patrick.net

FortWayne says

lostand confused says

How does the spouse pension work. If a 90 yr old teacher marries a 20 yr old and croaks in a year, does spouse get the pension till they die too?

I think that's how it works in the military, it's called surviving spouse benefits.

It was very important for a generation when women did not work. But as far as your example... a 20 year old will marry Warren Buffet for money, a 20 year old isn't going to marry a school teacher. But in theory they would get the benefits, yes.

The benefits are reduced for surviving spouse. I don't know how they work here, but when I was in Maryland and in a state program there you could choose your options. Upon retirement, you could choose a plan that gave your surviving spouse a paycheck, but this resulted in reduced benefit to you starting with day 1 of retirement. If you instead opted for the full benefit upon retirement, it would END the day you died. I only lasted one year there, so I didn't have to decide who was going first. haha

Entitlemented says

and we dont build nearly as much which can be taxed, since its tax and other revenues which fund public education.

But again, do the Math. Many seem to think these pensions come out of taxes. They do in a way, but only in the sense that that additional 12% needs to be seen as part of teachers pay, which averages a little over 50K in California. So add 7K for pension onto that salary cost along with health care and other costs.

Thanks goodness we don't have people saying that we can't afford to give health insurance to govt workers. I guess that's because health insurance isn't viewed as this pot of money that the uniformed think is coming right out of their pockets to pay lavish pensions.

In some countries, everyone gets a good pension, and you don't have this stupid pension envy.

JH says

The benefits are reduced for surviving spouse. I don't know how they work here, but when I was in Maryland and in a state program there you could choose your options. Upon retirement, you could choose a plan that gave your surviving spouse a paycheck, but this resulted in reduced benefit to you starting with day 1 of retirement.

That's my understanding in California too. I think it often works the same way with healthcare -- e.g. you can pay more to ensure your spouse is covered after your death.

JH says

After 40 years working at the same job, they can approach 90%. But those same employees have put away 8% with employee match of 8%...for 40 years.

JH says

STRS's 16% is pretty solid contribution

In addition to the 8% the teachers pay in, and the 8% the district pays in, the state pays another (average of 5.5%) in. So that's over 20% of teachers salary put away each year.

If you look at what this (the 5.5% of teacher salaries) amounts to as part of the state budget, it's not that much. What if teachers and the district paid 9.5% in, and the state paid say 6.5 - 7.0% (even in years that the stock market goes up !).

I wonder what the actuaries would find that amount of change would do to the funding level projections.

I know how we get better teaching.

Berate teachers as lazy & entitled. Tell them they are too stupid to do anything else that's why they teach. Lobby to have them constantly tested, drug-tested, and paid based of arbitrary performance measures. Have them testing their students and reporting data all the time. If they manage to run this gauntlet and make it to retirement, claim situations changed and snatch their pension out from under them.

That'll teach 'em!

humanity says

the state pays another (average of 5.5%) in. So that's over 20% of teachers salary put away each year.

I didn't realize the state kicked in that much on top, also. 23% is pretty hefty. Not many private employees are putting that much away toward retirement...which is why the envy exists.

In addition, the state/district/taxpayer is NOT kicking in the usual 6.2% for social security.

humanity says

If you look at what this (the 5.5% of teacher salaries) amounts to as part of the state budget, it's not that much

Right, and the break on social security helps. The problem is the payout burden. Ironically it's fine now; it's just the 30 year insolvency predictions that will scare voters into referenda to fuck over state employees.

humanity says

I wonder what the actuaries would find that amount of change would do to the funding level projections.

Unfortunately, actuaries do not have gregarious personalities of politicians, so you'll never hear them explain (loudly) that the problem can be solved with minor adjustments. And that the strs/pers could become sustainable models if they can get through the first big generation of beneficiaries.

JH says

Not many private employees are putting that much away toward retirement..

I think 3% is considered normal to semi-generous these days.

The funds should have invested more in AAA rated MBS.

It seems that one of the key differences is that public employees get a defined benefit retirement package where as private sector workers get a defined contribution retirement package.

The public sector gets 36% more average salary and 70% greater on benefits.

This data is not specific to teachers but I would think it parallels what the teachers get, if not understate the facts.

The data is from the BLS:

http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/tbb-59.pdf

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf

The other factor to be considered is that Calif is I think 48th out of 50 in scholastic scores.

This is because the union members do no have to worry about what the market place wants.

indigenous says

The public sector gets 36% more average salary and 70% greater on benefits.

I call this type of comparison apples and oranges.

Let's compare 2 things:

The shoe size of NBA basketball players vs. general population.
The compensation paid to Bay Areans vs. American average.

Public sector positions are tilted towards clerical and skilled, with degree requirements predominating.

When you compare the salary of for example public sector teachers vs. private, how does that turn out? Dr. at a University teaching hospital, or one in private practice? Or say public sector programmer/analysts vs. private. You need to compare apples to apples.

Yeah. You might find it's not so rosy a picture as you wanted to paint.

Relevant:

http://www.epi.org/publication/pm173/

Just once I'd like people to read one of my posts, and say "I NEVER THOUGHT OF THAT, THANKS!"

humanity says

Teachers pay 8% of their salary directly into the funds each month instead of SS, and the district/state pays another 12%.

This is not only legal, but also the smartest thing the Teacher's Union has been doing with it's members paychecks over the years. The only possibly way to screw it up would be a declining income or population base from the State? Or, if maybe the retirees don't contribute to the fund?
Or, worse yet, it's not a fund and the contributions are tossed into the State's treasury in exchange for an IOU?
Maybe that is what JB is concerned about?

FortWayne says

But as far as your example... a 20 year old will marry Warren Buffet for money, a 20 year old isn't going to marry a school teacher. But in theory they would get the benefits, yes

I don't know. Marrying a 94 yr old teacher one step from the grave for a year or two and receiving 8-10k a month for life-now that seems like a sweet deal?? maybe at that age most people don't think long term.

Vicente says

Public sector positions are tilted towards clerical and skilled, with degree requirements predominating.

My conjecture leans toward the government being the employer of last resort, consequently hiring people who are unemployable in the free market.

The government may have a more educated work force, but the question is does their job description require that education? Also this is not data for teachers so it applies across the spectrum of public employees.

The overarching reason public sector workers make more money is because of collective bargaining, this is by far the reason.

Again in Cali test scores are 48th out of 50. This demonstrates incompetence. You will say the testing is not uniform from state to state, I say it is not that skewed, especially when you consider the pay level, then you will say Calif is more expensive, it is not that skewed, then I will say why do a growing number of parents home school or go to a private school.

Which is the real point whenever you require application it separates the wheat from the chaff. This touch stone is not used in the public sector which allows for gross incompetence. This is where you see 48th out of 50 test scores or a constitutional law professor who demonstrates his disdain for it at every opportunity.

carrieon says

The only possibly way to screw it up would be a declining income or population base from the State?

Conservative estimate: those teachers pay into a fund that would be worth $2M at retirement. Agressive estimate: $3M. All they get is (a little less than) their salary until they die. If my retirement nest egg is $2M, then on 5% interest, that's $100k/year. Few teachers are at that level, so where does the $2M go once they die? The teachers are hosed because that should go to their surviving family members. For all of you who think pensions are a scam, they are. Just not the way you think they are. Teachers are forced to pay into the system and do not get the assets at the end...only the interest. This is why the states still have these programs. They will become cash cows if handled properly; much like rental properties

The only way to screw it up is to cancel it.

indigenous says

Again in Cali test scores are 48th out of 50. This demonstrates incompetence.

So pay the teachers 36% less and cut their benefits by 70% to match your seriously flawed comparison. That'll boost testing scores.

indigenous says

The overarching reason public sector workers make more money is because of collective bargaining, this is by far the reason.

By this logic, it is the reason CEO and other executive pay grows in leaps and bounds. Puleezz

JH says

So pay the teachers 36% less and cut their benefits by 70% to match your seriously flawed comparison. That'll boost testing scores.

No, just privatize the whole system. The good teachers will make more money. The grade school teacher imo would because she is a good teacher by nature and would be in demand.

But as I recall many people should not be teaching as they don't have the people skills that create understanding, rather they are pedantic, and mostly just brainwash and are really a liability.

JH says

By this logic, it is the reason CEO and other executive pay grows in leaps and bounds. Puleezz

Yes that is apples to lizard tails, IOW stupid.

The unions have leverage CEOs do not.

Keep in mind that CEOs are appointed by the company, the company knows what the costs are, they are not going to pay astronomical money for somebody who cannot do the job or they will fire them when they realize they made a mistake. E.G. how much money does a Steve Jobs make the company? Conversely they realize their mistake with a John Sculley and fire him because he does not make the company money.

With union members not so much...

indigenous says

No, just privatize the whole system.

The answer to everything that doesn't work.

indigenous says

The unions have leverage CEOs do not.

You have to be shitting me. I hate unions too, but c'mon.

YJH says

You have to be shitting me. I hate unions too, but c'mon

Only if they crony up with the state. JH says

The answer to everything that doesn't work.

Showing your true colors with that comment...

sbh says

You are such an irredeemable idiot.

Your comments are not arguments. You just hoover in the ad hominem level.

sbh says

indigenous says

My conjecture leans toward the government being the employer of last resort, consequently hiring people who are unemployable in the free market.

You are such an irredeemable idiot.

Yes, he is, and a troll, which is why I have him on ignore.

He believes in markets too. And yet he believes public school teachers are overcompensated with benefits that are too high. And yet the job market somehow brings them only incompetent people that are not employable "in the free market." (what?)

That's right.

Evidently, the private sector job market is part of ""the free market."

Whereas the public sector job market is this place that only unemployable morons go, to get jobs that pay better than the the jobs in the "free market."

I guess you have to register with the government as one of the unemployables to get on the list of people that are informed about the secret closed market listing of awesome jobs with better pay and benefits than in the free market private sector.

I think that what they need to do is somehow include the listing of public sector jobs in the market place, so that the market can do its job. The better pay and benefits that supposedly now exist in the public sector should bring the more talented people in to teaching, and the problems will fix themselves.

So yeah. I'm for making public sector jobs available to all and listed and advertised out in the open. Let's finally bring public sector jobs in to "the free market" of jobs!

marcus says

Yes, he is, and a troll, which is why I have him on ignore.

Along with 35 others, IOW a troll is anyone who Macus/Humanity does not agree with.marcus says

He believes in markets too. And yet he believes public school teachers are overcompensated with benefits that are too high. And yet the job market somehow gets them only incompetent people that are not employable "in the free market." (what?)

That's righ

They hire Marcus, clearly not very particular...

Being that Marcus is a teacher, I can see why the state is 48th out of 50.

This is not to say I don't value real teachers as they are invaluable.

But they have the opposite characteristics of a Marcus type

THen again, maybe I'm confused about what the free markets means.

Maybe what the free market means is that it's free on the exploitation by employer side. IF you privatize education and lower the pay and benefits, I'm sure you can get some people to take those teaching jobs. I guess somehow it brings out the more talented people, because you know, it's the private sector job market, where all the competent people get their jobs. That leaves more profits for Haliburton once it gets in to education and those sweet government contracts.

The key is that that govt money doesn't go to the bottom and the workers that actually do the jobs. It needs to go to the high level managers and the shareholders. This is how American exceptionalism works.

marcus says

THe key is that the pay doesn't go to the bottom and the workers that actually do the jobs. It needs to go to the high level managers and the shareholders. This is how American exceptionalism works.

The key is meritocracy, literally the antithesis of the collective bargaining zombies.

carrieon says

The only possibly way to screw it up would be a declining income or population base from the State? Or, if maybe the retirees don't contribute to the fund?

Actually over 20% of salary contributed to the fund provides enough, if the govt honors it's side of the deal, regardless of population shrinking.
Retirees aren't supposed to contribute to the fund.

But what has happened is that at the federal level, we don't tax enough (relative to what we spend) and more gets pushed to state and local. So, state and local govts are hurting, and they can't print money, and the powers that be start sending out the message that we can't afford to pay worked what we always have.

Struggling people buy this, and say "YEAH, Fuck those lazy workers doing public service work."

Meanwhile the ultimate result is going to be to lower pay for everyone.

Because, newsflash: Government jobs are not only a part of the job market, they are a very big part of the job market.

Priorities people !!

WHo knows. Maybe one day your grandchildren will be wanting a decent job with decent pay.

indigenous says

Showing your true colors with that comment...

Just following your lead.

JH says

Just following your lead.

Well that makes you more ingenious than the other two mutts.

lostand confused says

I don't know. Marrying a 94 yr old teacher one step from the grave for a year or two and receiving 8-10k a month for life-now that seems like a sweet deal?? maybe at that age most people don't think long term.

I just don't think it happens. I think every woman out there has a lot more self respect, and if they were to marry a 90 year old... it sure as hell wouldn't be a retired teacher.

marcus says

Struggling people buy this, and say "YEAH, Fuck those lazy workers doing public service work."

I don't remember last time I've seen a unionized government worker try in life at all. All I've seen you people do is constantly protest that you are not paid like millionnaires, while hiding behind union protection and it's racketeered benefits.

If CA runs out of money it's going to be because unions killed it with their unsustainable demands.

indigenous says

My conjecture leans toward the government being the employer of last resort, consequently hiring people who are unemployable in the free market.

Conjecture all you want, just don't mistake it for fact.

Some of us want to do something other than brown-nose executives and collect a paycheck. I did that for a while and it sucked. When I walked away from it, a few years later the company didn't exist so it was like nothing I did there mattered. Glibertopian idyll is everyone is John Galt, my work environment more resembled Office Space.

In my current arena lots of young kids come in spend a few years getting up to speed, then get hired for a huge raise out in industry. Because they now have proven skills that their resume didn't evidence before. Last kid that left jumped 66%, have to disagree how public employ is so renumerative nobody leaves.

FortWayne says

All I've seen you people do is constantly protest that you are not paid like millionnaires, while hiding behind union protection and it's racketeered benefits.

Once again your perception matches up pretty well with your intelligence.

I'm in a teachers union in one of the biggest cities in the country. We haven't had a pay raised since 2006 and had pay cuts for several of the years since plus class size increases, with many high school lasses over 40 now.

Meanwhile have you heard these protests you talk about ?

NO, because times have been tough all around and teachers aren't going to ask for what the public doesn't think they deserve.

Meanwhile all the many times you say they protested before have gotten them is pay that starts out in the mid 40s and goes up over 16 years to a max possible salary in the mid 70s (only if the person has tons of additional hours of coursework in their subject or in eduction classes or a masters degree plus many more classes).

All I can say is if they are constantly protesting that they want to be paid like millionaires, and that's what they make, in LA where a typical shack of a home start at about 450K, they are definitely FAILING with these protests.

Admit it. You blame teachers for your lack of intelligence and nonexistant critical thinking skills.

FortWayne says

I don't remember last time I've seen a unionized government worker try in life at all.

How interesting for you, that you get to substitute your imagination and hate talk from talk radio for perception and comprehension of the world around you. It must make life ever so satisfying for you.

They say ignorance is bliss, but I don't see that it always works out that way.

Vicente says

Conjecture all you want, just don't mistake it for fact.

Back at ya

Vicente says

Last kid that left jumped 66%, have to disagree how public employ is so renumerative nobody leaves.

I did not say that, only the ones who have no skill...

Vicente says

Some of us want to do something other than brown-nose executives and collect a paycheck. I did that for a while and it sucked.

Is it better being a part of the Borg?

sbh says

Aww, the idiot rediscovers ad hominem all on his own.

Not exactly, it requires that you can detect a subtle difference...

marcus says

We haven't had a pay raised since 2006 and had pay cuts for several of the years since plus class size increases, with many high school lasses over 40 now.

Marcus you are so "entitled" that you don't even realize it. Did you lose your job? No, you were protected from that by taxpayer dollars. While in private sector, there were no raises in 2006... hell most people were lucky to keep their jobs. Plenty of people either lost them, and many took huge pay cuts.

But yeah you are in a government union, I guess you can just complain about "not getting raises". All while you still do not understand why people in private sector who do all the suffering and are not shielded by government union bureaucracy from devastating economic consequences think you people are entitled slackers.

indigenous says

Vicente says

Conjecture all you want, just don't mistake it for fact.

Back at ya

Vicente says

Last kid that left jumped 66%, have to disagree how public employ is so renumerative nobody leaves.

I did not say that, only the ones who have no skill...

Vicente says

Some of us want to do something other than brown-nose executives and collect a paycheck. I did that for a while and it sucked.

Is it better being a part of the Borg?

I channel the protagonist of Office Space. I say what I'm thinking and do what needs to be done. Borg off!

Vicente says

I channel the protagonist of Office Space. I say what I'm thinking and do what needs to be done. Borg off!

Typical of a public sector worker.

FortWayne says

No, you were protected from that by taxpayer dollars

Hahhahahahahahh and nobody in private sector was? Wake up! Besides you got all your jobs back so time to quit this whining.

FortWayne says

Marcus you are so "entitled" that you don't even realize it. Did you lose your job? No, you were protected from that by taxpayer dollars.

OH, I thought it was simply because people's children still need to go to school and they couldn't raise class sizes above the number of desks that can fit in the room (forget about fire safety codes). A lot of teachers did lose their jobs. That's how class sizes went up.

FortWayne says

hell most people were lucky to keep their jobs.

Yes including me, I did take a pay cut and also had bigger class sizes, which was hard for me, and not particularly great for the students either.

FortWayne says

But yeah you are in a government union, I guess you can just complain about "not getting raises

I wasn't complaining. I was responding to your retarded nonsense about teachers protesting that they should be paid like millionaires. If that was true, why was it we didn't even protest when pay actually went down and a lot of teachers were canned?

FortWayne says

All while you still do not understand why people in private sector who do all the suffering and are not shielded by government union bureaucracy from devastating economic consequences think you people are entitled slackers.

Yes, I don't understand that.

But what I do understand is that my job is a public service job, and I feel fortunate for that. I enjoy working with kids, and helping them as best I can.. And in as much as that is rewarding, and I'm glad I don't have be be doing work that is nothing more than chasing money - which I did before, I still want to be paid an appropriate living wage.

I also understand that you have no idea what unions do, and what they don't do. I have plenty of pressure to perform, and am increasingly evaluated by my students perfomance on tests (a topic for another time). Unions don't make us slackers, and neither do police unions or nurses unions. These are all jobs where a very high majority are conscientious about their work, in large part simply because of the nature of their work.

IF you think that public service jobs are such a sweet deal, why didn't you become a cop or a fireman or a teacher or a paramedic our a court cleark or a county hospital worker, etc ? Envy is such an unattractive human trait. I don't understand how you aren't ashamed to be the way you are.

I chalk it up to stupidity. You're too stupid to be ashamed of yourself.

IT also says a lot about you (more than you know), that you think most people that are teachers or other public service jobs are in it for the easy work or the money. I would agree that job security is probably a factor for some, but the trade off is limited upside, that they accept. Anyone that does it, who doesn't want to do that kind of work, probably isn't going to last. OR they're going to be miserable if they do.

marcus says

IF you think that public service jobs are such a sweet deal, why didn't you become a cop or a fireman or a teacher or a paramedic our a court cleark or a county hospital worker, etc ?

I worked in public sector, and I hated it. It was a public utility job, there was no drive, no passion, and a whole lot of entitlement. Wasn't my cup of tea, so I didn't stick around.

marcus says

I enjoy working with kids, and helping them as best I can.. And in as much as that is rewarding, and I'm glad I don't have be be doing work that is nothing more than chasing money - which I did before, I still want to be paid an appropriate living wage.

You think the rest of us are chasing money? We all do what we like or what we can. But we are not feeling entitled to a permanent raises even when economy collapses, like you are. I don't know a single person who had a raise in 2006. I do know an architect who got a grocery store job because his company closed, I know several mechanics who took low paying jobs and closed their shops. Many of my customers were coming asking for discounts because they were either losing their jobs or taking huge pay cuts.

And what you miss, Mr. "I didn't get a raise in 06", was that it's folks in private sector who have to work to pay taxes in order for you to get paid. If we don't make money and pay taxes, there is no one to pay you. And people paying taxes, working class they don't have even half the benefits you people get. So get off your entitlement train and come to terms with reality, no one owes you anything. In this world you get what you earn, sooner or later that'll come to the state/city level too.

FortWayne says

I worked in public sector, and I hated it. It was a public utility job, there was no drive, no passion, and a whole lot of entitlement. Wasn't my cup of tea, so I didn't stick around.

Outfingstanding post. Not that Marcus will have a clue what you are talking about.

FortWayne says

But we are not feeling entitled to a permanent raises even when economy collapses, like you are.

What ? If I say it more slowly will you get it ?

Not only do we not expect constant raises. WE have taken pay cuts and lay offs just like the private sector.

What confuses you, is that when you have a union then raises happen if and only if the union negotiates and bargains for it.

I know you aren't going to understand what I'm saying here, and I'm not finding a simple enough "sound bite" that might get through to you.

But what is happening is that you are confusing the fact that the only way we can recieve a raise, even when it's due and everyone knows it's due is when the union asks for it. This confuses you, because you periodically hear about this public union or that one asking for a raise. The fact that we get raises less often than most private sector workers, is lost on you. And btw, that's the reason I keep mentioning that we haven't had a raise since 2006. Soon you might hear about our union asking for the first raise in 7 or 8 years, and you'll be thinking, there they go again.

Not that you have the kind of mind that's open to things like logical proof, but here goes.

If you were right, that we were constantly seeking raises beyond what we deserve, or so far above what we could get in the private sector, then how is it that teacher pay is where it is ?

(of course you will cite the very most extreme examles. But there are hundreds of thousands of teachers in this country, with most represented by unions, eraning average pay of something like 45K, with an average in urban areas more like 55 - 60K ).

I've gone way beyond sound bites that you might comprehend, but this is very simple proof that most 11 year olds could understand, that you're full of shit.

FortWayne says

If we don't make money and pay taxes, there is no one to pay you. And people paying taxes, working class they don't have even half the benefits you people get. So get off your entitlement train and come to terms with reality, no one owes you anything. In this world you get what you earn, sooner or later that'll come to the state/city level too.

Yes we have good benefits. You are correct.

I guess that's enough reason to feel the hate you do and to project all your lies and emotional bullshit on to me and other public sector workers.

I feel sorry for you.