe for one second that most of the old 50's-70's era players are getting anywhere near that $25k/month someone else mentioned.

As for the idea that these guys shouldn't be getting pensions, I disagree. Keep in mind, the majority of NFL players don't make the money you describe (MTV Cribs, etc.). Most only play for a few years, for a minimal (albeit NFL) salary. In that time, they can destroy their body. Major injuries factor into the premature end of many football careers.

I do agree that the guys making the big bucks shouldn't be getting the pensions, though. They don't need it. If they simply invest a small portion of their salary, they'd be set for life. Why not give better pensions to those that need it most?

a good point raised about the non-stars in the league. however, for the most part the football leaves them partially physically incapacitated, they should still have their minds and they should still develop other skills for post-football. just b/c they play football doesn't relieve them from having to exercise other options (as is the reality in college). besides, they cannot access retirement funds prior to reaching age 59 1/2 without incurring a 10% excise tax for early withdrawal anyway, so the longevity of their football career is really a moot point in regards to pension.

in regards to favoring a lesser paid player over a better paid player, it can be designed that way, but you always have to be careful of running afoul of the internal revenue code rules when doing so. though the fact that none of these individuals would be defined as a non-highly compensated employee might temper any of those concerns.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

If you worked for MSFT as fledgling company - you would be a millionaire due to stock options.

There is difference is between retirement income and retirement benefits. The retirement income is based on the income earned. The benefits are the same for all retirees. Usually the change in benefits, specially the change for better, applies to all, as it is good business sense. Benefits tend to be mostly health coverage and hence it does not matter to large coorporations due to group coverage. As a corporation grows in size/market share/wealth, it is distributed (albeit slowly and minimaly) to the retirees. NFLPA should provide benefits to the folks who made this league.

On the flip side, even corporations have cut off retirements with the start of 401K. With corporations not participating in a retirement program, the dire straits of SS fund, no wonder we created a "me" generation. Can't have capitalism and socialism alive and kicking at the same time.

what you say is partially accurate. while changes to a company's health and welfare programs may affect retirees, changes in retirement plans do not. your retirement benefits are based upon a formula that usually takes into consideration your years of service and your final average pay (usually over the last, or highest, 5 years of employment with the employer) and a multiplier. you then accrue the service and a particular benefit. once you terminate employment your benefit accrual ceases and determination of your benefit only changes based on interest rates and actuarial magic.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Well that explains why they cant get their retirement. But if there retirement is so bad like people are saying why is OJ's so damn high? Especially considering he played 30 years ago almost?

first, i think it's all relative. what's "so bad" to an athlete may not be "so bad" to the rest of us.

second, it's possible that OJ's reported retirement might not be all NFL-related.

third, i think it's even older-timers that are really grumbling. by OJ's time the pension may have been better. also, as i just mentioned, pensions are partially determined based on your years of service and salary. i am sure that OJ's tenure and salary was much greater than the average players', thereby affecting the size of his benefits.

finally, time value of money and compounding interest. the actuarial equivalent computation that must be done for pension benefits greatly increases over time. 30 years of growth is pretty damn huge.

 

[Mulli]

what you say is partially accurate. while changes to a company's health and welfare programs may affect retirees, changes in retirement plans do not. your retirement benefits are based upon a formula that usually takes into consideration your years of service and your final average pay (usually over the last, or highest, 5 years of employment with the employer) and a multiplier. you then accrue the service and a particular benefit. once you terminate employment your benefit accrual ceases and determination of your benefit only changes based on interest rates and actuarial magic.

I have no idea what that means, but I want it.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I have no idea what that means, but I want it.

as you should. as should everyone. unfortunately the pension plan (defined benefit, not defined contribution like 401(k)s) is going the way of the dinosaur. the employer liability for a pension plan is enormous. they bear the entire investment risk unlike a 401(k) plan where the employee bears the investment risk. and legal hoops through which an employer must jump to maintain the tax qualified status with both the irs and the dept of labor for a pension plan just make them cost prohibitive in todays litigious society.

 

[NuttinButTDs]

I have no idea what that means, but I want it.

Retirement plans are usually made up of two components.

a. Income
b. Benefits such as health etc

Income tends to be in proportion to the number of years worked and salary. For example, in Clark County, as a county employee you will earn 75% of your last salary if you worked 30 years. The lesser the number of years, the lower the percentage.

Benefits are the same once you are vested.

The best retirement plans are for civil (government) employees. For most of us in the private industry, we will change jobs so many times that we may never get the full benefit of retirement plans if they exist in the company you worked.

Hope this helps

 

[ajcardfan]

Accroding to Mercury Morris, if you retired in the 70s and started to draw your pension at 45, you get $300 a month, 800 if you waited until 55 and 1,000 if you waited until 65. Jay Taylor was on, who retired in the mid-90's said he can get 800-1,000 a month if he starts to take it at 45.

 

[ajcardfan]

Well that explains why they cant get their retirement. But if there retirement is so bad like people are saying why is OJ's so damn high? Especially considering he played 30 years ago almost?

OJ has his own pension he set up according to this article from CNN on the 5 year anniversary of the Simpson verdict:

Living well on a pension

Afterward, Simpson successfully challenged paying the award and lives well today on a hefty pension plan. He draws $25,000 a month on the $4 million pension set up when the former pro football star, actor and ad pitchman was making millions.

Such pensions are exempt from civil court judgments, although any money Simpson earns would be seized immediately by the court. It's not clear if that applies to a lawyer-referral service Simpson has endorsed in a commercial. Terms of his deal were not available.