Author Topic: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.  (Read 11191 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #75 on: February 24, 2011, 07:31:14 PM »
Outrage, anxiety after Providence mayor fires almost 2,000 teachers
CNN.com ^ | 2/24/11



CNN) -- The firing of every teacher in the Providence public school system has set off a wave of anxiety, anger and uncertainty in the Rhode Island city, with a union leader blasting the mayor's decision as anti-union maneuvering along the lines of what's happening in the Midwest.

Mayor Angel Tavares said in a online message Wednesday that he authorized the previous day's move to dismiss almost 2,000 teachers and staff to allow for greater flexibility once the budget process is complete. Tavares also said the final number of layoffs needed to balance a multimillion budget deficit will be determined later.

Still that explanation did little to assuage those teachers in the firing line, nor did a closed-door forum Thursday with Superintendent Tom Brady on the matter.

"The mood in the meeting today was extremely grim," one such teacher, Lori Iannucci, told CNN affiliate WPRI. "Teachers felt very negative, unappreciated. No questions were answered."

Teachers said that their union wasn't notified beforehand of the termination notices. At Thursday's meeting, they said they were given general assurances that the situation could be resolved within the next month.

But Steve Smith, president of the city's teacher's union, said he believed the decision "makes no sense at all to teachers or the community." He accused Tavares of "making a political decision to take control and silence workers" -- a group that, he said, has consistently and continually worked with city leaders to implement reforms.

"It's shocking that in the midst of working in a collaborative environment ... the mayor says you're fired," Smith told reporters. "This sounds very much like what's going on in Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana, where lawmakers want to get rid of collective bargaining and remove the voice of workers."


(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #76 on: February 24, 2011, 07:42:34 PM »
LOL @ a mayor (in his 7th week on the job) firing teachers who have taught 28 years.




Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #77 on: February 24, 2011, 07:43:59 PM »
LOL @ a 4-year term mayor firing teachers who have taught 28 years.



240 - yes or no - havent I been saying this stuff was coming now for at least a year and a half? 


240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #78 on: February 24, 2011, 08:16:44 PM »
240 - yes or no - havent I been saying this stuff was coming now for at least a year and a half? 

Definitely man.  nobody is saying you didn't get it wrong.

I just find it funny a georgetown lawyer from private practice can show up and fire 2000 teachers who have given 20 or 30 years to the job....

he's been in office since early january.  After orientation and decorating the office, he's probably done a totl of 20 actual days of work.  As MAYOR.


And he has the power to put 2000 people out of work.  that's 2000 people who spend 4 or 6 years in college to be teachers.  And he's worked 20 days and he's fired them all.



I dont know if it's the right or wrong move... it just blows my mind he has that kinda power.  Governor, I could see having that power.  I didn't know mayors could fire 2000 teachers, that's all.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #79 on: February 24, 2011, 08:36:10 PM »
He probably say the P n L and fainted.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #80 on: February 25, 2011, 05:25:54 AM »
Rubicon: A river in Wisconsin
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, February 25, 2011



The magnificent turmoil now gripping statehouses in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana and soon others marks an epic political moment. The nation faces a fiscal crisis of historic proportions and, remarkably, our muddled, gridlocked, allegedly broken politics have yielded singular clarity.

At the federal level, President Obama's budget makes clear that Democrats are determined to do nothing about the debt crisis, while House Republicans have announced that beyond their proposed cuts in discretionary spending, their April budget will actually propose real entitlement reform. Simultaneously, in Wisconsin and other states, Republican governors are taking on unsustainable, fiscally ruinous pension and health-care obligations, while Democrats are full-throated in support of the public-employee unions crying, "Hell, no."

A choice, not an echo: Democrats desperately defending the status quo; Republicans charging the barricades.

Wisconsin is the epicenter. It began with economic issues. When Gov. Scott Walker proposed that state workers contribute more to their pension and health-care benefits, he started a revolution. Teachers called in sick. Schools closed. Demonstrators massed at the capitol. Democratic senators fled the state to paralyze the Legislature.

Unfortunately for them, that telegenic faux-Cairo scene drew national attention to the dispute - and to the sweetheart deals the public-sector unions had negotiated for themselves for years. They were contributing a fifth of a penny on a dollar of wages to their pensions and one-fourth what private-sector workers pay for health insurance.

The unions quickly understood that the more than 85 percent of Wisconsin not part of this privileged special-interest group would not take kindly to "public servants" resisting adjustments that still leave them paying less for benefits than private-sector workers. They immediately capitulated and claimed they were only protesting the other part of the bill, the part about collective-bargaining rights.


Indeed. Walker understands that a one-time giveback means little. The state's financial straits - a $3.6 billion budget shortfall over the next two years - did not come out of nowhere. They came largely from a half-century-long power imbalance between the unions and the politicians with whom they collectively bargain.

In the private sector, the capitalist knows that when he negotiates with the union, if he gives away the store, he loses his shirt. In the public sector, the politicians who approve any deal have none of their own money at stake. On the contrary, the more favorably they dispose of union demands, the more likely they are to be the beneficiary of union largess in the next election. It's the perfect cozy setup.

To redress these perverse incentives that benefit both negotiating parties at the expense of the taxpayer, Walker's bill would restrict future government-union negotiations to wages only. Excluded from negotiations would be benefits, the more easily hidden sweeteners that come due long after the politicians who negotiated them are gone. The bill would also require that unions be recertified every year and that dues be voluntary.

Recognizing this threat to union power, the Democratic Party is pouring money and fury into the fight. Fewer than 7 percent of private-sector workers are unionized. The Democrats' strength lies in government workers, who now constitute a majority of union members and provide massive support to the party. For them, Wisconsin represents a dangerous contagion.

Hence the import of the current moment - its blinding clarity. Here stand the Democrats, avatars of reactionary liberalism, desperately trying to hang on to the gains of their glory years - from unsustainable federal entitlements for the elderly enacted when life expectancy was 62 to the massive promissory notes issued to government unions when state coffers were full and no one was looking.

Obama's Democrats have become the party of no. Real cuts to the federal budget? No. Entitlement reform? No. Tax reform? No. Breaking the corrupt and fiscally unsustainable symbiosis between public-sector unions and state governments? Hell, no.

We have heard everyone - from Obama's own debt commission to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - call the looming debt a mortal threat to the nation. We have watched Greece self-immolate. We can see the future. The only question has been: When will the country finally rouse itself?

Amazingly, the answer is: now. Led by famously progressive Wisconsin - Scott Walker at the state level and Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan at the congressional level - a new generation of Republicans has looked at the debt and is crossing the Rubicon. Recklessly principled, they are putting the question to the nation: Are we a serious people?

letters@charleskrauthammer.com


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/24/AR2011022406520.html


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #81 on: February 25, 2011, 06:35:24 AM »
Gov. Brown will push for a $25-billion cut unless voters OK tax extension
The Los Angeles Times ^ | February 25, 2011 | By Anthony York and Shane Goldmacher




Sacramento — Gov. Jerry Brown said Thursday that he would hold out for a budget that cuts more than $25 billion from state services if voters and lawmakers do not approve more taxes.

Brown made his comments to a panel of lawmakers who are working on a spending plan — the first time in nearly 50 years that a sitting governor has testified before the Legislature.

"I want to make one thing clear," Brown said. "... If we don't get the tax extensions, I am not going to sign a budget [unless it is] an all-cuts budget."

Brown, a Democrat, has said he does not want to borrow to close the gap or employ the kinds of bookkeeping gimmicks used to balance the budget in recent years. He has alluded to "dire consequences" if his plan to extend billions in income, sales and vehicle taxes is not taken to voters and ratified this year.

But a spokeswoman for the Service Employees International Union called the proposal "fundamentally unfair to workers and unwarranted by the facts."

For the first time Thursday, Brown seemed ready to include discussion of pension changes as part of the budget negotiations. He sparred with Assemblywoman Diane Harkey (R-Dana Point), asking if she would support the tax package if it were coupled with a plan to curb pensions.

"If that's serious, let's do it," Brown said.


(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #82 on: February 25, 2011, 09:15:21 AM »
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


February 25, 2011 http://detnews.com/article/20110225/OPINION01/102250330

Editorial: Public retiree health costs must be confronted

Local governments have billions in unfunded retirement health liabilities

THE DETROIT NEWS

Many of Michigan's local governments have made retirement promises to their employees that they probably can't keep. A new study from the Citizens Research Council of Michigan finds that counties, municipalities and schools have built up huge retiree health care liabilities, most of which are unfunded. Dealing with these costs can no longer be avoided or postponed.

While Gov. Rick Snyder has laid out a plan on current state employee health coverage, he hasn't yet unveiled his accompanying proposal for retirement health care benefits, beyond starting to invest $200 million a year toward the unfunded liability for them. His plan is coming soon and should provide a guideline to local government and school leaders for handling these benefits as well.

Some already have done away with retirement health coverage for all new hires, but still are on the hook for current retirees and current workers who'll retire in the future. The Citizens Research Council study shows those local governments will need relief of some kind.

The nonpartisan organization sampled 50 of the state's 83 counties and found they have made $4 billion worth of retirement health care commitments but haven't set aside funds to cover $3 billion of this obligation.

As startling as that may seem, it's but a fraction of the liability for the entire state. There are at least 1,800 local units of government and 800 traditional K-12, intermediate and charter school districts in Michigan, as many as two-thirds of which may have retirement health care agreements with their workers.

The report notes that when local governmental units started handing out such benefits in the 1950s, they seemed like a good concession to make. The costs then were small compared to overall budgets of counties and municipalities.

Citing state data regarding membership in the state's Municipal Employees Retirement System used by 708 local governments, the Citizens Research Council said, however, that the number of retired workers drawing these health benefits nearly tripled between 1955 and 2008.

Further, health care spending has escalated at a rate that's 2.4 percentage points faster than growth of the economy since 1970, according to the report. A generation of Baby Boomers heading toward retirement will exacerbate the problem in the next few years.

Budgets of counties, townships and cities, meanwhile, are being slammed by falling property values — and tax revenues — as well as severe cuts in state revenue sharing. Lawmakers have tried to protect schools, but they, too, face a considerable decline in state aid under Snyder's 2012 budget proposal.

It's easy to see how this sets up an impending clash between what schools and local governments have promised and the scarce dollars they'll have available to meet those commitments. Snyder, wisely, has pledged to partner with unions to solve the problem, rather than go to war. That, too, is an example for labor leaders and local officials to follow.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© Copyright 2011 The Detroit News. All rights reserved. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #83 on: February 27, 2011, 04:58:33 AM »
latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-pensions-20110226,0,7405680.story

latimes.com
Editorial
Day of reckoning on pensions
The Little Hoover Commission paints a bleak picture of what's ahead for state and local governments in California.
February 26, 2011



 
The housing bubble and subsequent Wall Street collapse wreaked havoc on the nation's retirement savings, as many pension funds and 401(k) plans suffered losses of 30% or more. State and local governments are now facing huge unfunded pension liabilities, prompting policymakers to scramble for ways to close the gap without slashing payrolls and services. But a new report from the Little Hoover Commission in Sacramento makes a more troubling point: Many state and local government employees have been promised pensions that the public couldn't have afforded even had there been no crash.


The commission's analysis of the problem is hotly disputed by union leaders, who contend that the financial woes of pension funds have been overblown. The commission's recommendations are equally controversial: Among other things, it urges state lawmakers to roll back the future benefits that current public employees can accrue, raise the retirement age and require employees to cover more pension costs. Given that state courts have rejected previous attempts to alter the pensions already promised to current workers, the commission's recommendation amounts to a Hail Mary pass. Yet it's one worth throwing.

A bipartisan, independent agency that promotes efficiency in government, the Little Hoover Commission studied the public pension issue for 10 months before issuing its findings Thursday. Much of the 90-page report is devoted to making the case that, to use the commission's blunt words, "pension costs will crush government." Without a "miraculous" improvement in the funds' investments, the commission states, "few government entities — especially at the local level — will be able to absorb the blow without severe cuts to services."

The problem is partly demographic. The number of people retiring from government jobs is growing rapidly, and longer life expectancies mean that a growing number of retirees will collect benefits for more years than they worked. But the report argues that political factors have been at least as important in driving up costs, starting with the Legislature's move in 1999 to reduce the retirement age for public workers, base pensions on a higher percentage of a worker's salary and increase benefits retroactively. The increases authorized by Sacramento soon spread across the 85 public pension plans in California.

Compounding the problem, the state has increased its workforce almost 40% since the pension formula was changed and boosted the average state worker's wages by 50%. Local governments, meanwhile, raised their average salaries by 60%. Much of the growth came in the ranks of police and firefighters, who increased significantly in number and in pay.

There's nothing inherently wrong with generous pension plans. Pensions, after all, are just a form of compensation that's paid after retirement, not before. The problem, particularly for local governments, is that the plans are proving to be far costlier than officials anticipated or prepared for. By their own reckoning, the 10 largest public pension systems in California had a $240-billion shortfall in 2010.

When the funds don't have enough money to cover their long-term liabilities, state and local governments are compelled to increase their contributions. In Los Angeles, the report says, the city's retirement contributions are projected to double by 2015, taking up a third of the city's operating budget. It projects that governments throughout the state will have to raise their contributions by 40% to 80% over the next few years, then maintain that higher rate for three decades.

The more tax dollars governments have to devote to pensions, the more they'll have to take from other programs or from taxpayers. That means more layoffs or pay cuts for public employees, higher taxes, fewer services, or all of the above.

The situation won't be so dire if the plans earn more on their investments than expected. But with the plans typically counting on annual returns near 8%, or twice the "risk-free" level suggested by some analysts, it seems just as likely that they'll earn less than that, forcing local governments to contribute even more.

The Legislature and some local governments have sought to ameliorate the situation by reducing benefits for new hires and persuading current workers to contribute more to their pension funds. The commission's report, however, argues that these moves aren't sufficient. The savings from the lower pensions for new employees won't be realized for many years, and the increased contributions aren't nearly enough to close the funding gap.

The only real solution, the report contends, is to reduce the benefits that current employees are slated to earn in the coming years. That's hard to do. California courts have held that pensions for current employees can be increased without their approval, but not decreased unless they're given a comparable benefit in exchange. Nevertheless, the commission calls on the Legislature to give itself and local governments explicit authority to trim the benefits that current employees have not yet accrued, without touching the amounts they have already earned. It also calls for a hybrid retirement plan that combines a smaller pension with a 401(k) plan and Social Security benefits, as well as the elimination of a variety of loopholes used to inflate pensions.

The commission is right about the importance of reducing the liabilities posed by current employees. And though picking a fight with unions over unilateral reductions in pensions probably isn't the solution, the report should persuade both sides to do more at the negotiating table to prevent pension costs from swamping state and local budgets. As the commission notes, public employees in California enjoy some of the most generous pension plans in the country. Those plans won't do them much good, however, if their employer can't afford to keep them on the payroll.

Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #84 on: February 27, 2011, 05:52:26 AM »
NEA to Double Member Dues Contribution to Political War Chest
Hot Air ^ | Feb. 26, 2011 | Mike Antonucci



Amid substantial membership losses and a $14 million shortfall in its general operating budget, the National Education Association plans to double each active member’s annual contribution to the national union’s political and media funds.

Currently, $10 of each active member’s NEA dues is allocated to these special accounts. The more than $20 million collected each year is then disbursed to state affiliates and political issue campaigns – such as last year’s SQ 744 in Oklahoma. A portion of the money also pays for state and national media buys to support the union’s agenda.

But the most recent numbers show NEA lost more than 54,000 active K-12 members since this time last year. Coupled with less-than-expected increases in the average teacher salary – upon which NEA dues are based – the union will find itself with $14 million less revenue than it had planned. This includes about $500,000 less in the political and media funds.


(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #85 on: February 27, 2011, 05:55:44 AM »
The People Mover's Pricey Pensions
Michigan Capitol Confidential ^ | 02/27/2011 | Tom Gantert



Barbara Hansen made $114,815 in 2010 as general manager of Detroit Transportation Corporation. DTC exists to operate the Detroit People Mover, the municipal rail system that serves downtown Detroit.

Hansen also received a $14,696 pension contribution made by her employer last year. It is a benefit DTC employees get that far exceeds the private sector. The DTC contributes 12.8 percent of W-2 wages for employees’ pensions, more than double the payment made to a typical private sector employee with a retirement benefit.

“That’s not where you want to be,” said Rick Dreyfuss, a pension expert and adjunct scholar at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. “That wouldn’t be sustainable in the long term.”


(Excerpt) Read more at michigancapitolconfident ial.com ...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #86 on: February 27, 2011, 06:43:30 PM »
Skip to comments.
Showdown brewing over CA state employee pensions
 San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 2/27/11 | Joe Garofoli,Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writers

 
Pos


A raucous, Wisconsin-style labor showdown is unlikely to unfold in California given its Democratic-controlled Legislature and union-friendly Gov. Jerry Brown.

But a different type of showdown is simmering in California as business and taxpayer groups and Republicans are ratcheting up the pressure on Brown to ask for more concessions from public employee unions to help fill the state's $25.4 billion budget deficit.

While union supporters gathered in Sacramento and Oakland on Tuesday night for vigils to show solidarity with their brethren in Wisconsin, the buzz among the 200 business leaders at the Sacramento Metro Chamber of Commerce earlier in the day was how "in a budget crisis, everything should be on the table," said James Beckwith, president and CEO of Sacramento's Five Star Bank.

"It's the 800-pound gorilla in the room," Beckwith said. "You can't have real budget reform without pension reform."

That "isn't just a state problem, it's far worse in cities," said Marcia Fritz, president of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility, a nonprofit pension reform group. While several sources said Brown administration officials have been quietly meeting with union officials about possible concessions, Brown has yet to offer a proposal.

"We need the leader of California to stand up and lead on this issue," Fritz said. "And if he doesn't, we'll go around him, just like people did on Proposition 13 (in 1978 during Brown's first stint as governor). And I don't think he wants that."

On Tuesday, Assemblyman Allan Mansoor, R-Costa Mesa (Orange County), introduced a bill that would strip public employees of their ability to collectively bargain for retirement benefits.


(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Pensions and Benes for Unionized Public Employees are next bubble to pop.
« Reply #87 on: February 28, 2011, 01:43:32 PM »
N.J. Public Workers are in a Hurry to Retire
N.J.com ^ | 2/28/11 | Jarrett Renshaw





More than 20,000 police officers, firefighters, teachers and other public employees put in their retirement papers last year as momentum was building for sweeping health and pension reform in Trenton, state figures show.

That is a 60 percent jump from 2009 retirements and the highest in at least a decade, according to the Division of Pension and Benefits.

Teachers whose contracts were criticized all year long by Gov. Chris Christie headed for the exits at the quickest pace, nearly doubling the number who retired in 2009.

Under nearly all the reform proposals circulating in Trenton, public employees would pay more for pension and health benefits, but would ESCAPE the additional costs if they retire before the reforms were enacted.

"There has been a direct assault on the benefits that public employees have earned and fought for over the last 40 years," said Dominick Marino, president of the state chapter of the International Association of Firefighters.

"People were attracted to these jobs because of the certainty, now there is no certainty, and people are retiring."

Mark Ruskoski, 60, taught physical education for 26 years in the Vineland School District and hoped to continue. He said the talk in Trenton prompted him to put in his retirement papers last year and collect his $35,085 annual pension.

Under Christie’s plan, a teacher who makes a $66,000 salary would pay about $5,200 a year for health insurance.

In general, public employees with 25 years of service can retire and receive medical benefits at no cost, but that would change under both Sweeney’s and Christie’s plan.


(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

February 28, 2011
Pension Funds Strained, States Look at 401(k) Plans
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE

www.nytimes.com



Lawmakers and governors in many states, faced with huge shortfalls in employee pension funds, are turning to a strategy that a lot of private companies adopted years ago: moving workers away from guaranteed pension plans and toward 401(k)-type retirement savings plans.

The efforts come as the governors of Wisconsin and Ohio, citing dire budget problems, are engaged in bitter showdowns with public-employee unions over wages, pensions and collective bargaining rights.

The new plans allow states to set a firm, upfront limit on the amount they will contribute and leave it up to the employee and the financial markets to make the money grow. In a traditional pension system, the employer promises a certain benefit, then must find a way to pay for it.

Like private employers, which in droves have terminated traditional pension plans, many government officials like the idea of shifting much of a pension plan’s risk to the worker. And some workers prefer a 401(k)-type system because it gives them more control over their retirement assets, including the ability to take the money with them when they change jobs.

Utah lawmakers voted last year to make a partial changeover to a 401(k)-type plan, following in the footsteps of Alaska, Colorado, Georgia, Michigan, Ohio and several other states, which offer at least some version of it.

In February, Kentucky’s Senate approved a full switch to a 401(k)-type plan, although the bill faces uncertain prospects in the House. In Oklahoma and Kansas, legislative committees will be studying the issue intensively over the next few weeks. Gov. Sam Brownback of Kansas has made it clear he hopes the state Senate will embrace some form of a 401(k)-type plan. Texas is also considering a switch.

Utah decided to adopt a 401(k)-type plan after the stock market plunge in 2008 caused the shortfall in the state’s pension plan to balloon to $6.5 billion.

“We said, ‘O.K., how do we prevent this from happening again?’ ” said Dan Liljenquist, a state senator who pushed for the changes. “How do we eliminate the bankruptcy risk for our pension fund?”

Under the new plan, Mr. Liljenquist said, the state’s retirement contributions for new workers will be roughly half that for current employees, potentially saving $5 million a year for every 1,000 new workers hired.

Still, these plans — similar to 401(k)’s, but named after other sections of the tax code — are not being embraced in states with the biggest pension problems like Illinois, California and New Jersey, which have shortfalls so immense that a switch would not solve their problem.

Unlike private companies, most states are constitutionally or contractually barred from changing the pension plans of current employees without their consent. So the new rules are generally voluntary or apply only to new employees.

In fact, switching workers to 401(k)-type plans can make the underfunding problem even worse. As contributions move to individual investment accounts, less money goes into the traditional plan to help finance pensions promised to other workers.

“There’s no free lunch here,” said Alicia H. Munnell, director of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. “People say, ‘We can reduce our costs here if we have a defined-contribution system.’ Well, if you do this, you still haven’t done anything about your unfunded liabilities.”

California’s problems are so acute that just last week a government-appointed commission of experts urged the state to consider at least a partial switch to 401(k) plans; six years ago, an effort by Arnold Schwarzenegger, then governor, to move new employees into such plans was blocked by local governments and public-employee unions.

The long-term benefits of restructuring pension systems are alluring to many public officials. The new governors of Florida and Kansas, Rick Scott and Mr. Brownback, and lawmakers in North Dakota, Oklahoma, Virginia and several other states are seriously discussing adopting 401(k)-type plans for state employees.

“Every state has to solve this problem or else there’s going to be a very dire consequence,” said Mike Mazzei, a Republican state senator in Oklahoma who heads the Senate select committee on pensions and is backing an overhaul of a system that faces $16 billion in unfunded obligations.

The push to switch to 401(k)-type plans comes overwhelmingly from Republicans, who see them as more individualistic and free market. Democrats generally oppose the change, partly because their union allies are eager to keep traditional plans.

Utah chose to take a hybrid approach to limit taxpayers’ liability and keep money flowing into the old plan.

Starting July 1, new state workers will be able to choose either a traditional pension plan or a 401(k)-type plan, with the state contributing 10 percent of an employee’s salary (12 percent for uniformed workers) to whichever plan a worker chooses. But there is an important twist: Utah will never pay more than 10 percent of a new employee’s salary to the pension plan. If the plan becomes too underfunded, employees who have joined the plan will have to pay a percentage of their paycheck to help eliminate the shortfall.

The Utah plan is meant to give workers a choice, said Mr. Liljenquist, who became such an expert on pension overhauls during Utah’s debate that lawmakers in other states have sought him out for advice.

“Some state workers who will just work for the state a few years — take, say, bank examiners — I imagine 75 percent of them will choose defined-contribution plans,” he said, referring to 401(k)-type plans. “And I think 90 percent of cops and firefighters and 75 percent of teachers will want a defined-benefit plan because they look at their government jobs as a single career.”

Casey Parry, 32, a research consultant in the Utah human resources department, would prefer the 401(k) option. “It’s hard when you’re starting a job to make a decision whether to stay with an employer for 30 years,” he said. “I prefer the security of having a defined-contribution plan that I know I can take with me. It’s under my control. I can plan for it.”

But Debra McBride, a Medicaid policy analyst who has worked for the state for 35 years, said she was happy with a traditional pension plan. “I imagine that anyone who went through the recession with a 401(k) and saw the stock market nosedive wished they had a pension plan instead of a 401(k),” she said.

Lawmakers considering changes are trying to balance competing needs. Georgia officials — fearing that many employees would retire with paltry amounts in their plans — stopped short of embracing a full-fledged 401(k) plan, setting up a hybrid plan different from Utah’s. New employees join both a traditional pension plan, with a far less generous formula than the old formula, and a 401(k). The state contributes an automatic 1 percent of salary into the 401(k)-type plan and matches half of the next 4 percent that employees contribute.

“Georgia realized that having people solely in a 401(k), they have sole control and they might lose a lot of money in it,” said Pamela L. Pharris, executive director of the Employees’ Retirement System of Georgia, adding that such people eventually “might become dependent on the state.”

The National Association of State Retirement Administrators has voiced support for traditional pension plans.

“Defined-contribution plans are a very unreliable vehicle for promoting retirement security,” said Keith Brainard, the association’s research director. “Many workers don’t know how to invest, many don’t contribute enough to their 401(k)s, and many cash out much of what’s in their 401(k) long before they retire, leaving them too little to live on when they retire.”

Mr. Brainard said it would be wiser for states to ask employees to contribute more toward underfunded plans than to switch to 401(k)-type plans. And in fact, some states have shored up their pension plans by requiring employees to pitch in more of their salary.

Despite the cautions, Bette Grande, a Republican state representative in North Dakota, vowed to continue pushing for 401(k)-type plans. Ms. Grande sponsored a bill to switch new employees entirely to such plans, but it was blocked by the House on Feb. 18. “I think it’s condescending to say that workers aren’t wise enough to manage their own investments,” said Ms. Grande, who said she would push to revive the bill. “I refuse to think I’m going to have a bunch of teachers on welfare.”



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
BILL GATES: States' Ridiculous Budget And Pension Accounting "Would Make Enron Blush"
John Ellis | Mar. 3, 2011, 5:19 PM | 4,530 |  38



Image: Wikipedia Commons User Kjetil Ree

See Also:

Bill Gates Addresses The 'Completely Unsustainable' Crisis In Public PensionsCalifornia Lawmakers Shoot Messenger RepeatedlyBADGER STATE SHOWDOWN: Wisconsin Governor Unveils Full Budget Proposal
 
Microsoft founder Bill Gates said today that state governments needed to adopt "clear and honest" accounting of their budgets, as their true finances threaten America's public-education system.

Speaking at the annual TED conference in Long Beach, California, Mr. Gates said that state budgets should follow more-transparent accounting principles.  The Wall Street Journal reports:

"It's riddled with gimmicks," Mr. Gates said of the "tricks" states use to balance their budgets. Citing moves such as selling state assets and deferring payments, he said some methods are "so blatant and extreme," that "Enron would blush," referring to the energy company that collapsed a decade ago amid an accounting scandal.

The biggest concerns nationwide, he said, are the growing cost of state-funded health-care programs and public workers' health-care coverage, as well as the way states account for their pension funding. Those obligations threaten the ability to invest in education, Mr. Gates said.

"It is an increasingly difficult picture even assuming the economy does quite well," Mr. Gates said of the costs.

You can read the full report here.


Tags: Big Picture, Bill Gates, TED, State Governments, State And Muni, Pension Crisis, Municipal Debt, Politics, State & Muni, Pensions, Governance, Debt, Muni Bonds, Deficit | Get Alerts for these topics »

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Economists: State, local pension funds understate shortfall by $1.5 trillion or more
Washington Post ^ | 3/3/2011 | Peter Whoriskey





The pension funds for state and local workers in the United States are understating the amount they will owe workers by $1.5 trillion or more, according to some economists who have studied the issue, meaning that the benefits are much costlier than many governments and taxpayers thought.

Doubts about government pension accounting have been voiced by analysts for years, but with shortfalls in state and local pension plans exacerbated by the recession, the push to refigure pension fund shortfalls has gained political momentum.

The trillion-dollar gap arises from the government method of accounting, which several experts say significantly underestimates the cost of future pension payments.
[Snip]

The cost of pension plans for the approximately 17 million state and local government workers have come under heightened scrutiny in recent weeks, particularly in Wisconsin, New Jersey and other states where governors are struggling to balance budgets and reduce costs.

In Wisconsin, for example, Gov. Scott Walker (R) wants state workers to pay 5.8 percent of their wages to fund the pension.

Even under current accounting methods, state and local governments are facing massive pension shortfalls - at least $344 billion, according to calculations by the Center for Retirement Research and other groups.

But when the accounting is revised to value future payments more accurately, in the critics' view, the amount that pensions are underfunded grows to more than $1.9 trillion, according to Munnell's calculations for 126 large plans.

[Snip]

By comparison, the entire federal debt held by the public is $9.3 trillion.

"By virtually any measure, that's an enormous number," said Jeffrey R. Brown, a finance professor at the University of Illinois who has studied the issue. "When you're short that much money, at some point you have to pay the piper."


(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Connecticut Town Ordered to Pay for Union Workers’ Coffee
Fox News ^ | 03/04/2011 | Fox News




A Connecticut town must provide their union workers free coffee and milk, according to a ruling from the State Board of Labor Relations.

The board also ordered town leaders to reinstate “Dress Down Fridays” for the union clerical and custodial workers.

The dispute involved the town of Orange and the local chapter of the United Public Service Employees Union.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

andreisdaman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16720
These unions would have some goodwill from the public if they would give back when the economy is bad....they just want to continually take with no givebacks...However..I'm not totally in favor of merit pay either because wee all know that "merit" often means someone knows you so they give you something you often don't deserve

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Washington(State)View: Public employee pensions are a ticking time bomb
The Columbian ^ | Tuesday, June 1, 2010 | By Don Brunell




Most people know that our $13 trillion national debt is endangering America’s credit rating and pushing the United States closer to bankruptcy. But hidden beneath the surface is another ticking time bomb that threatens economic collapse : unfunded public employee pensions.


...Historically, increasing public employee pensions has been a practical way to resolve a budget crisis. .... voting to approve richer pensions is easy because they know they’ll be long gone before the bill comes due.


...According to an analysis by the Pew Center on the States, state and local governments now owe at least $1 trillion to public employee pension accounts. To pay that debt, taxpayers would have to spend $1 million a day for the next 2,740 years. That works out to about $8,800 for each American household, on top of their estimated $120,000 share of our national debt.


..Simply put, state lawmakers didn’t make the required payments to their pension plans. According to the Washington Post, “They failed to squirrel away enough money to pay retiree health benefits and, perhaps most egregious, they increased their benefits without figuring out how to pay for them.”


...Pew’s $1 trillion figure — tallied through the end of the 2008 fiscal year — is conservative given that it doesn’t capture the stock market losses incurred in the second half of that year. To make matters worse, the study did not include many city, county and municipal pension plans, which are thought to have similar funding shortfalls.


What about Washington state? According to Pew, state lawmakers have failed to make the total required pension contributions since 2001. In fact, between 1999 and 2008, Washington’s pension liabilities outpaced assets almost 2 to 1. And those figures don’t account for state investment losses due to the recession.


(Excerpt) Read more at columbian.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Illinois Senate president wants to look at taxing retirement income
Chicago Tribune ^ | 03/07/11 | Monique Garcia and Rick Pearson




Illinois Senate President John Cullerton today suggested the state should start taxing the retirement income of senior citizens who are able to afford it. The state does not currently tax pensions or retirement funds such as 401(k) plans, but Cullerton told a City Club of Chicago luncheon that should take place as part of an overall look at what he said was Illinois' "outdated" tax system.

"It would just be a matter of fairness," said Cullerton, a Chicago Democrat.


(Excerpt) Read more at newsblogs.chicagotribune .com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Mass. mayors, unions debate health care proposals
Published: Tuesday, 8 Mar 2011 | 3:23 PM ET Text Size
http://www.cnbc.com/id/41973932



BOSTON - Massachusetts mayors are warning state lawmakers that without dramatic changes to the way municipalities provide health care to their public workers, cities and towns will face dire fiscal straits for the foreseeable future, threatening core local services from police to road repairs.

The mayors issued their warning during a Statehouse hearing on a series of proposals on ways to overhaul insurance coverage for municipal employees.

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino said the state's largest city is already grappling with the effects of skyrocketing health care costs. He said in the past decade those costs have soared by 142 percent while all other spending grew by 27 percent.

For every dollar the city spends on health insurance, Menino said, it spends just a nickel on snow removal and community centers.

"The status quo is a stampede of increasing costs that will break cities and towns," he said. "If we do nothing ... Boston will continue to spend more on health care than on the entire police department."

Menino wasn't alone.

New Bedford Mayor Scott Lang said his city is also looking at ongoing cuts to services unless mayors and town administrators are given more control over health care plans for their workers.

Lang said a proposal unveiled on Monday by a coalition of unions representing public workers was a start, but didn't "scratch the surface" of the kind of overhaul needed to get spending under control.

Union officials said their plan would save an estimated $120 million in the first year, while preserving collective bargaining rights. The plan also calls for half of the savings in the first year to go back to workers to pay for health care costs.

Lang, who supports a proposal by the Massachusetts Municipal Association that would strengthen the hands of city and town leaders over health care plans for workers, said the goal should be to develop a way to provide quality health care plans that are also affordable.

"Otherwise, in order to pay for the health care plans you are going to be laying off the very employees that the unions represent," Lang said. "You'll have fewer and fewer people with these superlative plans and other people will be out there without jobs and then the services won't get done. Everyone's got to be realistic."

Menino and Lang were among a group of mayors who met with Secretary of Administration and Finance Jay Gonzalez, Gov. Deval Patrick's budget chief, before the hearing by the Legislature's Public Service Committee.

Patrick has filed a bill that would require all cities and towns to put their workers into the state's Group Insurance Commission or institute a program of equivalent value and cost by the start of 2012 fiscal year on July 1.

The governor's bill would also require cities and towns to move eligible municipal retirees into Medicare, a shift that the administration said will save municipalities an estimated $15 million to $30 million annually.

Lt. Gov. Timothy Murray, himself a former mayor of Worcester, said he understands the daunting challenges facing municipal leaders. Murray said Patrick's bill will help cities and towns begin to get their health costs under control.

"It is critical that we continue to give cities and towns as many tools as possible to manage their bottom lines," Murray told the committee. "It is similarly important that we continue to respect the collective bargaining relationship and the unions that represent our valued public sector employees."

Murray urged lawmakers to act quickly to give municipalities a chance to begin saving health care costs in the new fiscal year that begins July 1. He said the Legislature should try to get a bill to Patrick's desk by the end of the month.

House Speaker Robert DeLeo, D-Winthrop, has said he would press to require Massachusetts cities and towns to put their municipal employees into the Group Insurance Commission, a move he said would save up to $100 million.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Anger Brews Over Government Workers' Benefits
The Associated Press | 08 Mar 2011 | 08:15 AM ET

 
When Erin McFarlane looks at public workers, she sees lucrative pension benefits she doesn't ever expect to get. And it makes her mad.


"I don't think that a federal employee or government employee is worth any more than anybody else who does their job and does it well," said the Slinger, Wis., woman. She's been working a couple of bartending jobs since January, when she was laid off from her job at a Harley Davidson plant after almost a decade.

She's not alone in seeing public servants as public enemies in some ways.

It's a case of pension envy.

For McFarlane, 36, it's part of a ubiquitous discussion, at the bars where she works and on Facebook. And it's the center of some of the biggest political battles playing out in state capitals across the country as governors say their states can no longer afford the benefits that public employees have been promised.

Government workers in McFarlane's state have rallied for weeks against Gov. Scott Walker's efforts to take away many collective bargaining rights, saying that would amount to killing the middle class.

A USA Today/Gallup poll last month found show that Americans largely side with the employees, though about two in five that want government pay and benefits reined in.

Barbara Davis, a retiree from Cherry Hill, N.J., has been watching public workers in rallies in Madison, Wis., as well as Trenton. She says the protesters are wrong about tightening benefits hurting the middle class.

"I'm sorry, but what they're doing is telling off the middle class," said Davis, 76, and a co-chairwoman of the Cherry Hill Area Tea Party. "The middle-class people don't get all the goodies that they do."

At its heart, the issue is this: Some public workers get a sweet deal compared to other workers. And it's taxpayers who pay for it.


That's set off resentment in a time when economic doldrums have left practically everyone tightening their belts. Many people have found their tax bills rising even if their earnings haven't.

In Davis' case, it's the property tax that smarts. She and her husband pay about $12,000 per year for the house she describes as a three-bedroom "tract home." That's a high tax even in New Jersey, where the average property tax bill tops $7,000 and where the Tax Foundation has found homeowners pay three and a half times the national median.

A half century ago, industrial jobs at car and steel plants provided high salaries and rich benefits. But as manufacturing moved overseas, many formerly well-paid workers had to take lower-paying jobs. By the end of the Great Recession, the economic order was undeniably changed.

"It's the government sector worker who's the new elite, the highest-paid worker on the block," said David Gregory, who teaches labor and employment law at New York's St. John's University.

For instance, most non-uniformed public employees who have worked in New Jersey for 30 years with an ending salary of $85,000 can look forward to retiring at 55 with an annual pension of about $46,000. Working until age 60 and a salary of $90,000 can bring a pension of $57,000. And many of the New Jersey's public-sector retirees have no or low premiums for their health insurance.


For a private-section worker who retires at 55, relying solely on a 401(k) without an employer match, it would take a $100 contribution to a plan every week for 30 years and getting an annual return over 7 percent to get to the same level of pension benefit as the public worker retiring at that age. Those benefits would run out after 25 years for the 401(k) retiree.


To be fair, most public-sector retirees don't get such rich pensions. New Jersey's Treasury Department says the average annual pension due state workers who retired between July 2009 and June 2010 was just over $30,000 per year; for local government employees, it was about $20,000.

And the members of the state's two biggest public employee retirement systems are required to pay 5.5 percent of their base salaries into the pension funds.

St. John's Gregory says the rest of the benefits are deferred compensation promised to workers instead of better salaries.

National data compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics confirms that public-sector workers do better when it comes to pensions and benefits.

As of last September, professional and management workers in the private sector were making $34.91 in hourly salary; public sector professionals made $33.17 an hour.

The government entities spent 1.7 times as much on health care per employee-hour worked and nearly twice as much on retirement costs. Public-sector workers—who are more often represented by unions—are far more likely to have defined-benefit pensions with promises to pay for the retirees' whole lives.

Olivia Mitchell, a professor of insurance and risk management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, says the data isn't perfect. It doesn't compare workers with the same education or experience levels, and it covers a broad range of jobs. Also, she said, it doesn't take into account that about one-fourth of public workers aren't covered by Social Security.

There's one clear downside for the public employees: "We also know that the public-sector pensions are in deep trouble financially," Mitchell said, pointing to studies that suggest that they're underfunded by a total of $3 trillion, largely because governments have skipped payments. "Exactly what will be done about that, nobody knows."

Unchanged, those retirement systems could eventually stop paying entirely.

"One way or another, if we don't make changes, the government will collapse," said Abel Stewart, of Toledo, Ohio.


Stewart, 36, the director of contemporary worship at a Methodist church in suburban Toledo, says he has a hard time conjuring up sympathy for the government workers he's seen protesting because of all the time he's spent working with struggling immigrants.

"These are middle class people who have a house, who have enough food, who are complaining they don't have enough," he said. "Instead of fighting for their piece of the political pie, they'd be better looking at how to live within their means."

That's not a unanimous view.

Tony Christoff, a 38-year-old stay-at-home dad in Perrysburg, Ohio, believes public workers like police officers and teachers—including his wife—should be rewarded. "They go over and above and deserve the pay they get," he said.

Jeff Nash is a Democrat elected to the county freeholder board in union-heavy Camden County, N.J., who has come to believe that public employees need to sacrifice.

"The days of government workers receiving free benefits and pensions without risk, those days are coming to an end because everyone else who pays for government services is paying more for their health insurance, like myself, and running the risk of a 401(k) as part of their retirement savings. Government is changing to match what the rest of middle-class America is enduring today."

"It's not a matter of fairness," he said. "It's a matter of evolution."

Hetty Rosenstein, the New Jersey director of the Communications Workers of America, which represent New Jersey government workers in several fields, says she gripes about her members' pensions are misplaced.

"There's pension envy because people who are working in the private sector, they're being denied pensions," she said.

© 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.cnbc.com/id/41965569/


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

NOW California's Biggest Pension Fund Wants To Cut Its Earnings Forecast
Grace Wyler | Mar. 11, 2011, 2:53 PM | 1,151 |  13



Fixing Pensions Requires Cutting Existing Benefits
 
CalPERS, California's largest public employee pension fund, is considering cutting its earnings forecast, a move that would surely inflame a heated national debate over the cost of public employee retirement.

Actuaries for CalPERS recommended lowering the forecast by a quarter of a percentage point, conceding that investment returns are expected to be lower over the next decade, the Sacramento Bee reports.

CalPERS earnings outlook has been the subject of heated debate in Sacramento since state and local governments were forced to make up for pension fund investment losses during the recession. A Stanford study of California's pension systems' last year found that overly optimistic forecasts were concealing about $500 billion in unfunded liabilities.

A lower discount rate would deal a huge blow to California municipalities and school districts, most of which are already struggling with growing pension and personnel costs.

Check out 7 charts that show how pensions are crushing the Golden State >>


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/now-californias-biggest-pension-fund-wants-to-cut-its-earnings-forecast-2011-3#ixzz1GUdJfDu4




Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39838
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
California Moves Closer Toward Default
BigGovernment.com ^ | 3/15/2011 | Chriss W. Street


________________________ ________________________ ______________



California tax payers just took a huge punch in the nose from the same actuaries who provided the cover for state politicians to spike public employee retirement benefits. The latest shocker comes from California State Controller John Chiang who yesterday unveiled a new actuarial report that shows California faces another unfunded debt of $59.9 billion to pay for retiree health and dental benefits over the next 30 years.


Controller Chiang highlighted that the unfunded liability grew during the 2010 fiscal year by $8.1 billion; an amount equal to almost 25% of this year’s entire California kindergarten through high school education budget.


Actuaries have aided and abetted the explosion in under-funding of pension and healthcare liabilities for public employee pension plans over the last ten years. With most public employee pension plans fully funded in 2000, a preposterous actuary study gave assurances that the technology stock market bubble of the 1990s would continue its high returns never burst.


(Excerpt) Read more at biggovernment.com ...