Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
x635

White Plains Jacks Up Retired FF's And PO's Healthcare Costs

39 posts in this topic

I'm sorry, but I am a firm believer in shared costs, meaning that everyone should pay at least something toward health insurance. If it costs me an extra $50 a check to subsidize my health insurance, and in the long run, I can alleviate some of the strain on my department and the taxpayers who support it, thereby potentially saving a job or jobs, then I am all for it. The private sector does it, and in this day and age, maybe the public sector should, too. We may have to foot some upfront costs, but in the long run, it might just be a better situation in the end.

While it is understandable to help alleviate some financial burden that afflicts the taxpayers may pay off int he long run, it is a fast and slippery slope. Few cities find a way to cut costs one year and stop going back to the same "well" every time they "need" to. A decent benefits package has always been the public sectors draw. While we may see firefighting and police work as "glamorous" and think there's an endless pool of applicants, there are tons of other municipal jobs with far less attraction. Even this job cannot compete against higher paying private sector jobs while upping the ante as a profession and cutting the pay, job stability and benefits.

JFLYNN likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



I'm sorry, but I am a firm believer in shared costs, meaning that everyone should pay at least something toward health insurance. If it costs me an extra $50 a check to subsidize my health insurance, and in the long run, I can alleviate some of the strain on my department and the taxpayers who support it, thereby potentially saving a job or jobs, then I am all for it. The private sector does it, and in this day and age, maybe the public sector should, too. We may have to foot some upfront costs, but in the long run, it might just be a better situation in the end.

I have to strongly disagree with you. When employees retiree they are specified a base pension that only increases with COLA yearly. While that $50 a check is not bad to you ask someone on a "fixed income" what difference $50 or $100 a check makes. Why should the public sector pay for the private sectors failures. Remember it is the private sector that got the tax breaks and incentives that created a lot of the problems. The taxpayers are straining and the department strains are due to government balancing the budgets on the workforce's back. Instead of illegally changing existing pension plans of retirees, illegally take away the sweetheart deals the developers were given, oh wait they have deeper pockets for lawyers than the retirees so use the media and make the public employee the bad guy. Just look at the media and see what has been going on to set this up - relentless articles about overtime earned, articles detailing benefits all to make the public see the public sector employee as the bad guy not the politicians that gave away the store to every developer that wanted to put up something bigger than a dog house.

wraftery, x635 and JFLYNN like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I am a firm believer in shared costs, meaning that everyone should pay at least something toward health insurance. If it costs me an extra $50 a check to subsidize my health insurance, and in the long run, I can alleviate some of the strain on my department and the taxpayers who support it, thereby potentially saving a job or jobs, then I am all for it. The private sector does it, and in this day and age, maybe the public sector should, too. We may have to foot some upfront costs, but in the long run, it might just be a better situation in the end.

First, we who have health care ARE sharing the wealth. Illegaal immigrants, those on welfare for generations, and the like pay nothing for their health care, The reason we get hospital statements showing $ 4.oo for an aspirin is because we paid for our aspirin plus the 8 doses for the freeloaders I mentioned above.

Second, those in the private sector are always ready to bang cops and FF's over health insurance costs. From proby to Chief, our salary and benefits are an open book. How does the private sector CEO's salary/benefit package compare to his average employee? I bet he's doing OK if you can even find out! How many Fire Chiefs make 100 to 1000 times more than his FF's? Not a one. Maybe...just maybe...Cops and FF's are good negotiators,, and those in the private sector are not.

Third. Cops and FF's are not that smart. We keep endorsing Democrats, and a year or two later, they want to lower our salaries, and lay us off. It happens over and over.

And yes, Rob, I know we have to scramble. I was just spewing out a few thoughts while I scramble.

x635, PEMO3, JFLYNN and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, we who have health care ARE sharing the wealth. Illegaal immigrants, those on welfare for generations, and the like pay nothing for their health care, The reason we get hospital statements showing $ 4.oo for an aspirin is because we paid for our aspirin plus the 8 doses for the freeloaders I mentioned above.

Second, those in the private sector are always ready to bang cops and FF's over health insurance costs. From proby to Chief, our salary and benefits are an open book. How does the private sector CEO's salary/benefit package compare to his average employee? I bet he's doing OK if you can even find out! How many Fire Chiefs make 100 to 1000 times more than his FF's? Not a one. Maybe...just maybe...Cops and FF's are good negotiators,, and those in the private sector are not.

Third. Cops and FF's are not that smart. We keep endorsing Democrats, and a year or two later, they want to lower our salaries, and lay us off. It happens over and over.

And yes, Rob, I know we have to scramble. I was just spewing out a few thoughts while I scramble.

BRAVO!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, not sure where you went to law school, but they have to do with Contracts they State entered into. That's what the White Plains case will rest on.

If the union attorney's are resting on the those cases, then I wish them all the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Third. Cops and FF's are not that smart. We keep endorsing Democrats, and a year or two later, they want to lower our salaries, and lay us off. It happens over and over.

Chief, Albert Einstein once said:

'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chief, Albert Einstein once said:

'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'

He also said "If a cluttered desk is the sign of a cluttered mind, what, then, of an empty desk?"

Nothing to do with the thread, but I just like the quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's also not forget, some of these White Plains retirees weren't making a lot of money to begin with when they retired 20 years ago, let's say. Their pension was one of their benefits of serving the city, and with inflation and taxes getting higher and higher, many are just scraping by.

Now to have to go to paying $0 to their health care to anywhere between $600 and $12,000 out of the blue? And due to the line of work, the job takes it's toll on firefighters and police officers, who often have health problems that could be due to their jobs.

These retirees shouldn't get shafted because the City Of White Plains didn't have any foresight or a growth plan that anticpated future needs. These retirees have to pay for all the tax break White Plains gave to Capelli and other developers? Again, the richer get richer and the poor get poorer.

In the future, communities need to think about what this development will really cost before giving tax breaks that they can't afford. The same is happening in Yonkers, they are betting on Ridge Hill and other developments that haven't even broken ground to save the city fiscally. And Yonkers won't see any money for years from these projects due to all the tax breaks promised. I don't see these projects in this economy bringing in enough money to balance the cities budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I guess us retirees are finished "venting."

The rest will probably be in the hands of the lawyers.

I bet they won't "Share The Wealth."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.