Dave Baker

Hello! Here's a request for your comments on this idea: It's somewhat less secure to have the standard username/password log-in system if a would-be intruder already has a username to work with. The log-in form can be submitted multiple times with a series of commonly-used passwords, looking to see whether 01234567890 matches, for example. Currently these message boards enable you to log in using either (i) your "Display Name" (which is displayed, natch, next to every post you've made), or (ii) your email address (i.e., the one you used when you first signed up). So somebody else would be able to enter your Display Name into a log-in form and then start throwing potential passwords into the form, until the intruder succeeds or goes to bed. Of course, the world doesn't end if there were to be a "break-in" -- the intruder might simply alter your posts to say "I think ERISA attorneys are weenies" or some other heresy -- and yet many of us use the same password for our bank accounts, our Tinder accounts -- haw -- etc., so having a password that works on BenefitsLink lets them go monkeying around on other more potentially profitable websites on which you might be a registered user. So (at long last, getting to the point here), the proposal would be to require the use of email addresses for log-in, and no longer permit Display Names for log-in. Your email address, unlike your Display Name, is not displayed on the message boards, so it's not public knowledge insofar as a message boards visitor is concerned. But of course you know your own email address, so the log-in process wouldn't be seem to be any more burdensome. I thought about the possible problem of logging in after your email address has changed (you're at a new job, etc.), but actually the log-in process would be unaffected. You'd still enter the email address you had used when you signed up, and your usual password. The log-in system wouldn't know or care that your "real" email address has changed. What do you think?

@austin3515The settings have been identified and changed. Although it was fun to be a rocketeer for a minute there...

@austin3515We had bid $27.5 million but the other guy got it at $28 million. Dang. Maybe next launch. As for the rocket ships, your humble servant is still trying to determine what and why. Seems to be a lagniappe with a security upgrade from the software vendor, which I applied this morning. It's always something...

Ahoy, could someone do me a big favor and take a call from an attorney friend of mine who might be taking a plan sponsor into the PBGC mediation program that was started in 2019? He'd like to find out a little more ahead of time. It's a single-employer plan. Feel free to post a reply here, or contact me via the "Message" button on my "profile" (click on my name). Thanks!

Luke Bailey is not far from Ft. Worth https://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?/profile/92850-luke-bailey/

Welcome, Barry! So great to have you onboard, and your valuable contributions.

One for Tom. Bear sees hunter, starts chasing hunter. Hunter finally runs out of breath, turns to bear. "Please -- please -- don't eat me!" Hunter closes his eyes and begins reciting the Rosary -- "Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with you..." -- Bear then exclaims, "Peace be with you! I'm Catholic too!" -- Hunter's eyes open wide, and he breathes a sigh of relief. -- Bear, licking lips, says, "Bless us, O Lord, for these thy gifts which we are about to receive from thy bounty..."

Here are some articles of possible interest, as well: https://benefitslink.com/search/index.cgi?sort=1&startNumber=1&resultsPerPage=10&datasource=MYDB&textQuery="suspension+of+benefits"&level=advanced&lookback=0

Employers can post an entry-level job opening (meaning no experience in the employee benefits field is required) at no charge. We're happy to help the industry "prime the pump"!

Sometimes they're kinda cranky about not being able to take a real vacation for a couple of decades (without toting along a computer to put together a daily email newsletter). Still, they just paid off the mortgage, the boy was able to go to a good college, and there's money set aside in connection with this retirement concept that one hears about. Plus there couldn't be a finer group of subscribers and message board users, and in some sense our intrepid Internet pioneers have helped the cause of retirement security as well as helping people find good jobs and do their jobs more easily and effectively. So it's all good! Here's our "amendment and restatement" in a work photo (Gymboree in pinstripes, doncha know) that dad took and fiddled with in 1995, when this world-wide web thingie got started. Joey will be 27 in a couple of months. He has no interest in employee benefits, though, and the former Floridian prefers to work as a snowboard instructor and maintenance engineer at a ski resort near Mt. Hood in Oregon.

WANTED by the FBI

Think I'll withdraw this idea. Thanks!

The idea would be to replace the existing message boards with New BenefitsLink (click) -- what could possibly go wrong?

<Bump> This unanswered topic needs some love 😄

<Bump> This unanswered question needs some love 😄

Request for comments -- I wonder if you think it would be a Good Thing vs. a Bad Thing for the community to allow members to post a message (i.e., start a topic) that's commercial in nature because it would enable the member to describe more about himself or herself, or describe his or her firm/employer, or both -- e.g., something like a LinkedIn page. It might describe what services or products are provided by a firm/employer, where it's located, who to contact for more information, a logo or other image (e.g, a map or a photo of the member or a facility etc.), its history, how many people are employed, and similar facts. A personal bio might describe what sorts of hobbies the individual has, and whether he or she would like to connect with other members who are ham radio operators (for example), in addition to any desired "commercial" information (without the fear of breaking any rule that otherwise would stop the member from feeling free to include it). It would be limited to one such topic per firm/employer, but it could be edited from time to time as desired by the member. It would allow the posting of reply messages into the topic (e.g., people could ask questions or even develop a conversation with the member about the firm/employer). I know the message board software has a "profile" feature (click on a member's name next to any posted message), and it includes an "Interests" field and a "About Me" field, but it's a bit hidden, and not as free-form as the idea I'm describing. Perhaps the privilege would extend only to members who have are large contributors -- X or more posts -- as a reward and incentive for participation.

I've asked Ken to be sure his posts are about subjects that pertain to employee benefits. They're certainly unlike the other posts we've had to date, because they're not questions posted by a practitioner for discussion, or other sorts of practitioner-shared information. That's probably the source of the understandable discomfort. Many employers are offering "financial wellness" benefits, basically being educational programs. That's a sort of welfare/fringe benefit, which is probably why Ken chose to post the messages in the "Other Kinds of Welfare Benefit Plans" forum/message board. His most recent post (which is not a product pitch) is about student loans; as you know, some employers are running programs that actually pay pay off student loans for employees, because it's a very attractive employee benefit for the younger employee or potential employee who is saddled with high payments. But that sort of information is valuable to employers and not so much to practitioners, who make up the vast majority of users of the message boards. Still, they would be useful to a practitioner who advises employers about fringe benefits. Reaction?

Can you point me to an example? Thanks

Bill, do you have a selection called "Ignored Users" that appears in the drop-down menu that appears when you click on your name (top-right corner when logged in)? I have one, but it might be reserved to "Administrators" for some reason. I haven't tried it. It includes a field in which you'd type the member's name. (I believe that would be whatever is showing as the user's name to the left of individual posts by the user.) See attached image file.

(Rhetorical question.) Updated for 2021 numbers: https://benefitslink.com/cgi-bin/inte-greater/ Not sure how useful it is nowadays, but the free, online "Inte-Greater" determines the integration level that provides the greatest share of the contributions for one or more "favored" employees. More than a bit clumsy on the input end, and no way to save the data, but maybe fun to play with. I enjoyed writing it in Turbo Pascal in 1992. The online version is written in Perl.

I apologize for springing the new version on an unsuspecting world. The vendor of the software rolled out the new version and emphasized that it's a security patch as well as containing some new functionality. The new "look" was unfortunately not optional to me in doing the upgrade, but the vendor believes it's easier to read and to use. I hope you'll agree. I know that I, and most people, hate adjusting to changes, but here we are. And, hey kid, get offa my lawn!

Interesting. I wonder if the participant figured that income tax rates might increase substantially in 2021, so decided to take on the income taxes in order to take advantage of the historically low rates in the 2020 taxable year.

Could someone "restate" the question and the answer here, especially the takeaway point for TPAs?

Hadn't thought about it! A "collector's emoji" -- might be able to sell it at the flea market ? Thanks for everything you add to the message boards, which is a great deal!

@Effen -- "If you can't allocate within 5 years due to 415 limits" should read "If you can't allocate within 7 years due to 415 limits" ?