Changing the Pension Plan only for new hires will do nothing for 20-30 years until these new employees begin to retire….WAY too late to save SF.

Clearly the California Constitution MUST be changed to allow significant Pension Plan reductions for FUTURE years of service for CURRENT (yes CURRENT) employees.

It’s either this or a SERIOUS ramp-up in outsourcing (which effectively ends FUTURE Pension growth, by ending the employment relationship).

To much emphasis has been place on “funding” discussions and the difficulties of adequate funding. Well that’s clearly (as Jeff points out) BECUASE these Pension Plans and retiree healthcare benefits are WAY WAY WAY too “rich” (come-on … LIFETIME retiree healthcare after working 5 years ???)

The “richness” problem can easily be summarized by comparison with the Private Sector …. a good guideline, because Plans in the Private sector must remain affordable (i.e., the “funding” issue) or the employer will go bankrupt) ……

At EVERY pay level (from the $25K worker to the $300K executive), the value at retirement of the employer (meaning TAXPAYER ) paid-for share of the “typical” Civil Servants’ retirement package (pension & retiree healthcare) is 2-4 times greater than that of the employer paid-for share of a comparably paid Private Sector worker retiring at the SAME age and with the SAME years of service ….. and that 2-4 times rises to 4-6 times for “safety workers”.

The Public Sector Unions will (and do try to) spin this every which way from Sunday, but such “rich” Plans will still be unaffordably expensive, unsustainable, and grossly unfair to taxpayers whose contributions (together with the interest earned thereon) pay for 80-90% of these pensions and retiree healthcare benefits.