I’ll say it again – pension benefits must be proportional to the underlying assets and future values of the associated funding source (CALpers etc.) No taxpayer contribution for any deficit! If insufficient funds are available to pay current benefits then benefit reductions must be made including current retirees as well as future ones. No one ased me to vote for a tax payer bailout and I don’t think my standard of living should be reduced so that of a retired government worker can be improved, especially when some are earning more than $100,000. The reductions could be tailored so that that those at the lower end of the benefit pyramid would be less affected. Better to spread the pain and across the board so that everyone shares some of the misery. If this action requires some sort of legal(court) or legislative (voter)action – bring it on! I worked for a company that went bankrupt and it cost me half of my pension. There is a president. California IS bankrupt!

What is the state of the ballot initiative?

We hear over and over again that pension formulas cannot be reduced for CURRENT employees … even for FUTURE years of service.

If we cannot get around this and reduce pensions (not for PAST years of service) but only for FUTURE years of service for Current employees, we are financially doomed. We are near broke now, and the savings from Plan changes ONLY for NEW employees will not materialize for 20-30 years until they begin to retire. We’ll never make it.

Besides, it is very ROUTINE for such changes in Private Sector Plans when circumstance make it necessary. Well, that’s where we are NOW with public finances. These changes are VERY necessary.

Why should Civil Servants be treated “better” than those (the Taxpayers) that pay for the vast majority of their Pensions & Benefits ?

Whether it be by ballot initiatives, State Constitutional change, or challenge in the FEDERAL courts (where conflicted State-level Plan participant judges are removed from the decision-making process) we MUST find a way to implement these Pension reductions ASAP

The story is nearly accurate — the pension does not end at lifetime but at the beneficiary’s lifetime. Imagine the back room deals going on in the public employees househould! We must demand the heads of the politicians not having the guts to deal wityh this issue! Stand up America!!

To Commentor David Walker:

Can say 55 year old retiring employee specify say a 10 year old child as their pension beneficiary (instead of their equal age spouse) and have the pension continue (with COLAs !) until the 10 year old child passes away ?

If true, what an astounding taxpayer ripoff !

How ironic, pensions have only been in the spotlight since the economy has dipped. before they were seldom even talked about and were never a concern. Now that the money grubbing private sector’s 401k’s are tanking and their getting laid off, their all of sudden crying about our pensions. Too bad, we’ve earned them through years of hard work and dangerous safety jobs, such as Police & Firefighters. In California, the current retirement formulas were approved by the Governor, the Legislature, Employee Unions Collective Bargaining and CalPERS. It makes me sick. State workers have always worked for lower pay in exchange for a good retirement plan. What they don’t mention, is the fact that less then 1% are in that $100,000 a year club. If the proponents and polititians would concentrate on eliminating government waste, there would be plenty of money. Don’t take it out on Public workers.

Quit your crying walker, your just jealous

Dear Marcia

I herd you on KFI Sunday night and didn’t get the website right.

Sincerely

LH

Thank God we have these Public Servants like Police, Firefighters, Caltrans, Dept. of Corrections to do these dangerous jobs that 99% of us would never do. Would you want to be a prison guard or run across the freeway with Caltrans. Thank you Civil Servants, you deserve every penny. We love you guys & gals

New employees will be the only ones affected by the changes proposed. Contract law will protect exisitng employee benefits.

Three years ago only 1,700 retirees received pensions in excess of $100,000. By May, 2009, the total jumped to over 6,000. We requested a list as of February, 2010, and it will likely show a big increase due to so many sweetheart early retirement deals given statewide to trim payrolls. What makes pensions such a problem now is that average wages increased much higher than the actuaries anticipated when we set $ aside during everyone’s career and now that baby boomers are retiring in droves it’s draining pension funds. For the first time in sixty or so years pension payouts are higher than pension contributions going into the fund, and investments have to remain liquid (at very low interest rates) to pay benefits when they become due.

Will pension reform become a ballot measure before the November 2010 elections?
If so, what is the ballot measure number and where can I get details on it.

Marcia, will there be a supporter for your ballot initiative, or is it DOA.

Get real Marcia, don’t blame this on the pensioners. These pensions have all been approved by SB 400 in 1999, with the Legislature and Governor’s blessing. Retirements from CalPERS are a simple calculation. A lot of these people have risked their lives their whole careers and deserve a decent retirement. If the economy wasn’t tanking, these pensions would not be an issue. We are obligated to take care of our pensioners….by law. Tell Sacramento to get rid of wasteful spending and there will be plenty of money for pensions. You know as well as me that only 1% are in the $100,000 club. These people worked hard for their pensions and just because your 401k is tanking, don’t take it out on us. Thank God for Police, Firefighters, Caltrans & Prison Guards (just to name a few).

I’ve never seen so many whining crybabies…….