Skip to main content
PensionRisk

United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan vs Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund

Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data

United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan and Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund are meaningfully apart on the LakeQuality pension-health rubric: United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan grades D while Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund grades A. Funding ratios: 51% vs 99%.

Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund comes out ahead on the composite rubric. For a participant in either plan, the spread is informative but not directly actionable — pension participation is not portable, so the relevant question is what each plan's funded-status trajectory means for that participant's benefit security.

Verdict

Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund has a stronger Pension Health Score of 99/100 (A) compared to United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan at 49/100 (D). Funding ratios differ by 47.1 percentage points (98.6% vs 51.5%). Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund covers 44,923 participants.

MetricUnited Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension PlanLaborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
49/100 (D)99/100 (A)*
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
51.5%98.6%*
Total Assets$3.3B$4.9B
Total Liabilities$6.5B$5.0B*
Unfunded Liability$3.1B$71.8M*
Participants73,91344,923
1-Year Investment Return5.0%5.3%*
Plan Typemultiemployermultiemployer
PBGC Risk Levelhighlow
SponsorUMWALIUNA

Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund has a stronger Pension Health Score of 99/100 (A) compared to United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan at 49/100 (D). Funding ratios differ by 47.1 percentage points (98.6% vs 51.5%). Laborers National (Industrial) Pension Fund covers 44,923 participants.

Explore More

Related Comparisons