On the same day that striking Fresno County workers protested a 9% pay cut at the Board of Supervisors meeting, the county quietly paid $191 million into the unsustainable county pension system. A key reason the county has had to lay off workers and force other employees to take pay cut is to fund the overly generous pension program for those same employees.
The county's bottom line would look a lot different if the pension system didn't need to be subsidized by taxpayers every year. Pensions payments account for about 14% of the county's annual budget. That does not include salaries or other employee compensation.
As The Bee's Kurtis Alexander reported last month, "the pension fund's investments simply have not kept pace with payout promises. But the county has yet to figure out how it will cover the growing liability."
The problem is the system is much more generous than what employees in the private sector receive -- if they get a pension at all.
The county system allows most employees to be eligible for retirement at age 50 or 55, and for every year worked, they receive 2.5% or more of their highest annual pay. Employees are required to put about 9% of their salary toward their retirement, but that is a tiny fraction of the cost and investments and taxpayers must make up the shortfall. With investments lagging, the burden on taxpayers is even larger.
But don't blame the employees, the Board of Supervisors instituted that generous payout about 10 years ago. And let's not forget, the supervisors also are eligible for that generous pension plan. It's a system without checks and balances because the people making the pension decisions also are eligible to received the pension payouts.
http://fresnobeehive.com/opinion/2011/02/fresno_county_supervisors_gave.html
In this opinion you called it the Supervisors fault are you now blaming the employee's?
I am still reading this but I find it Informational.
http://www2.co.fresno.ca.us/9200/attachments/agendas/2011/050411/Item%2023%20050411%20Task%20Force%20Findings.pdf
Mr. Bobbitt, I do not believe Mr. Boren is blaming the employees. Mr. Boren wrote, "don't blame the emloyees, the Board of Supervisors instituted that generous payout about 10 years ago." I do think, however, he is suggesting that SEIU and the striking employees may lack some perspective regarding the County's inability to pay full salaries and benefits and all of its direct-benefit pension obligations; i.e., something has to give.
You make a good point either I miss read Mr Borens editorial or he edited it after I first read it, either way what has been done is done and we can only change future employee's benefits.
Now I may have jumped to the conclusions since everyone else blames the average worker and not Management and elected officials who them self benefit from the benefits.
It is very sad to read such an article that seems as it was written to make the County of Fresno SEIU members seem as if all they want is money. The bottom line is that the employees were given a 9% salary cut without the right to vote on the imposed cut and the purpose of the strike was to have the Board of Supervisors return to the negotiating table and remember that the employees are the working class serving a community that often has more opportunities and better living situations than the employees serving them. Every employee that made the decision to strike went without any pay. The opportunities that the working class have received throughout the years have come from strikes just like this.
Three days without the SEIU folks and we survived...can you believe it?...how much did we save?...I think they've laid the groundwork for budget reduction and Melissa stating that strikes like this are what has given the working class opportunities..."Pure UNION Propaganda"...I believe their self-serving excessive demands over the years has squashed opportunity for thousands.What could have been done with the millions to prop up their pensions and perks...we could have built a luxurious,safe campground for the homeless and named it AOK...hired people to pick up trash and clean up graffiti...fund Boys and Girls Clubs...staff the jail properly...build a park or two...instead of opportunities for the working class,they're lowering the quality of life for others...that's the "Bottomline".
Quoting ..."On the same day that striking Fresno County workers protested a 9% pay cut at the Board of Supervisors meeting, the county quietly paid $191 million into the unsustainable county pension system. A key reason the county has had to lay off workers and force other employees to take pay cut is to fund the overly generous pension program for those same employees."
The "overly generous pensions" will continue to cost Public Sector worker jobs. What's so unfair is that the shortest service workers are the ones who get fired because the Unions protects the longest service workers by refusing to compromise on pensions.
The short service workers need to band together to throw out the Union officials who keep screwing them.
Quoting ... "....either way what has been done is done and we can only change future employee's benefits."
That won't be nearly sufficient. As the Little Hoover Commission clearly stated, there needs to be a significant reduction in the pension accrual rate for FUTURE service of CURRENT (yes CURRENT) workers.
The reason county supervisors voted for these enhanced pension benefits 10 years ago is because government worker unions made them. These politicians cannot get elected unless they do what the unions say. The first step towards bringing government worker compensation back to financially sustainable levels is to outlaw public sector unions.
Perfectly stated !
Many strikers say that they pay into their pension funds and they're right. However, since the fund is a defined benefit rather than defined contribution, taxpayer dollars have to fill in the gap between the contributions and defined benefits.
Also, with such an early retirement age, we are paying for people who no longer contribute to the economy for more years than if they had to work until 65 like us private sector employees. In addition, we pay more for their health care since it is a longer time until they're on Medicare.
By raising the retirement age to 65, the employee will be paying more into their pension and health care benefits and contributing to the economy through their work. Thanks to the low retirement age, they are able to coast on our dollar.
The actual contribution of the workers (INCLUDING all investment earning on their contributions) RARELY pay for more than 10-20% of the total cost of their pensions. The TAXPAYER contributions (with earnings on Taxpayer contributions) pay for the 80-90% balance.
The workers like to emphasize just how much THEY pay, but it turns out to be bubkiss, because their Plans are SO RICH and hence VERY VERY expensive.
Thanks. I didn't realize how bad it really is. Only through a corrupt relationship between unions and legislators of s certain party has this mess been created.
There are county employees who earn every dime they make. There are others who are "nesters" and for whom the county is nothing more than a jobs bank. If the county was a private business, it would quickly become non-competitive and contract Bain Capital to restructure or dissolve it.
Since when did the county employees become the "bad guys"?
I have been employed with the county department of social services for over 4 years now and not once complained until now. I have worked my way through school to obtain the education needed to succeed in life. I applied for this job along w/ 100 other people, went through the testing and interview process just like everyone else. Nothing was handed to me in a silver platter. In the last 4 years I have received a few step increases, yes, but at the same time I have had to pay more for my health insurance and retirement, along with county furlough totaling 80 hours each fiscal year. So technically, I've yet to see a "raise". With this 9% I find myself taking home $900 a paycheck (yes I disclosed my income) and I'm expected to be ok with that?! Why? I have bills, rent, a family to support, a school loan that I can't afford anymore, and I do not received any public assistance. I am not asking for a lavish lifestyle...I just want to be able to afford the daily necesities: food, shelter, and transportation.
Sorry I am not one of them but most people on here think you earn to much and don't work for it, They think you set around and drink coffee all day. They have no clue what it takes to get a job like yours and are mostly jealous because you are doing good and paying your own way after they gave all their right to corporate America and now want to destroy your life after they made bad choices.
Maybe if they had not gave away their rights and didn't lose everything in the Bush administration Recession they would feel different, but you keep your chin up they are the losers and by their own choice.
They Are mad because they backed a President that took away all they worked for and now want to take away yours along with them.
Yolsnds Flores, Let me explain. Most studies show that "cash pay" in comparable Public and Private Sector jobs is quite close. Since "total compensation" (cash pay + pensions + benefits) should also be quite close, this means that public Sector pensions and benefits should not be greater than their Private Sector counterparts.
But they ARE, TYPICALLY 2-4 times (6 times for safety workers) greater. That's the problem ... and it exists at ALL pay levels .... and sorry, but it must be fixed, because the excesses that Public Sector workers gets comes at the expense of Private Sector workers through higher taxes.
Your government at work. Where else can incompetence and laziness hit the jackpot daily even in retirement??
Dana... "Pure UNION Propaganda" mixed with misguided "Partisan Nonsense" produces an "Unjust Dessert" very few are willing to eat,let alone pay for, anymore...you and Ms.Flores can have my piece.