This is a letter to the editor of the Quad City Times that came out in the Times this morning.
Deere small print tells another story
By T. Grooms, East Moline | Sunday, October 14, 2007
14 comment(s) | Rate this article | Default | Large
On Sept. 20, Deere & Co. publicly announced changes it was making in health benefits affecting 5,000 retirees from John Deere facilities. A company spokesman made statements to the effect Deere & Co. would gain no advantage, and the changes would actually provide choices for retirees.
On the fourth page of the material sent to affected retirees, it states in small print what it did not say in its public announcement ?— the following:
?“Deere & Co. reserves the right to suspend or terminate the Plan(s); to modify the Plan(s) to provide different cost sharing between the company and participants; and to amend the Plan(s) in any respect.?”
Deere & Co. annually reminds employees that health benefits are an important and expensive part of employee total compensation. Pay and benefits comprise total compensation. We were told health insurance continued through retirement.
Worldwide accounting
standards require companies to display health benefits as a liability on the company?’s balance sheet, recognizing health benefits as an obligation the company has to the employees and retiree ?— an obligation such as a debt.
Even in the country?’s worst economic times, and even in the worst economic times in Deere & Co.?’s 170-year history, the company has not reduced health insurance benefits. In what are perhaps the company?’s most profitable years ?—with John Deere stock selling at historic highs ?— what justification other than naked greed can the company offer for this attempted grab?
I enclosed the following information as I personally know this person.
T. Grooms was the manager or supervisor of the Industrial Relations labor Department of Deere & Co for around 25 years, a salary employee not covered by Union contract.
A week or so ago Deere announced that they were changing the Health benefits for 5000 retirees.
They also did not tell you that these were salary employees.
They also did not tell you that you will have to pay 1/2 of the premiums of your insurance even though you had been retired since 1993 and these premiums were covered as part of your retirement package.
Now I ask how secure is your benefit package in your retirement ?
Just a little food for thought as I have a real good idea where Mr T.Grooms and others will be taking this as he is a Labor Attorney.
Deere small print tells another story
By T. Grooms, East Moline | Sunday, October 14, 2007
14 comment(s) | Rate this article | Default | Large
On Sept. 20, Deere & Co. publicly announced changes it was making in health benefits affecting 5,000 retirees from John Deere facilities. A company spokesman made statements to the effect Deere & Co. would gain no advantage, and the changes would actually provide choices for retirees.
On the fourth page of the material sent to affected retirees, it states in small print what it did not say in its public announcement ?— the following:
?“Deere & Co. reserves the right to suspend or terminate the Plan(s); to modify the Plan(s) to provide different cost sharing between the company and participants; and to amend the Plan(s) in any respect.?”
Deere & Co. annually reminds employees that health benefits are an important and expensive part of employee total compensation. Pay and benefits comprise total compensation. We were told health insurance continued through retirement.
Worldwide accounting
standards require companies to display health benefits as a liability on the company?’s balance sheet, recognizing health benefits as an obligation the company has to the employees and retiree ?— an obligation such as a debt.
Even in the country?’s worst economic times, and even in the worst economic times in Deere & Co.?’s 170-year history, the company has not reduced health insurance benefits. In what are perhaps the company?’s most profitable years ?—with John Deere stock selling at historic highs ?— what justification other than naked greed can the company offer for this attempted grab?
I enclosed the following information as I personally know this person.
T. Grooms was the manager or supervisor of the Industrial Relations labor Department of Deere & Co for around 25 years, a salary employee not covered by Union contract.
A week or so ago Deere announced that they were changing the Health benefits for 5000 retirees.
They also did not tell you that these were salary employees.
They also did not tell you that you will have to pay 1/2 of the premiums of your insurance even though you had been retired since 1993 and these premiums were covered as part of your retirement package.
Now I ask how secure is your benefit package in your retirement ?
Just a little food for thought as I have a real good idea where Mr T.Grooms and others will be taking this as he is a Labor Attorney.