Tier 6 Pension Fight

[ny10570 745]

For anyone that believes pensions are the anchor dragging our economy down. Mr. Dinapolli has no vested interest in whether or not tier 6 passes. He'll be long since retired before the changes have a meaningful impact.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/n-y-pensions-worth-defending-article-1.1026487#ixzz1nEme7OtT

[Guest alsfirefighter]

For anyone that believes pensions are the anchor dragging our economy down. Mr. Dinapolli has no vested interest in whether or not tier 6 passes. He'll be long since retired before the changes have a meaningful impact.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/n-y-pensions-worth-defending-article-1.1026487#ixzz1nEme7OtT

Not to mention the fact that the newsletter we all just got last month has a big article with the state comptroller stating NYS Retirement system is one of the strongest in the nation.

But hey...what would we do with network news supporting their rich cronies who actually are sucking us dry, putting the blame on us.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Another issue that the Gov. and other politician who are pushing this plan have yet to mention is the Tier 6 plan does not cover disabilities or death. It also does not offer the employeer the protection of 207a or c. That means employees who get hurt are 1) on there own and 2) they can sue the municipality as the politicians are proposing to remove the municipal savfeguards to "save" money.

Those of you who want to get jobs as firefighters or police officers, teachers, public works...etc. Will you still want the job or if you take the job, will you put yourself in harms way knowing that the community does not have your back?

Is this really going to solve our economic problem or is it just one more talking point for Cuomo's 1016 Presidential Run?

[LTNRFD 266]

Another issue that the Gov. and other politician who are pushing this plan have yet to mention is the Tier 6 plan does not cover disabilities or death. It also does not offer the employeer the protection of 207a or c. That means employees who get hurt are 1) on there own and 2) they can sue the municipality as the politicians are proposing to remove the municipal savfeguards to "save" money.

Barry as you know I'm a tier 2 retiree out on 207-A. I don't have any protection in regards to my disability now. The City of New Rochelle is refusing to pay for my medical care. I have been on my own for the past 3 years and no one in the state says it's their department to protect the retirees. The City of New Rochelle has decided not to pay for the medical care for the injured and has told us to "sue us if you don't like it". To sue the city you have to file an "article 78" in state supreme court. You need $5,000 out of pocket to file an article 78.

The ironic part is the City of New Rochelle is claiming they are now saving the tax payers money. The money they save by denying the medical care due the 207-A retirees is that the money times 10 is going to 207 Resolutions, the labor attorney and the IME. They are doing this in direct violation of the GML 207-A and no one in the state has any authority to compel them to follow the law.

Edited February 25, 2012 by LTNRFD

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Barry as you know I'm a tier 2 retiree out on 207-A. I don't have any protection in regards to my disability now. The City of New Rochelle is refusing to pay for my medical care. I have been on my own for the past 3 years and no one in the state says it's their department to protect the retirees. The City of New Rochelle has decided not to pay for the medical care for the injured and has told us to "sue us if you don't like it". To sue the city you have to file an "article 78" in state supreme court. You need $5,000 out of pocket to file an article 78.

The ironic part is the City of New Rochelle is claiming they are now saving the tax payers money. The money they save by denying the medical care due the 207-A retirees is that the money times 10 is going to 207 Resolutions, the labor attorney and the IME. They are doing this in direct violation of the GML 207-A and no one in the state has any authority to compel them to follow the law.

Sad to say..but New Rochelle is not the only one doing this. Once one does something like what's happening to you without successful challenge, word spreads like wildfire and its like dominoes.

Anyone who would still be willing to take the job..and there are plenty of you who would because of your heart...you might want to start thinking with your head...cause your a** is going to be out in the breeze. You will be 60 years old getting out of a RMP or an engine.

[LTNRFD 266]

Sad to say..but New Rochelle is not the only one doing this. Once one does something like what's happening to you without successful challenge, word spreads like wildfire and its like dominoes.

Anyone who would still be willing to take the job..and there are plenty of you who would because of your heart...you might want to start thinking with your head...cause your a** is going to be out in the breeze. You will be 60 years old getting out of a RMP or an engine.

When I came on the job a wise senior man told all of the probies to remember that we were nothing more than a number. When you are gone there will be another number replacing you. It took me 21 years to really understand what he meant.

Edited February 25, 2012 by LTNRFD

[Guest alsfirefighter]

When I came on the job a wise senior man told all of the probies to remember that we were nothing more than a number. When you are gone there will be another number replacing you. It took me 21 years to really understand what he meant.

Same thing I tell guys that piss fire and vinegar...probies and volunteers....the fire service was here before you...and it will survive long after you. But you can still make a mark...but you will never be bigger then the job.

[SECTMB 612]

Unless you want to keep your head in the sand and adhere to some strict ideology, you have to see that the pension benefits allotted to prior generations of civil service employees are no longer sustainable in today's economic climate.

And, if we're going to be honest about it, those pension benefits were justified in order to attract persons into civil service as, then, civil service compensation was notably less than private sector compensation.

In the last 40 years however, civil service compensation has in many instances, increased to match or even exceed private sector compensation.

We now have civil service employees retiring with pensions twice the national average of private sector compensation after 20 or 25 years of service. That's persons in their mid 40's to 50 eligible to immediately receive pensions of anywhere from $50K to $100K annually for possibly another 30 years. Essentially, we are paying our civil service employees twice, once for 20 or 25 years of active service and again for 30 or more years in retirement. Look at the numbers for pension expenses, up 500 or 600 percent within the last decade and expected to increase exponentially into the future, if not reformed.

Unsustainable is the term being used and it is appropriate. It now affects municipal budgets which cut back on their civil service employees in order to meet their budgets. Five man engine companies get reduced to four, then three, then two and response protocols are re-written to accommodate the lack of personnel.

We do need a new tier which addresses the new and future economic reality. But any new tier should include the appropriate benefits to protect the life and health of those covered by it.

And I have to disagree with the statement that DiNapoli has nothing to gain from this issue. DiNapoli has consistently issued reports and opinions contradictory or contrary to independent audits and analysis of these issue. DiNapoli is just another politician with the next election and/or higher office in mind and he is just pandering to a significant voting block. The proposed new tier may not take effect for years, but the political effect is immediate.

Edited February 26, 2012 by SECTMB

[ny10570 745]

If NY and NYC had maintained their regular contributions over the boom years of the 90's and early 2000's both funds would be hugely over funded. The NYCERS fund by between 20 and 30% depending on who's math you use. These funds are insolvent through mismanagement! There are absolutely abuses in the system that need to be addressed but these radical changes go so far beyond that. Absolutely in some cases municipal contributions have soared in comparison to previous years but those are intentionally misleading. In every case where I've seen such large relative increases you're comparing the smallest contributions when the fund was booming to now when they have to cover their losses. That is not a problem with the fund. It is a problem with the politicians running our governments.

Dinapoli isn't up for re-election till 2014. Any pandering now is useless if the fund isn't solvent then. Since he has zero say on the legislation of a new tier he gains much more from fiscal responsibility than political favors 2 1/2 years before the election. Looking at his record shows his commitment to reigning in the budget and his willingness to oppose his fellow dems.

[Guest ME4]

Unless you want to keep your head in the sand and adhere to some strict ideology, you have to see that the pension benefits allotted to prior generations of civil service employees are no longer sustainable in today's economic climate.

And, if we're going to be honest about it, those pension benefits were justified in order to attract persons into civil service as, then, civil service compensation was notably less than private sector compensation.

In the last 40 years however, civil service compensation has in many instances, increased to match or even exceed private sector compensation.

Seeing the above makes my blood boil.

It is partisan horsesh1t.

This nation create ENORMOUS new wealth each year and will continue to do so, what has changed in the past few decades is how this wealth is distributed.

The people at the top through buying members of Congress, state legislatures has advocated for changes in the law that allow a CEO to be paid tens of millions for firing tens of thousands.

CEO pay has gone up 400% while ordinary worker compensation has gone down in the same time period.

If some of you want to accept the current political dogma from both parties that all our fiscal woes are the fault of TAX PAYING civil servants you do so at your own peril.

One political party only advocates for the already rich and corporations, the other party advocates for illegals and thinks money grows on trees, NEITHER party gives a damn about the hardworking middle class.

You can't demand pensions be cut or eliminated for working people as Cuomo has while demanding another tax cut for the rich and an increase in welfare.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Unless you want to keep your head in the sand and adhere to some strict ideology, you have to see that the pension benefits allotted to prior generations of civil service employees are no longer sustainable in today's economic climate.

And, if we're going to be honest about it, those pension benefits were justified in order to attract persons into civil service as, then, civil service compensation was notably less than private sector compensation.

In the last 40 years however, civil service compensation has in many instances, increased to match or even exceed private sector compensation.

We now have civil service employees retiring with pensions twice the national average of private sector compensation after 20 or 25 years of service. That's persons in their mid 40's to 50 eligible to immediately receive pensions of anywhere from $50K to $100K annually for possibly another 30 years. Essentially, we are paying our civil service employees twice, once for 20 or 25 years of active service and again for 30 or more years in retirement. Look at the numbers for pension expenses, up 500 or 600 percent within the last decade and expected to increase exponentially into the future, if not reformed.

Unsustainable is the term being used and it is appropriate. It now affects municipal budgets which cut back on their civil service employees in order to meet their budgets. Five man engine companies get reduced to four, then three, then two and response protocols are re-written to accommodate the lack of personnel.

We do need a new tier which addresses the new and future economic reality. But any new tier should include the appropriate benefits to protect the life and health of those covered by it.

And I have to disagree with the statement that DiNapoli has nothing to gain from this issue. DiNapoli has consistently issued reports and opinions contradictory or contrary to independent audits and analysis of these issue. DiNapoli is just another politician with the next election and/or higher office in mind and he is just pandering to a significant voting block. The proposed new tier may not take effect for years, but the political effect is immediate.

The retirement system and salaries morphed into what they are because governments could not recruit talented people to the jobs when they could and were making more on the outside. On top of it, once those who did take the job became good at it they couldn't retain them. That includes the retirement. Unsustainable...yes when the retirement funding is handled the way that it is...and then those...much like what you are stating sip the network news kool aid and the politicians play right into the flavor of the year topic to enhance their careers in the political arena.

Social security is unsustainable..why are we not hacking that now? But hey..who really cares that you will have cops and firefighter in their late 50's and even possibly 60 getting out of a vehicle. Funny...somewhere along the line the state must have made a mistake...then again for all of us in the NYS retirement system...we're paying taxes to help fund our own retirement.

[M' Ave 1,466]

I will be in Albany on March 13th....hopefully one in a sea of blue uniforms.

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

We lost. looks like your safe in the city . Sold out in the middle of the night !

Edited March 15, 2012 by PCFD ENG58

[FDNYDCHI 38]

With the new Tier 6 plan there is no real incentive for people to work in the civil service field. Also too would there be a rift between new hires and other members in tier 1/2/3/4. In today's world its the I Got mine or I want that!

Chris

[SECTMB 612]

The entire public pension system, including social security, is one giant ponzi / pyramid scheme. We put Bernie Madoff in jail, but we keep re-electing the politicians that run this government sanctioned three card monty.

When social security was enacted it was a safety net. You worked and paid into the system till you retired at 65 and you were dead by 68. Today you pay into the system take early retirement at 62 and live to 82.

On the public pension side, you work for 20 or 25 years and collect for another 30 or 40. It takes increasingly more people at the base of the pyramid to pay for

those exiting at the top. Problem is that base is not expanding fast enough to fund those that want to leave.

In the case of social security, the money is all gone, just a file cabinet with IOU's. The politicians have long ago spent the money and only new contributions fund the current retirees. Unfortunately there just aren't enough new and current contributors to fund those retirees so the system will run out of money until they either take more money from the current workforce, change the distribution formula for the retirees or some of both.

On the State side, the money is actually there, though most funds are underfunded. Its great that Mr. DiNapoli has billions of dollars invested but that doesn't mean the plan is not underfunded to meet it stated goals. Its not really a problem for NYS retirees since their benefits are guaranteed by the State constitution. If there's not enough money, taxes are simply raised to make up any short fall. So when the plans guarantee a specific payout and the investment return is not sufficient to cover it, they simply raise taxes. Yes, you are paying higher taxes to fund your own plan, at least until you retire and move to a state that does not have a state income tax.

I don't have a horse in this race, I'll long be dust before it hits the fan and I leave no one behind. But it will one day implode itself unless changes are made and all the 'class warfare', 're-distribution of wealth' bull isn't going to change it. Only honest, well thought out changes will.

If we only had a few politicians with just a hint of the brain power that was in the founding fathers that got us this far before we screwed it all up.

[antiquefirelt 994]

When social security was enacted it was a safety net. You worked and paid into the system till you retired at 65 and you were dead by 68. Today you pay into the system take early retirement at 62 and live to 82.

On the public pension side, you work for 20 or 25 years and collect for another 30 or 40. It takes increasingly more people at the base of the pyramid to pay for

those exiting at the top. Problem is that base is not expanding fast enough to fund those that want to leave.

The issue you're failing to address is that municipal and state retirement systems can and many case do, cost the taxpayers less money than SS. Our system in Maine is 98% funded (of course we pay half the pay-in), and costs the taxpayers less than if they offered nothing and had to pay the SS pay ins. That's today, but it saves the taxpayer later too, as those who retire with an actual pension are far less likely to need taxpayer funded assistance as most of those who only have SS do. You partisan political argument fails to show how much the alternatives cost.

This argument is being had nationwide and seems to gain support from many people who can't believe the people that they pay get more than they do. It's as if they just want to make sure we know we're "the help". Funny thing is they're voting to pay more to look down their noses at us.

Edited March 16, 2012 by antiquefirelt

[rayrider 94]

The entire public pension system, including social security, is one giant ponzi / pyramid scheme. We put Bernie Madoff in jail, but we keep re-electing the politicians that run this government sanctioned three card monty.

When social security was enacted it was a safety net. You worked and paid into the system till you retired attack 65 and you were dead by 68. Today you pay into the system take early retirement at 62 and live to 82.

On the public pension side, you work for 20 or 25 years and collect for another 30 or 40. It takes increasingly more people at the base of the pyramid to pay for

those exiting at the top. Problem is that base is not expanding fast enough to fund those that want to leave.

In the case of social security, the money is all gone, just a file cabinet with IOU's. The politicians have long ago spent the money and only new contributions fund the current retirees. Unfortunately there just aren't enough new and current contributors to fund those retirees so the system will run out of money until they either take more money from the current workforce, change the distribution formula for the retirees or some of both.

On the State side, the money is actually there, though most funds are underfunded. Its great that Mr. DiNapoli has billions of dollars invested but that doesn't mean the plan is not underfunded to meet it stated goals. Its not really a problem for NYS retirees since their benefits are guaranteed by the State constitution. If there's not enough money, taxes are simply raised to make up any short fall. So when the plans guarantee a specific payout and the investment return is not sufficient to cover it, they simply raise taxes. Yes, you are paying higher taxes to fund your own plan, at least until you retire and move to a state that does not have a state income tax.

I don't have a horse in this race, I'll long be dust before it hits the fan and I leave no one behind. But it will one day implode itself unless changes are made and all the 'class warfare', 're-distribution of wealth' bull isn't going to change it. Ony honest, well thought out changes will.

If we only had a few politicians with just a hint of the brain power that was in the founding fathers that got us this far before we screwed it all up.

How about the guys who paid into the system for 30 yrs and and failed to collect a single check or for a couple of years. I know quite a few. I think ill retire to a state with no income tax and maybe become a reverend or open a church for more tax benefits along with my ponzi scheme.

[ny10570 745]

Actually last year NY was over funded. If you average out pension costs to the tax payers over a career rather than just the boom and bust cycle of the last 10 years pensions are an excellent investment for the taxpayers. Both social security and state pension systems were raided when they were profitable. I keep pointing this out, but you people on the right keep ignoring it. HAD GOVERNMENTS MAINTAINED THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS RATHER THAN REDUCING THEM BECAUSE OF STRONG MARKET RETURNS NY, NYC, AND I'm SURE MANY OTHER FUNDS WOULD STILL BE FUNDED WITHOUT THESE MASSIVE INCREASES. 2000% increases in taxpayer contributions is outrageous. But ask yourself what changed to necessitate those changes. There wasn't a surge in retirements nor was there a spike in payouts. The government finally got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. All of this applies to social security too. They kept kicking the ball down the road saying we'll pay it back later, but later never came.

[JetPhoto 626]

Time to "retire" early and go on Welfare...gaurenteed money, zero work hours, no bosses and free medical & no worries about the state pension system

[FFLieu 70]

As someone who used to work for the illustrious governor when he was in his last office, I can personally attest to the fact that he is, without a doubt, a moron. He ran the office like the guy from the Wizard of Oz: he was always behind the curtain, but giving direction through his number 2 (equally a moron, as well), never to be see, unless of course, there was a TV camera in the room. Chances are, he's doing the same thing as governor, so my guess is that this whole Tier 6 thing really isn't his bailywick.

[DR104 141]

The legislation puts in place a new Tier VI pension plan that includes:

New Employee Contribution Rates: The new tier increases employee contribution rates in a progressive fashion to ensure lower paid state and local workers are not seriously affected. Employee contribution rates vary depending on salary:

$0 - $45,000: 3%

$45,000 - $55,000: 3.5%

$55,000 - $75,000: 4.5%

$75,000 - $100,000: 5.75%

$100,000+: 6%

These rates remain substantially lower than the large majority of similar state systems around the country. The new tier impacts only newly hired employees. Existing employees and retirees retain all benefits.

Increase of the Retirement Age: The pension reform includes an increase in the retirement age from 62 to 63 and includes provisions allowing early retirement with penalties. For each year of retirement prior to 63, employee pension allowances will be permanently reduced by 6.5%.

Readjustment of Pension Multiplier: Under Tier VI, the new pension multiplier will be 1.75% for the first 20 years of service, and 2% starting in the 21st year. For an employee who works 30 years, their pension will be 55% of final average salary under Tier VI, instead of 60% under Tier V. This readjustment brings New York more in line with most other states and will save billions of dollars for taxpayers and local governments.

Vesting: Under Tier VI, employees will vest after 10 years of service.

Protect Local Governments From State Pension Sweeteners: The agreement requires the state to pre-fund any pension enhancers, ensuring that these costs are no longer passed to local governments.

Adjustments to Final Average Salary Calculation to Help Reducing Pension Padding: The agreement changes the time period for final average salary calculation from 3 years to 5 years. To limit how much overtime can be used to determine an employee's pension, pensionable overtime for civilian and non-uniformed employees will be capped at $15,000 plus inflation, and for uniformed employees outside of New York City capped at 15% of base pay. Tier VI puts in place new anti-spiking measures which cap growth in salary used to determine pension allowances at 10% for all employees statewide. These reforms will take major steps toward addressing instances of abuse and pension padding. Tier VI also eliminates lump sum payments of unused sick and vacation time from the calculation of final average salary.

Voluntary and Portable Defined Contribution Option: The legislation includes an optional defined contribution plan for new non-union employees with salaries $75,000 and above. In the modern economy, employees often change jobs multiple times and need pension portability. Many states, the federal government, and most private employers provide some form of defined contribution plans to their employees. The state will make an 8% contribution to employee contribution accounts. Currently, SUNY and CUNY offer such an option through TIAA-CREF that has been successful and popular. This is a voluntary option for those employees who prefer the portability and vesting feature not available with defined benefit options, and will help attract top talent to state government.

Adjustments to SUNY/CUNY TIAA-CREF Plan: Under Tier VI, SUNY and CUNY employees who elect the TIAA-CREF plan will receive an employer contribution of 8% of salary for the first 7 years of service and 10% thereafter.

Limiting Number of Sick and Leave Days that Can Pad Pensions: Tier VI reduces by half- from 200 to 100- the number of sick and leave days that can be used for retirement service credit.

Salary Reform: Previous tiers allowed salaries from an unlimited amount of employers for calculating retirement benefits. Tier VI allows only two salaries for the calculation.

Limiting Pension Benefit of High Paid Employees: For new higher paid employees, the amount earned above the Governor's salary (currently $179,000) will not be eligible for pension calculation under Tier VI.

[201/65 94]

For those of you interested, here are the voting roll calls for the recently passed legislation.

NYS Assembly:

S06735 Relates to persons joining certain public retirement systems after April 1, 2012

• DATE: 03/15/2012 YEA/NAY: 92/46

YEA:

Amedore, Arroyo, Barclay, Benedet, Blanken, Boyle, Braunst, Brennan, Brindis, Bronson, Brook-K, Calhoun, Canestr, Castell, Clark, Conte, Corwin, Crouch, Curran, Cusick, Cymbrow, Duprey Englebr, Farrell, Finch Fitzpat, Friend, Gabrysz, Galef, Gantt, Giglio, Goldfed, Goodell, Gottfri, Gunther, Hanna, Hawley, Hevesi, Hikind, Hooper, Jordan, Kavanag, Kolb, Lavine, Lentol, Lifton, Lope PD, Lope VJ, Losquad, Lupardo, Magee, Magnare, Malliot, Markey, McKevit, McLaugh, Mill D, Mill JM, Montesa, Morelle, Nolan, Oaks, O'Donne, Ortiz, Palmesa, Paulin, Perry, Pretlow, Quart, Ra, Reilich, Rive PM, Rodrigu, Rosenth, Russell, Sayward, Schimel, Schimmi, Silver, Simanow, Simotas, Sweeney, Tedisco, Thiele, Titone, Smardz, Tobacco, Walter, Weinste, Weisenb, Weprin, & Zebrows

NAY:

Abbate, Abinant, Aubry ,Barron, Boyland, Butler, Cahill, Camara, Castro, Ceretto , Colton, Cook, Crespo, Dinowit, Gibson, Glick, Graf, Jacobs, Jaffee, Jeffrie, Johns, Katz, Kellner, Lancman, Linares, Maisel, McDonou, McEneny, Meng, Mill MG, Millman, Moya, Murray, Peoples, Rabbitt, Raia, Ramos, Reilly, Rive J, Rive N, Roberts, Ryan, Saladin, Stevens, Tenney, & Titus

Excused or Abstained:

Burling, DenDekk, Espinal, Heastie, Latimer, Robinso, Scarbor, & Wright

NYS Senate:

S6735-2011 Votes

FLOOR VOTE: - Mar 14, 2012

Ayes (32):

Alesi

,

Ball

,

Bonacic

,

DeFrancisco

,

Farley

,

Flanagan

,

Fuschillo

,

Gallivan

,

Golden

,

Griffo

,

Grisanti

,

Hannon

,

Johnson

,

Lanza

,

Larkin

,

LaValle

,

Libous

,

Little

,

Marcellino

,

Martins

,

Maziarz

,

McDonald

,

Nozzolio

,

O'Mara

,

Ranzenhofer

,

Ritchie

,

Robach

,

Saland

,

Seward

,

Skelos

,

Young

,

Zeldin

Nays (5):

Carlucci

,

Klein

,

Savino

,

Squadron

,

Valesky

Abstains (23):

Adams

,

Addabbo

,

Avella

,

Breslin

,

Diaz

,

Dilan

,

Duane

,

Espaillat

,

Gianaris

,

Hassell-Thompson

,

Huntley

,

Kennedy

,

Krueger

,

Montgomery

,

Parker

,

Peralta

,

Perkins

,

Rivera

,

Sampson

,

Serrano

,

Smith

,

Stavisky

,

Stewart-Cousins

Excused (1):

Oppenheimer

Edited March 16, 2012 by 201/65

[FDNYDCHI 38]

that looks pretty bad!! with the new tier 6 plan it looks like with the SUNY/ CUNY they are trying to push a 401k style with employer matching if I am reading it right. Can a New employee do both? DB Pension and 401k or 457?

Or is it Pick one and that's it??

Chris

[ny10570 745]

I haven't seen a good breakdown of the details yet, but I believe anyone making more than 75k/year will be eligible to enter the defined contribution plan. If it follows the SUNY plan, its one or the other.

[SECTMB 612]

Just for the record, I would like to say that I don't think my statements should be considered center, left of, or right of when it comes to our politicians. I think they, or most of them anyway, bite the big one, are selfish, self serving, egotistical prima donnas who cater to whatever interest group will either get them re-elected or a cushy private sector job (quid pro quo) post public service.

Remember, with politicians, its not just the next election, its what comes after public service and the ability to really cash in your time 'serving the public'.

And yes, I think it unfair that some people paid into SS for their entire career and only collect for a short time, or not at all under certain circumstances, but that's part and parcel with a pyramid scheme and what makes them work, for a while.

Imagine if that money were invested personally and privately. The result would be better and something to pass on to your family. Not the SS way though.

And yes, almost every single municipality that enacts a private pension plan in lieu of SS has garnered better outcomes for their participants. It's the same for all our members of Congress who have their own retirement system separate from SS. They can, you can't. Is that fair? But if everyone was allowed to opt out of SS the pyramid would collapse, that's why they fight so furiously to prevent even a portion of someone's contributions to be privately placed. So guess what? the majority of workers who actually pay into the system will get what they can, when they can according to the politicians who will keep changing the rules while the game is being played.

[mstrang1 213]

Imagine if that money were invested personally and privately. The result would be better and something to pass on to your family. Not the SS way though.

And yes, almost every single municipality that enacts a private pension plan in lieu of SS has garnered better outcomes for their participants. It's the same for all our members of Congress who have their own retirement system separate from SS. They can, you can't. Is that fair? But if everyone was allowed to opt out of SS the pyramid would collapse, that's why they fight so furiously to prevent even a portion of someone's contributions to be privately placed. So guess what? the majority of workers who actually pay into the system will get what they can, when they can according to the politicians who will keep changing the rules while the game is being played.

If the money were invested personally and privately, what happens to all of those people who (wanted to) retire in 2008ish? They lost 100s of thousands in the market, all the while, the stockbroker is wiping his butt with $100 bills. Who do you think is pushing people away from defined benefits? Wall Street! Say a defined benefit program has $50 million in it. They are paying 1% of that in commission($500k/yr). Now a personal investment plan, they get 3-5%! So who wins with personal investments? Lets see, the stockbroker wins, the politician wins. That's it. Notice I did not say the taxpayer wins. That is because they lose.

If the fund is properly funded, like it should have been, instead of the $400 MILLION LOAN that the state of NJ took against the NJS Pension Fund with no plan to repay it, then it is totally self sufficient with no taxpayer input.

[ny10570 745]

Politicians are not the only people out there who are irresponsible and greedy. No one put a gun to any of Madoff's victims heads. In fact they were clamoring to invest with him. No one thought to second guess his impossibly high investment returns because all they cared about was all the money he promised them. Lets not forget all of the smart investors who didn't chase fairy tales but became over leveraged in the market when it crashed. Either through outright fraud or simple mismanagement if everyone was managing their own finances we would have a lot more destitute people out there. People that would then need government support. Social security is a safety net. That's all it ever was and ever will be. You shouldn't be relying on it for your retirement. That is where pensions and defined contribution plans come in.

[Bnechis 3,961]

The legislation puts in place a new Tier VI pension plan that includes:

Increase of the Retirement Age: The pension reform includes an increase in the retirement age from 62 to 63 and includes provisions allowing early retirement with penalties. For each year of retirement prior to 63, employee pension allowances will be permanently reduced by 6.5%.

So if you get hired at 22, work 30 years and when your 52 your knee gives out (non job related) and you can no longer do field work, if you retire you lose 65% of your pension.

So would this mean you should not take the job until your 40?

Tier VI also eliminates lump sum payments of unused sick and vacation time from the calculation of final average salary.

Limiting Number of Sick and Leave Days that Can Pad Pensions: Tier VI reduces by half- from 200 to 100- the number of sick and leave days that can be used for retirement service credit.

When the pension folks gave a siminar 2 years ago they told us that in teir II all lump sum payments were prohibited.

If you can not use your sick leave, what the likely hood that you will start using it so it does not build up..."Use it or lose it" and run up the OT for others is what could happen. That will not help "reduce the tax costs".

All your info was posted in Cuomo's press release. Their was previous talk that their would be no disability or death benefits. Their is no mention of it now...So is it the case or not?

[efdcapt115 1,511]

They should spell it Tear Six, because it really is reason to cry for the younger people affected by this. I mean this is what it's come to huh? All the sacrifices of those who came before us, and helped to build mediocre municipal jobs into the respected careers they became; gone in a piece of legislation?

Poof.

Decade upon decade of sacrifice, hard work, playing by the rule of law....all the ingredients mixed in to bring the job of fireman to the career of firefighter, the job of policeman to the career of law enforcement, the job of garbageman to the career in sanitation.

To the younger members on this site who a pursing a career in civil service, what do we say now? "Suuure it's still a great job, but chances are pretty good you're signing a lifetime contract here, so be prepared to do this until you drop dead while doing it?" Should we start including Estate Planning into Firefighter I or II?

You want to know why I think the issue of death and disability weren't even addressed apparently? Because they KNOW LODDs are going to skyrocket, on-the-job injuries are going to become epidemic as this affected generation are going to be great-grandfathers and still pushing lines into working fires, still carrying tons of materials every day on their backs, still going at it with gangsters to protect us all.

Maybe they think Apple is going to come out with an APP that will reverse the aging process in the meantime.

These jobs are primarily for younger workers. There will always be the need for senior men, and a seasoned officer corps, but with this new tier apparently EVERYBODY will be a senior man.

No, that's not a ceremonial fire truck coming down the street in the local parade, carrying the honorary 50 year members. That's your first due truck.

A special thanks to the NY newspaper that made it it's top priority to engage in a smear campaign against the pension system for many years. And the 15Billion dollar mayor. And the son GOV, who finished what the father GOV started.

The hell with the sons and daughters of the Empire State. And in so doing they have added one more nail in the coffin of the Empire. And that empire's name is These United States of America Inc.

[gamewell45 258]

Unless you want to keep your head in the sand and adhere to some strict ideology, you have to see that the pension benefits allotted to prior generations of civil service employees are no longer sustainable in today's economic climate.

And, if we're going to be honest about it, those pension benefits were justified in order to attract persons into civil service as, then, civil service compensation was notably less than private sector compensation.

In the last 40 years however, civil service compensation has in many instances, increased to match or even exceed private sector compensation.

We now have civil service employees retiring with pensions twice the national average of private sector compensation after 20 or 25 years of service. That's persons in their mid 40's to 50 eligible to immediately receive pensions of anywhere from $50K to $100K annually for possibly another 30 years. Essentially, we are paying our civil service employees twice, once for 20 or 25 years of active service and again for 30 or more years in retirement. Look at the numbers for pension expenses, up 500 or 600 percent within the last decade and expected to increase exponentially into the future, if not reformed.

Unsustainable is the term being used and it is appropriate. It now affects municipal budgets which cut back on their civil service employees in order to meet their budgets. Five man engine companies get reduced to four, then three, then two and response protocols are re-written to accommodate the lack of personnel.

We do need a new tier which addresses the new and future economic reality. But any new tier should include the appropriate benefits to protect the life and health of those covered by it.

And I have to disagree with the statement that DiNapoli has nothing to gain from this issue. DiNapoli has consistently issued reports and opinions contradictory or contrary to independent audits and analysis of these issue. DiNapoli is just another politician with the next election and/or higher office in mind and he is just pandering to a significant voting block. The proposed new tier may not take effect for years, but the political effect is immediate.

I agree with you that the issue needs to be addressed. The public as a rule has little sympathy for public sector workers since pensions are mostly a thing of the past for those fortunate enough to work in the private sector. The popular mindset being that they don't have them, why should you have them?? The argument that you didn't make much money really doesn't hold water anymore in their eyes. We can always point the finger at cities that they should have done this or done that with the money, but the long as short of it is that in many cases the pension funds in some cities are woefully underfunded and the cities have to address the immediate concern at the expense of staffing unfortunately. The cities are unwilling to add further tax burden on the public; the public will squawk about it and none of the politicians are willing to risk being voted out of office by angry taxpayers.

I think the Tier VI will most likely go forward in some modified form. If too much resistance is put up and the voters get fed up enough, you could end up having the laws changed radically to the point where you end up with a 401.k as opposed to a pension or even worse, jobs reduced further or privatization of public services.

Ideally both sides will be able to hammer out an agreement on this matter to the satisfaction of everyone involved.