Comments on: Doomed pension reform

By: Lynold

Lynold — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 07:33:22 +0000

State pensions are only 2.5% of the state budget.
My retirement portfolio that I pay into through
Calpers is making money. Calpers is the only leverage
tool that the middle class in California have and
they want to take that away. I think more people should
get a job with the state. Spread the wealth!!!

By: A Public Employee

A Public Employee — Sun, 06 Jun 2010 19:10:23 +0000

I took a job with the state because of the stability and pension, but understood in return I would receive a wage less than what those in the private sector make. Many of my co-workers have since left the state for the higher up-front wage with resultant vacancies. We did not know we were receiving compensation that the state could not sustain. This is what was advertised in the job description, so we took it. Since accepting employment, I have never expected anything more than a cost-of-living increase. I did not expect to prosper when Californians in the private sector have.

I expected those, such as those from the Department of Finance, to have determined what arrangements were financially sound. My union has not done anything for me that I could not have done on my own. I have a marketable skill that my employer seeks. When programs begin collapsing, my employer gives us a salary increase.

If anything, unions have steered the attention away from where it belongs, on those more knowledgeable and who are responsible for the finances of California. State employees are not the ones who expanded programs when the state should have been tightening its belt. State employees are not the only ones who voted for unfunded propositions-mandates.

Let’s take a look at programs that have continued to grow in an attempt to defy Seiler’s Law. My financial stability has been compromised as a result of poor financial decision making that I had little say in, yet now I am expected to pull the state out of the mess I did not create. I did not want to accept the DMV fee that our Governor returned because I did not want to be an accomplice to such financial foolishness. I knew the state was in trouble then-who didn’t?

Am I supposed to return my pension? Then I would have to ask for a defined amount of back-pay consistent with the prevailing wage for my profession during my years as a state employee. A deal is a deal. I am in a difficult predicament that I did not create and am asking the tax payer who I have proudly served to look closely at all parties involved for allowing this to happen. Let’s handle this fairly. I did not prosper when many Californians did, but I have taken a 15% cut during hard times.

I am told I should be lucky to have a job. I took a less-paying job for this security. I paid for it with almost 20 years of service. I studied hard and competed for the job position by exam. Others competed, but I won it fair and square.

State employees should not be scapegoats for poor financial management. No union could have bullied the state into doling out unsustainable benefits in the face of data provided by financial planners. Where was this data? Who was accountable for reviewing such contracts?

I want those responsible for my predicament to be held accountable. I have taken a 15% cut. I am only guessing that those responsible for making these decisions have not suffered like my family and I have.

Perhaps the media can put the spotlight on individuals and agencies hired to ensure the financial solvency of our state. Let’s have some accountability. I will continue to do my part.

By: Richard Rider

Richard Rider — Thu, 20 May 2010 21:35:45 +0000

Having commented on these pension issues on many blogs and boards across the state, one thing I find — it’s the public employees vs. everyone else. The only defenders of public employee pensions and overcompensation are govt employees/retirees, their families and — occasionally — government employees pretending that they are not.

And just as I appear (using my real name) on these boards, I find the same govt workers (and perhaps their labor union staff/bosses) showing up over and over. Judging from the time of day when they write, many are writing from government computers on govt time.

By: SkippingDog

SkippingDog — Sun, 16 May 2010 03:51:57 +0000

I like Seesaw more and more every time I read her reasoned responses to the knuckleheads whining about public employee pensions in California. Good job, Seesaw. Nothing more to say today….

By: SEESAW

SEESAW — Sat, 15 May 2010 06:13:09 +0000

TL: Please stop referring to “my union”. I belonged to a small employee association with dues of less than $15/month, and we never bought any politicians, except giving small amounts of less than $500 to City Council candidates. Even if I did belong to a big union, I think that any union has as much right as the State Chamber of Commerce and other groups and large corporations to curry favor of the politicians. The Supreme Court ruled on that, didn’t they? You don’t have any more burden placed on you than I or anyone else. We all pay a certain percentage of our income as taxes–you were not specially chosen to suffer such indignity.

By: Tough Love

Tough Love — Sat, 15 May 2010 05:59:50 +0000

SEESAW, Quoting …”CA is not Greece, and it is really disgusting that people such as yourself are just salivating at the thought of pensioners in CA being affected like those in Greece. ”

Interesting how I see it in a different light …..

Perhaps persons of my ilk are salivating at the thought of Private Sector taxpayers being freed of the unfair & unjust burden placed upon them by the politicians whose favor was curried with your Union’s money.

By: SEESAW

SEESAW — Sat, 15 May 2010 02:14:04 +0000

TL: The CA Dialogue was open and free to the public–pre-registration was required. People should not opine unless they have heard the arguments and opinions from as many presenters as possible and from as many angles as possible. And, who better to work on the problems than the officials and stakeholders themselves? You surely don’t expect them to take what you say as gospel do you?

CA is not Greece, and it is really disgusting that people such as yourself are just salivating at the thought of pensioners in CA being affected like those in Greece. The Grecians have all the sympathy and well wishes I can give.

By: SEESAW

SEESAW — Fri, 14 May 2010 04:40:44 +0000

Michael, you sure want to lay a lot of stuff at the feet of the unions. We are in a worldwide recession, and the public employees or the unions are not to blame for most of the problems. The right to organize and collectively bargain is a freedom that you will never be able to take away. Before my group joined the association, it still had to bargain with management. The association dues were less than $15 a month, and we didn’t buy any favors with that. Most of the high salaries and large pensions are going to people who are not and never were in unions. The Vallejo officials did restructure the contracts, but there is a section in the CA Government Code that protects the pensions, in cases of bankruptcy. I do agree with you on the traffic tickets–it is outrageous–perhaps that situation is what you should work on, instead of picking on the public employees and SEIU, which is made up of mostly low-paid workers, from both the public and private sectors.

By: michael fuss

michael fuss — Fri, 14 May 2010 02:06:18 +0000

Seesaw- I think that with all of the spikes in taxes, fines and fees that we are experienceing lately Californians will definately claim their right to directly vote on public employee union contracts that are largely the product of a conflict of interest between the elected politicans who need the consistant and large campaign contributions and the public employees prudently give them. The old saw of `let it be dealt with at the negotiating table’ is sadly proving to be just a delaying tactic. The longer we delay the deeper in debt we go and the higher the misery index will be with regards not just to raising taxes, fees and fines on all of us but also the cut back of services and the furloughing and lay offs which are much more draconian and painful to those who they effect.
Please note that the cost of the elections would zero out and the amendment would have net budget gain because because the proposition stipulates automatic accross the board cuts in public employee pay to balance the budget during deficit years. The problems will only get worse as almost all of the Democrats and a significant number of the Republicans are becoming dependant on public employee campaign contributions. They will behave like the elected officals in Vallejo who are still trying to give away the store post Ch9 with unsustainable contracts to their union contributors. Who suffers? The vulnerable who are denied social and health services, the people who are afraid to call 911 for an overpriced ambulance drive? The victims of crimes commited by early release prisoners due to budget failures due to overly generous giveaways to the prisonguards union over the last decade. The poor slob who gets a $500 ticket for a rolling right turn or driving 5 miles over the speed limit (me both times). We should make out 40% of our fine and fee checks to the SEIU. This isn’t the California we grew up in and as the unions push the population into a financial corner their response can be a lot more draconian if not resolved, like taking back the right for them to collectively bargan, something I am not in favor of. Good government means limiting conflict of interest and moderation.

By: Tough Love

Tough Love — Thu, 13 May 2010 22:15:19 +0000

Quoting SEESAW …”The consensus at the end of the day of presentations and discussions was that the pension sustainability problems can and should be solved at the bargaining table. ”

Oh come on …. consensus between whom …. ONLY those groups looking to keep this gravy train rolling along ?

That trains is headed off a cliff, as nothing can be accomplished “at the bargaining table”.