Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sschullo

Nea's Endorsement, Aggressive Marketing Of Tsas

Recommended Posts

I thought this case was finished couple of years ago.

ERISA is useless in 403b plans. The insurance industry and the NEA are free to rip off their members. I wonder if CTA will now follow suit.

This case was dripping with conficts of interest and NEA pocketing money from the TSA sales. But ERISA cannot moniter these plans because TSAs are not securities. The union knows this, the inusrance industry knows this but very, very few of the members know this. Sure legally, NEA is right, but is this ethical? Is it ethical not to tell the members the fees they are paying for handholding because they are too stupid anyway.

After all of these years of complaining about union deals, nothing changes. Its a sad day for members.

click here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this case was finished couple of years ago.

ERISA is useless in 403b plans. The insurance industry and the NEA are free to rip off their members. I wonder if CTA will now follow suit.

This case was dripping with conficts of interest and NEA pocketing money from the TSA sales. But ERISA cannot moniter these plans because TSAs are not securities. The union knows this, the inusrance industry knows this but very, very few of the members know this. Sure legally, NEA is right, but is this ethical? Is it ethical not to tell the members the fees they are paying for handholding because they are too stupid anyway.

After all of these years of complaining about union deals, nothing changes. Its a sad day for members.

click here

 

Read the quotation from the article:

 

"After choosing the insurers, the union (NEA) designed certain annuities with them, negotiating the terms of the annuities, exclusively endorsing the annuities as favorable retirement savings vehicles, and aggressively marketing the annuities to union members. The union also monitored and managed the annuities for its participants. In exchange for the union's role in marketing the annuities, the insurers paid royalties of about $2 million per year to the union, took on the salaries of the union's member benefit corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of the union, and contributed to the union's charitable foundations. The insurers also received fees from investment companies whose mutual funds were made available through the annuities. The union did not fully disclose to its members the nature or amount of the payments it received from the insurers or the fact that the insurers received payments from the investment companies whose mutual funds were included in the annuities. Instead, the union marketed the annuities as the most favorable retirement option for its members, despite the fact that the annuities charged fees that were as much as ten times those charged on comparable annuity contracts."

 

NEA may have won the lawsuit, but it has egg all over its face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...