Public employee pensions

[LA Ute]

Here's a comment from a politician who's got to address this problem:

"Make no mistake about it, pensions and benefits are the major driver of our spending increases at all levels of government -- state, county, municipal and school board. . . . We don't have that money -- you know it and I know it. What has been done to our citizens by offering a pension system we cannot afford and health benefits that are 41% more expensive than the average Fortune 500 company's costs is the truly unfair part of this equation."

This is New Jersey's Gov., Chris Christie. He's describing the state's fiscal crisis. In his speech he highlighted the case of one New Jersey teacher due to receive retirement benefits of $1.6 million after contributing only $62,000 into the retirement system.

Regardless of how one feels about whether the recipients deserve the benefits they get, the system is unsustainable in many places. In Los Angeles we have two police departments - one on duty, one retired, and both receiving full salaries and benefits. The State Legislature (with help from the Attorney General, who interpreted the state constitution in a manner that would allow this) retroactively "enhanced" the pensions of already-retired state employees, adding $8 billion to the state's deficit. Public employee unions are very strong and we are all going to have to pay for that pretty soon. If I'm a private sector taxpayer making $65,000 a year I'm not too happy about a public employee making much more, working 9 to 5, and getting benefits I can only dream of.

It's a problem.

[The_Tick]

DT and I talk about this all the time on our commute from work. My wife is a teacher so she would be somewhat affected by what I propose, but here is how I feel:

Unions/Pensions need to be done away with for Civil Servants.

I understand that there is nothing that can be done to those that have already retired. But there needs to be some changes made to the current system for the following people:

Police
Fire
Corrections
Teachers
State
Federal
City

To receive retirement benefits you have to be 65. Both men and women. You aren't allowed to draw on it early.

If you are a Governer/Senator/President/House Member...doesn't matter...you don't get a golden pension after a few years of service. You also don't get special medical/retirement plans. (So whatever Medical Bill you push, you better effing love it, because that is what you have also.) You get the same stuff the following folks below get:

If you have less than 10 years of service in, the pension that you thought you were going to get you just aren't going to get. I understand that these folks have dangerous jobs (I would say the top 3 for sure, some teachers have dangerous jobs), but instead of giving you lifetime paychecks when you retire and lifetime benefits, you are going to be paid much more up front. Much more. You are going to have to 401K your own retirement though. Just like everyone else. Say hello to SS and Medicare. (My thinking in this is that we would have to budget payroll real time. It would be a real, tangible current expense. Not some make believe number we have to worry about when Joe Q. Public retires in 30 years.)

If you have >10 years of service and are <5 years away from retirement, there is going to be a shift of the pension that you are going to recieve. You can receive no more than 50% of your average wage for your your retirement. You still receive full benefits.

If you have <5 years to retirement, then your pension is as it is now along with benefits. No golden parachutes allowed. You also can't come back on as a contractor after you have retired. If you do, your retirement benefits are placed on hold until your work as a contractor is finished. No double dipping.

I understand that police, fire and corrections all have a tough job and they serve the public well. But if someone doesn't want to be a first year cop for 50K instead of the current 35k then they can find another job. Someone will be willing to do it.

Legally it would be hard to do. But at some point some precedent has to be made somewhere. The courts and the government would have to get involved and say "We know this doesn't seem fair, but this is going to happen. And you can sue if you want, but the courts have been instructed to rule against you."

Not currently legal of course, but shit...something has to be done.

Currently California is 52 Billion in the hole on retirement benefits. 52 BILLION!

[happyone]

As a federal employee, I admit I have a confict of interest, but I think Tick is on to something.

I have a small problem with Police, Firefighters and the military, those professions are fundementally a young man's game. If you do it right, your body is beatup after 20 yrs, esp for NCO's in the military. Maybe you could do something like they do with National Guard/Reserve pensions. You can retire after 20 yrs with some benefits, but can't start drawing your pension until your 60/65.

I like the double dipping provisions. There is some discussion going on right now in the Utah legislature about doing something on this.

While the fed gov't still has a pension program, it has been reduced to a great degree. Before 1983 it was 2.1% of your average high three yr salary X nr of yrs up to 80% of salary. Now it is 1% X nr of yrs, but they've added a 401K type of account (TSP) with a pretty generous match. You can still retire after 30 yrs at age 55, but the way it is set up, you have to have a second career, because you can't draw you TSP money until your 59.5, so most people are not planning on retiring until then.

I think part of the problem with public employee pensions, is that the gov't was getting away with not paying market for employees with the promise that they would make it up in retirement benefits and now it coming home to roost. I know that there have been more than one time the Utah legislature has told employees the in lieu of a pay raise this year, we will give you more in your pension benefits.

[dabrockster]

I would fall under these groups as a State Employee and I agree with Tick's response..

I like it...

The issue I see here is salary. We have a good amount of people in salary ranges that they should not be getting for the work they do. This includes Union and Non-unions as well.

Another issue is Pay ranges continually incfreasing each year. For example, if I work in a Union/non Union position for 3 years. I continue to get increases each of those years, but when a new employee comes in, do they start at the lower salary range? Nope. They start at the same salary I have that took me 3 years to earn.. I think there needs to be something to resolve the constant increases for new employees..

[il Padrino Ute]

I rarely listen to Rush and when I do I can only listen for a few minutes. Today I was scanning through the stations and came across Rush talking about this. I liked his comment that we should treat the public sector the same way that liberals tend to treat the private sector, as in do they really need to make that much? Why do they need that much money?

Perhaps it's time to turn the tables on the public sector and make them prove that they deserve what they are paid, with the exceptions being military, fire, police.

[Solon]

The Pew Center for States put out a study today.

http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/....aspx?id=56695

[frank ryan]

I rarely listen to Rush and when I do I can only listen for a few minutes. Today I was scanning through the stations and came across Rush talking about this. I liked his comment that we should treat the public sector the same way that liberals tend to treat the private sector, as in do they really need to make that much? Why do they need that much money?

Perhaps it's time to turn the tables on the public sector and make them prove that they deserve what they are paid, with the exceptions being military, fire, police.

Where the hell is this coming from? I think it is falsehood that public sector employees have it easy or make a lot of money. This comment strikes me a bit as mean-spirited.
What does he mean about how "liberals" treat the private sector?

[Donuthole]

Where the hell is this coming from? I think it is falsehood that public sector employees have it easy or make a lot of money. This comment strikes me a bit as mean-spirited.

You don't think there are any public sector employees making a lot more money than their qualifications and training merit? Based on what I've learned in handling a lawsuit against the County, I know i'm not ok with a lot of public employee salaries.

[byu71]

I rarely listen to Rush and when I do I can only listen for a few minutes. Today I was scanning through the stations and came across Rush talking about this. I liked his comment that we should treat the public sector the same way that liberals tend to treat the private sector, as in do they really need to make that much? Why do they need that much money?

Perhaps it's time to turn the tables on the public sector and make them prove that they deserve what they are paid, with the exceptions being military, fire, police.

Take the Senior, tenure, length of service, et.al., system out of the Public Sector. If you do that, the problem will start to self correct itself.

By the way, I haven't followed this situation closely. Are the air traffic controllers civil service or private employee's.

[frank ryan]

You don't think there are any public sector employees making a lot more money than their qualifications and training merit? Based on what I've learned through a case against the County I'm currently handling, I know i'm not ok with a lot of public employee salaries.

Not most of the ones I'm familiar with in Utah. I'm sure Nevada is a different story.

[byu71]

You don't think there are any public sector employees making a lot more money than their qualifications and training merit? Based on what I've learned in handling a lawsuit against the County, I know i'm not ok with a lot of public employee salaries.

This isn't employees and happened way back in 1974, but I will bet things haven't changed much.

I was an auditor with Price Waterhouse. We were auditing Santa Clara Unified School District. We noted tons of stuff bought mid June, after school got out.

Of course we had to dig deeper and make sure fraud wasn't going on. No fraud, all the stuff was there, properly approved. We then asked why. Well, they hadn't spent their allotted budget and felt if they didn't spend it, they would have their budget cut the next year. That is how the system I suppose is still set up causing folks to think this way.

[frank ryan]

Take the Senior, tenure, length of service, et.al., system out of the Public Sector. If you do that, the problem will start to self correct itself.

By the way, I haven't followed this situation closely. Are the air traffic controllers civil service or private employee's.

I believe there is shortage of air traffic controllers. So you'd like to see convergys and blackwater, walmart etc take over public employment?

[creekster]

Where the hell is this coming from? I think it is falsehood that public sector employees have it easy or make a lot of money. This comment strikes me a bit as mean-spirited.
What does he mean about how "liberals" treat the private sector?

It's not that they necessarily make a lot of coin or have it easy, although some do, it's htta they have almost complete job security, little acocuntability and are not subject to the market forces that toss the private market seas from time to time (like now).

[dabrockster]

This isn't employees and happened way back in 1974, but I will bet things haven't changed much.

I was an auditor with Price Waterhouse. We were auditing Santa Clara Unified School District. We noted tons of stuff bought mid June, after school got out.

Of course we had to dig deeper and make sure fraud wasn't going on. No fraud, all the stuff was there, properly approved. We then asked why. Well, they hadn't spent their allotted budget and felt if they didn't spend it, they would have their budget cut the next year. That is how the system I suppose is still set up causing folks to think this way.

It is... It is a culture issue. Because even though we have taken cuts in our budgets, even if we still have a surplus they still feel the need to spend exactly what they have..

[byu71]

I believe there is shortage of air traffic controllers. So you'd like to see convergys and blackwater, walmart etc take over public employment?

Thanks for answering my question. Oh wait you didn't, I didn't ask if their was a surplus or lack and I don't even know who the heck convergys and blackwater are, but I don't think that was part of my question either.

Being the good guy I am though, I will answer your question. I would have to study the situation before I would answer whether I wanted walmart to take over public employment.