patrick.net

maybe marcus can chime in on this one.

IS this the same as ChrisLA and Eman ? Sure sounds like it.

EncinoMan says

obviously to protect top union goons.

You never yet have come close to identifying who these people are. If anything unions prevent corruption by putting EVERYONE on the same pay scale.

The Bell City scandal was about city council members, paying themselves ridiculous salaries, and has nothing to do with unions, and also city pensions are much different than pensions such as those for teachers (Calstrs).

I don't try to argue that there are no pension abuses, in fact I agree with many of the reforms that help protect the security of my pension. What I take issue with are the dim bulbs who are envious of my pension and make it out to cost the state so much more than it does.

I pay in to it, instead of social security. It is deducted from my pay. The state matches that plus a little more. In other words it only costs a few thousand (at the most) more than SS.

IT probably needs to be tweaked, and abuses need to be prevented. I would have no problem with there being a cap maxing out what a State pension can pay (but then I don't have a salary of 250K ).

Are police and fire chiefs union members? It seems to me they would fall under "Executive/Senior Management" and their pensions/benefits are determined by politicians directly, rather than through negotiations with Unions.

thunderlips11 says

Are police and fire chiefs union members? It seems to me they would fall under "Executive/Senior Management" and their pensions/benefits are determined by politicians directly, rather than through negotiations with Unions.

I believe that must be the case, considering some of the ridiculously high pensions I have heard for retiring chiefs. Either that, or possibly they are applying the same formula that would normally be paid (based on union contract) to all the various police and firemen, based on the salary, multiplier and years of service. But then the salary determination at that level is political.

But that might effectively be "pension spiking." Say a policeman works for 30 years working his way up to detective with a salary of 115K (guess), but then for the last 7 years he is chief. Starting at 165K and gradually going up to 250k by the time he retires. Should the calculation of his pension be based on the average salary of his last three years ?

Ah I understand this "spiking" reference better now.

I once had a colleague who accidentally came across evidence 2 very senior staffers were conspiring to get their friend elevated pay for the last few years of service, specifically so that person would receive elevated pension.

Needless to say he reported it and put a stop to it.

I agree abuses should be stopped. It makes the rest of us look bad.

However it's false to say that some fire chiefs and other outliers are thus an indictment of the whole system. The article referenced does talk about a few data points but does not analyze the whole plan.

On that basis, a few particularly bad apples like Angelo Mozilo would be an indictment of capitalism.

I expect they attempted to keep information confidential not to "protect union goons" or even in fear of them. They do it to cover up their own dirt, even churches have corruption if you look for it.

Vicente says

On that basis, a few particularly bad apples like Angelo Mozilo would be an indictment of capitalism.

How hard would it be to find many examples (of both individuals and collective groups) that would be an indictment of humanity? Generalizing is usually a bad idea, and around here it is usually done by someone trying to back their way in to what it is they wish to believe. Actually this paragraph could be taken full circle, by looking at the role of generalizations in the rationale for the most evil things humans have done.

Vicente says

On that basis, a few particularly bad apples like Angelo Mozilo would be an indictment of capitalism.

These stories about double-dipper big wigs in government is an attempt to infer that the people who work in the organizations they oversee receive similarly outrageous compensation.

I doubt Mozillo's employees - the database entry people, secretaries, mail room guys, etc. - made anything like what he did. Just like very few cops, firefighters, or teachers collect a pension anything like the juiced-in political nominees, be they chiefs or superintendents.

marcus says

IT probably needs to be tweaked, and abuses need to be prevented. I would have no problem with there being a cap maxing out what a State pension can pay (but then I don't have a salary of 250K ).

This isn't about you marcus. This is about the union goons/legislators sitting at the top, ranking it all in, abusing the system with their pension spiking and other ways. Article has pointed out a few names there if you have read it.

What are your thoughts on the names of people pointed out in the article? What do you think about pension spiking which pretty much screws everyone in and out of the system?

You do have to agree that some of that needs to be addressed, and it becomes very clear who is being protected when certain government officials start fighting transparency orders.

EncinoMan says

This isn't about you marcus.

You asked me to chime in.

I have stated to you, or ChrisLA many times that I am opposed to "spiking."

But, who are these union goons you speak of ? Do you have any idea how stupid you sound. Could you please provide me any information (in detail) with sources, of who the hell you are talking about.

I saw "On the waterfront (1954)" It was a great movie. But I think we have mostly been talking about unions of police, fireman, teachers, nurses, etc. And I really want to know who the goons are, or union big shots are that you imagine.

I'll be the first to admit I sometimes share opinions about things I don't know a lot about. And even political opinions that might occasionally be based on incomplete information. But you (and or ChrisLA/Eman) are always making these extremely negative comments about "union goons" or "union bosses" that show you have absolutely no clue what modern unions of public workers are about. It's primarily about collective bargaining, period.

IT's really nothing more than name calling, and I'm sick of it. You're just trolling me.

marcus says

But, who are these union goons you speak of ?

Got me a picture of one of these pumped up bruisers right here:

In every industry, every area of the business world, there are abuses. There are unforeseen consequences because you can't anticipate every contingency.

I had to do a study once on getting homemaking help for seniors in low-income housing because the county-state programs had such long waiting lists. The woman who commissioned the study wanted me to write grants to get a program started in the city where I lived, seeing $$$ signs that included management overhead and the ability to add positions. It would also make her look super compassionate, which she wasn't.

My study, which incorporated the need with the laws and rules of public housing programs, found that if we offered homemaking to frail seniors it would be discrimination if we didn't offer it to everyone. And it only made sense that if that was available, people would stop cleaning their homes and expect the program to do it for them. It would cost millions and bring in grants in the thousands - and would be disruptive to say the least.

The bright side is that she never asked me to conduct an asinine study again.

But my point - and I do have one - is that spiking pensions is a by-product of a system that provides pensions to people who dedicate their lives to jobs they might not love so that they have security in their retirement years. It's a reward for working in a place that pays less, is restrictive and has ever-changing rules, etc. It's a reward for sticking it out.

marcus says

But, who are these union goons you speak of ? Do you have any idea how stupid you sound. Could you please provide me any information (in detail) with sources, of who the hell you are talking about.

Try Joshua Pechthalt or people mentioned in the article...
such as "...the San Ramon fire chief who retired at the age of 51 with an annual pension of $284,000 even though his final salary was $221,000" and the "Moraga Orinda fire chief retired at age 50 with an annual pension of $241,000 even though his final salary was $185,000."

Again you talk about specific abuses, which are not neccesarily indictments of the entire system.

Otherwise the actions of Dick Fuld or Lord Blankfein would be sufficient that the investment banks would all be smoldering ruins and survivors would be running for their lives.

shrekgrinch says

But then again, the governments in question are fighting tooth and nail to hide it. Why?

Not that hard to understand. Part of their mission (the retirement association - fund) is to protect benefits. If there is a contract out there that guarantees someones benefits that are questionably high, it would not be part of their mission to question that. In fact, it is part of their mission to protect that persons right to receive those benefits.

But I agree with the idea of getting the information.

The risk though, is that people with an agenda (like you possibly), use the info to lower government costs at the detriment of ALL govt employees, based on a small number of examples of excessive pay and or pension.

OH no, you would never generalize from a few insignificant data points.

One thing we already know is that a vast number of pension recipients, in California and nationally are receiving relatively meager pensions, very appropriate to what they contributed to the fund or to what they were promised in lieu of salary. The relative hogs are the ones who received big promotions late in their career.

Sometimes this isn't exactly "spiking." Someone may be a teacher who becomes an administrator late in their career for many reasons. The impact on their pension is just one factor. But when someone gets a big promotion, just for the last couple years, because they are connected, and because of the impact on their pension, that is an abuse.

I don't know that that retirement association is the right place to find that information, but it might be a good place to start. Still, it's not surprising that they feel conflicted. It just requires proper legal follow through.

shrekgrinch says

If you can prove that it isn't happening in the entire system, please provide it.

I have evidence that a certain Conservative poster has keyboard diarrhea and too much free time. Therefore I conclude that all Conservatives suffer the same embarrassing affliction. It's now your assignment to prove me wrong.

marcus says

One thing we already know is that a vast number of pension recipients, in California and nationally are receiving relatively meager pensions, very appropriate to what they contributed to the fund or to what they were promised in lieu of salary.

Your going to question this. I have already explained many times how I (a teacher) pay in to my pension fund instead of SS, and this is matched by the district in the same way that they would match SS or slightly more than match).

The average benefit for those who retired last year was 49,000. Anyone who works 38 years or more receives close to full salary. YOu can look up a lot of other data on Calstrs if you are interested.

Here is an article on the impact of 6 figure pensions. Some might not be surprised to know that being a school administrator is not a piece of cake job. I have no interest in doing that job, although I could.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/06/26/v-print/3727843/six-figure-pensions-soar-for-california.html

Vicente says

shrekgrinch says

If you can prove that it isn't happening in the entire system, please provide it.

I have evidence that a certain Conservative poster has keyboard diarrhea and too much free time. Therefore I conclude that all Conservatives suffer the same embarrassing affliction. It's now your assignment to prove me wrong.

“Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt

Hmm… looks like you are using sound conservative reasoning. I imagine you will get no disagreement from certain conservative posters.

Because any complaint would be just… hypocritical… and we know that they would not dream of holding a hypocritical position.

Bahh... who am I kidding that never stopped 'em.

marcus says

Not that hard to understand. Part of their mission (the retirement association - fund) is to protect benefits. If there is a contract out there that guarantees someones benefits that are questionably high, it would not be part of their mission to question that. In fact, it is part of their mission to protect that persons right to receive those benefits.

Governments job is to support private sector, and their first duty is to their nation. Not to protect theft and crime. Yes I know it happens, but protecting theft and fraud shouldn't be a main mission. Because at that point we don't have a country or government, we have rulers and thugs.

Something to me seems very wrong when some average people out there are getting ripped off, while their leadership is robbing the pension system. When some individual spikes their pension, there is one or two unemployed teachers out there because of that. There are children who will get lower quality education because of that. And that is not right for our nation.

That is why this government needs to be 100% transparent. There are too many places money goes and disappears into frivolous contracts, pension spiking, one can go on and on. It's human nature almost, free money, easy way to get it, it temps a lot of people.

Vicente says

I have evidence that a certain Conservative poster has keyboard diarrhea and too much free time. Therefore I conclude that all Conservatives suffer the same embarrassing affliction. It's now your assignment to prove me wrong.

You forgot to mention their chronic constipation of the brain. Shame on you!

elliemae says

a system that provides pensions to people who dedicate their lives to jobs they might not love so that they have security in their retirement years. It's a reward for working in a place that pays less, is restrictive and has ever-changing rules, etc. It's a reward for sticking it out.
Eschew Obfuscation

Certainly, a position of fire chief with ~200 K salary and 100% job security (for smb. with very modest education) is so low-paid and undesirable that, without the additional reward of >200 K pension at age 50, it would not be filled.

Fisk says

Certainly, a position of fire chief

Has to be earned. It's true that fireman is a hard job to get, and pretty desirable. There are physical requirements.

Ellie may have been thinking more along the lines of urban school teacher, or police officer, paramedic, or maybe nurse. The pay for all of those is just decent, but you want to attract good people and retain them. Contrary to the propaganda that Shirk and others spout, people are aware of the benefits that go with those jobs, and they do affect the number and quality of the applicants. (it's a market after all)

Once they are in, especially teaching, yes it does affect their drive to follow through and stick with it, after they have put in the years learning how to do the job fairly well. I look at it as a factor in committing to such work. Yes there is security, but the flip side of that for young teachers going in to the profession is commitment to foregoing all other opportunities.

marcus says

Contrary to the propaganda that Shirk and others spout, people are aware of the benefits that go with those jobs, and they do affect the number and quality of the applicants. (it's a market after all)

Has there been an migration of quality teachers from such places as suburban Los Angeles to such places as suburban Cook County?

I worked for a public agency (actually several of them at various points). But this one was horrendible (new word!).

The new-hire probationary period was nine months, which in every case was extended to one year. No vacation at all during that time; in fact, a fellow coworker was fired after taking time off for a non-immediate family funeral. It's a right-to-work state so even tho there was a union contract new-hires were exempted from representation. Once you pass the probationary period (about half do), the agency tells you when you may take vacations and they're famous for purposely scheduling them when they know it's not convenient for you. I've seen honeymoons delayed cruises that go uncruised...

They have a locked door; workers line up at closing time and swipe their cards as they leave, which is dutifully recorded in a computer system. Those people that they're harassing in the hopes of getting them to quit (or are collecting discretions to fire them) are written up for clocking out 20 seconds early even tho there are people in front of them, and behind them, whose time clocked out is ignored - I saw it and lived it.

Workers are treated like shit and are unofficially graded on how many denials they issue for assistance. However, those that they hate are also harassed for not helping enough people. Permission is required for everything - bathroom breaks, lunch times, etc. Everything is tracked through the computers - emails, how many times you check your work email and every note you write.

I was called into the administrative offices and told in my first week that who I chose to associate with on my own time was the agency's business and would affect my future. They had specifics as to who they believed was the "enemy." While I was there, a couple of workers had heart attacks on the job and nearly everyone who works there gains 20+ pounds the first couple of years if they make it. Workers are afraid to speak to each other because they can be seen and no one knows who the "chosen one" is. There's so much more, but I think you get the point.

For the privilege of being treated like shit and degraded on a daily basis, you're paid $10,000 more a year plus you don't pay into Social Security; the agency pays into the pension fund for you. The insurance costs more than the private sector but it's good. You can retire at 20 years with 60% pay, or a shitload more for every year you stick it out. This is union negotiated - and people stay because the benefits are good, even tho they're miserable the entire time. Many divorces, affairs, health problems, etc.

I went to a meeting with another public agency (it was a utility) where we were discussing how horrible it was to work there - and they went us one better. On Fridays, when someone was going to be fired, all of the supervisor would get together in the huge room with multiple desks (think telemarketing firm). At 4:45pm, a security guard and a supervisor (never the sup of the person being fired, so it was hard to know who was being fired) would slowly walk up & down every aisle past every desk, pausing. When they finally got to the chosen one, they'd stop and load up everything on the person's desk as they sat there stunned. They'd be escorted out of the building with no explanation - because none is required according to state law. The workers said that they've seen people pass out, have chest pains, etc. But people work there because it pays more and offers state pension as a public agency.
----------------------------------------
I got up from my desk one day after denying benefits to a young man whose gall bladder was infected and he couldn't get antibiotics until he jumped thru a bunch of hoops. He was required to get denials from agencies that were several miles away (but not on the bus route), perform 40 job searches for positions that had to be open and full applications submitted plus he had to be qualified for the job (we checked), and had to wait in line in the hot sun almost 8 hours before he was allowed in the building so that I could issue a denial. I don't know what happened to him, but he was seriously ill - it just wasn't an emergency yet.

I hope that this isn't indicative of all public agencies. I hope. But as a Social Worker, I can tell you that working in the public sector is difficult, demeaning and - well, horrendible. I got up and walked out two days before my year probation was over. I was THIS close, but I saw people who had aged beyond their years and hated their jobs but were locked in.

Pensions are the reward for doing the job even though you have to jump thru hoops, be treated like shit, endure the public perception of being greedy, etc. If I had stuck it out, I would have earned every bit of that pension. I don't see the difference between drawing a pension and working for a corporation that pays huge-ass bonuses. There are abuses - but for every person who draws a huge amount due to manipulating the system, there are hundreds of secretaries or teachers or other workers who busted their ass, endured being treated a subhuman and worked unpaid extra hours because they were dedicated to their jobs.

There are always loopholes. Always. They need to be closed. But remember that the people who make the laws are bestest buddies with the people who will be drawing the pensions - or in some cases, are the lawmakers themselves. Don't be pissed at the worker bees.

elliemae says

Once you pass the probationary period (about half do), the agency tells you when you may take vacations and they're famous for purposely scheduling them when they know it's not convenient for you

That's harrassment and passive aggression pure and simple.

elliemae says

They have a locked door; workers line up at closing time and swipe their cards as they leave, which is dutifully recorded in a computer system.

This is actually illegal in most states. You can't lock employees in like prisoners in most states. Yeah, you got to love the "Right to work" states. I love that phrase. It implies that you have a right to work while hiding the fact that it really means that the employer has all the rights to do deal with you or not however he or she wants. Here in CA we are an "Employment at will" state. At least that is a more honest way of letting you that workers have no rights.

elliemae says

Permission is required for everything - bathroom breaks, lunch times, etc. Everything is tracked through the computers - emails, how many times you check your work email and every note you write.

Yeah, adults are so productive when they are treated worse then elementary school children and controlled to such a degree.

elliemae says

I was called into the administrative offices and told in my first week that who I chose to associate with on my own time was the agency's business and would affect my future. They had specifics as to who they believed was the "enemy."

This is par for the course these days. It's a Teabagger's wet dream. It allows them to tell others how to think, with whom others may associate, and to reach into other people's personal lives. "Right to work" and "Home of the Free" my fat libruhl ass.

elliemae says

I went to a meeting with another public agency (it was a utility) where we were discussing how horrible it was to work there - and they went us one better. On Fridays, when someone was going to be fired, all of the supervisor would get together in the huge room with multiple desks (think telemarketing firm). At 4:45pm, a security guard and a supervisor (never the sup of the person being fired, so it was hard to know who was being fired) would slowly walk up & down every aisle past every desk, pausing. When they finally got to the chosen one, they'd stop and load up everything on the person's desk as they sat there stunned. They'd be escorted out of the building with no explanation - because none is required according to state law.

Who do these people think they are? Do they think they are Evil Chinese Emperors with a divine right to rule absolutely? Well, they are allowed to be because the knuckleheaded people who vote for conservatives/libertarians/republicans/Teabaggers believe that somehow by allowing employers to abuse their workers, there will be more jobs for everyone and greater happiness.

The way workers are allowed to be treated in most states is so very twisted and Orwellian. People have become mice who are content to run through a maze squeeking in fear at every noise and rejoicing over every small morsel of moldy cheese that is thrown their way. They are too frightened to speak up and reclaim their power. The working conditions have deteriorated in many states to the point where you might as well work in an Orwellian Universe at the Ministry of Truth, Ministry of Plenty, or the Ministry of Peace. It's a Teabagger's paradise.

There was a time when people in this country were strong, outspoken, and brave. That time has long since passed.

Now they are content and even excited to be sycophants for their wealthy corporate overlords and to eat the scraps that are thrown at them at the whim of their masters.

This is life in public entities in Clark County Nevada. The sad part is that no one will back you up if you attempt to report, or testify - so you're on your own.

The problem is that people still have to work - if you piss off the major public entities, your career is over. No one will touch you in the private sector either - the powerful agencies make sure of it. simchaland says

Who do these people think they are? Do they think they are Evil Chinese Emperors with a divine right to rule absolutely? Well, they are allowed to be because the knuckleheaded people who vote for conservatives/libertarians/republicans/Teabaggers believe that somehow by allowing employers to abuse their workers, there will be more jobs for everyone and greater happiness.

In the desert, people need water. Therefore a company has to sell it - and they can treat their workers however they'd like because people need their jobs.