San Jose California attemps to reform pensions

[Wry Catcher]

The irony is amazing...

BTW....there is a difference between "The Unions" and the Firefighters/Police......Who are just contributors to the Unions...

It is a sign of desperation that each and every time some solution arises to try and fix the disaster that is happening, people like you reach for the fear card.

People like me reach for the fear card? Do you have any evidence to prove that, or is this one more example of accusing others of what the right does regularly? Calling bigots out as bigots and those who are obviously envious of those of us who planned ahead isn't fear mongering, no matter how you spin it between your ears.

re-read the post I quoted (Of yours btw).....If you can't see it, no amount of effort on My part will bring the light to you.

Between your ears there's plenty of space to spin and infer whatever your biases dictate. There is nothing in my statement for anyone to infer a simple statement of facts is fear mongering.

 

[MeBelle]

It's true. The pension I receive is obscene when compared to the average Joe. Of course my pension and benefits are miniscule when compared to the salary and benefits of CEO's and CFO's, those who never once ran into harms way. And of course I was responding directly to the post where cops and firefighters were singled out.

Isn't it true a contract is binding? Or do you only believe it to be so when you benefit?

Does the good faith and credit of the government mean anything, or is that so only when you benefit?

The contracts were signed off by elected officials previously approved by a County Manager and his staff. Nothing illegal, no hint of fraud (ever hear of Enron?) and we actually worked (ever see how many days of 'work' the H. of Rep. is in session? When will they take a pay cut, and give up their benefits?).

A contract is only as good for the length of the term it was written for.
If a contract were set in stone forever why the need for bargaining?

That's a fact. What's happening now is good people are leaving early and will collect retirement benefits under the old rules do to the threat of change. Those who are retired should not be faced with new rules and cuts to salary and benefits because promises had been made and impacted retirement planning. Many of us wouldn't have put up with the bullshit and moved on to higher pay if the original promise with the offer of employment could be set aside do to political expediency/incompetence.

Does the good faith and credit of the government mean anything, or is that so only when you benefit?
Silly head. I am union. Only had one furlough day this year, last year we had four furlough days.

1) Comparing Enron to taxpaying Californians whose taxes get jacked in order to pay unfunded pension liabilities is nonsense.
2) Who signed CalPERS and CalSTRS into law and how did CalPERS, especially, get so much power?
3) Corporate CEOs/CFOs are not paid with California tax dollars, nor do they have a defined pension benefit. CEOs, etc, are paid by the stockholders. Mixing apples and oranges is deflection.
4) Why in the heck should elected councilmen be eligible for CalPERS? Do they risk their life?

Answer those questions please. I have more for you.

1. Enron was fraud; that was my only point.

2, I don't know anything about the history of CalPERS, my retirement is a county-wide safety system, not state-wide.

Forgot about this thread until I looked at a rep comment.

Contra Costa County, if I recall correctly.
Contra Costa County, CA Official Website - Deputy Information Page
Retirement:
2.7% at 57 years of age. Deputy Sheriffs are members of the Safety Service Retirement established under the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 with reciprocity with PERS.

CA Codes (gov:31830-31840.8)

Or was it Alameda?
Job Announcement: Deputy Sheriff's Recruit - County of Alameda
RETIREMENT
The County retirement program is a Defined Benefit plan and is governed under the provisions of the 1937 Act systems. The County’s retirement is based on one’s age upon entrance, compensation, years of service and specific percentage of employee/employer contributions with the County’s portion vesting after five years of employment.

Or perhaps San Mateo County?
SamCERA - Search
County Systems:
Counties that maintain retirement systems under the
County Employees Retirement Law of 1937:
Alameda
Contra Costa
Fresno
Imperial
Kern
Los Angeles
Marin
Mendocino
Merced
Orange
Sacramento
San Bernardino
San Diego
San Joaquin
San Mateo
Santa Barbara
Sonoma
Stanislaus
Tulare
Ventura

4. There are several separate retirement funds, Safety, Tier I, Tier 2 and in some systems a tier 3. Safety is what I earned, and I simply followed the rules. I'm no expert on retirement system and very, very few are, and none than I can tell who posted on this thread.

That's very obvious to me.

Elected officials do not receive the benefits of Safety (the elected County Sheriff is the exception).

Please remember this thread is about pension benefits.
About CalPERS
About CalPERS

The California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) has produced an "elected official toolkit," a primer on the funding of public employee pension and retiree health benefits. The toolkit is being distributed to State, local, and federal officials to help them understand how public employee retirement benefits work and to assist them in developing well-informed public policies on the issue.
CalPERS Releases Benefit Funding Toolkit for Local Elected Officials

AB 738 2011
2)Under current Public Employees' Retirement Law, "optional"
membership is provided to some officials elected or appointed
to a fixed term of office with a city or county (this may
include city attorneys and elected/appointed officials of
schools and contracting agencies; eligibility is determined by
the dates of your term of office).

The following employees of contracting agencies are optional
members who, if they are compensated for their service, may
elect membership by completing a specified California Public
Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) form:

a) Elective Officers: Persons elected by the vote of the
people (e.g., Mayor, City Council, County Supervisors,
Sheriff, District Attorney, City Clerk, etc.)
AB 738 Assembly Bill - Bill Analysis

Unfortunately this bill died.

I do know that our local system earned about 8% on investments most years - before the Great Bush Recession, and is now, once again, earning better than average interest.
In lean years the retirement system gave - not loaned - funds to the general fund to aid in keeping essential services.

defined-benefit pensions
There is no 'local system'. The 8% is what CalPERS needs it's investments to return in order to give defined-benefit pensions to retirees.
When that doesn't happen cities, counties, special districts, etc have to cough up the shortage.
So, no, there was no 'gift' from PERS.
The 'gift' came from the employers (taxpayers) which resulted in staggering losses to the taxpayer and massive layoffs.
This does not happen in the private sector.

On average, schools and other public agencies contribute 12.7% of payroll for their employees' retirement benefits;
however, the rates can increase if CalPERS' investments perform unfavorably and decrease if CalPERS' investments perform favorably.

According to CalPERS, "The School Pool contribution rate is affected by the investment return of a given fiscal year in the second year that follows"

and "Local public agency contribution rates are affected by the investment return of a given fiscal year in the third fiscal year that follows".

CalPERS' earnings and losses are averaged over 15 years to prevent extreme changes in employers' contribution rates.
Nevertheless, in 2008 "CalPERS warned that it might ask for more money from the state starting in July 2010 and from local-government employers starting in July 2011"
if CalPERS' investments are performing poorly as of June 30, 2009.

Which is exactly what happened:

The California Public Employees' Retirement System portfolio has lost 31.1 percent of its value since peaking last fall, a staggering $81.4 billion drop.

The good news for the 1.6 million CalPERS retirees, workers and family members is that their pension benefits are guaranteed.

Unlike many pension funds, CalPERS can require employers to dig deeper when needed. Since those employers are public entities, their funds come from taxpayer dollars. This fall, CalPERS warned that it might ask for more money from the state starting in July 2010 and from local-government employers starting in July 2011.

State public worker pension fund takes big hit - SFGate
[MENTION=20297]Wry Catcher[/MENTION]
I know long read but worthy.