A $101K pension ???

[73ss454]

If you don't get the point you never will.

 

[HFWR]

Welcome to the new normal...

 

[Moemg]

Public Employee Pensions on Long Island - 2010

Here is some recent Nassau and Suffolk folks that retired from the PD and a few other public pensions. Is this a joke or what? Look to the right of the lists, these #'s are actually what these folks are getting, not including full medical, add another 20K a year for that.

Teacher and Administrator Pensions on Long Island - 2009

Now take a look at what the teachers and administrators of the schools are getting.

This should make most of us ill.

Thanks , I know now what my sister's pension is . I actually thought it was higher !

 

[Purron]

Welcome to the new normal...

.

 

[Leonidas]

Frankly, I think corporate interests and influence are leading this campaign (and many others) to divide and conquer, turning ordinary people against each other so neither can see the shared common threat. And if we can't see that threat, we can't put our differences aside to defeat it or keep it in check.

You're on to something there.

GOP Gov. Rick Perry on Friday accused Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill White of taking pension money away from a police union when White was mayor of Houston, leaving the union with debt.

"That's what Texans expect from a liberal, personal-injury trial lawyer, which is what he is," Perry said.

Katy Bacon, a spokeswoman for the White campaign, said the accusation is false. White reformed Houston's pension system, she said.

"You can see just how desperate Rick Perry is to avoid the end of his 25-year political career," Bacon said.

In spite of seeing my pension plan being batted around in bigger political contests than is usual, I am not too worried about it. Especially when I see that it's worked it's way back to something like 80-85% funded. Now, if we can just win the lawsuit against State Street and get back all that damn subprime mortgage money.

As for me, I'm going to put this thread on ignore. My pension is secure and retirement is too damn short to get bogged down in this. One of the two people on my ignore list is hitting hard in here, and a couple are contending to be new entries. Better to just ignore the whole thread.

 

[Bimmerbill]

I retired from the National Guard at age 39 and have to wait until 2026 to collect. I sure hope my benefits are not retroactivly changed as I sure can't get back the time I spent during those 22 years of service.

One other thing I'd like to see. Even a 20 year military career must be equivilent to 25 or 30 years of full time, 8 hour a day, work. I don't think I've ever seen a study about it tho. Maybe the 18 hour days are offset by other shorter days in training or other cushy duty?

I'm working on my FERS pension which is no where near as sweet as other public sector jobs. Still, I'm not complaining. I may complain if my benefits are switched mid stream tho.

I do make less than if I worked in the civilian sector. I work in IT and salaries are at least 25% greater.

 

[Bimmerbill]

Oh, some more stuff... The State of NH just released some of their pension payment info (heavily redacted) showing the top 100 I think.

Pension spiking was a problem here as well, but I think they are trying to change it. Maybe they already have.

They did an overhaul of their retirement system a few years ago and the changes (increased minimum retirement age) made it so I no longer check for open IT jobs any more.

 

[ziggy29]

Oh, some more stuff... The State of NH just released some of their pension payment info (heavily redacted) showing the top 100 I think.

I think it's good that they release information relative to the the positions people held and the size of the pension, but I don't agree with releasing the names of the individuals. That could make them a target of someone who is sufficiently angry and who aims their anger at the recipients instead of the policy makers.

 

[Moemg]

I don't agree with releasing the names of the individuals. That could make them a target of someone who is sufficiently angry and who aims their anger at the recipients instead of the policy makers.

I totally agree . They could leave the info but block out the names . My sister's name was on the Long Island retiree list . I would hate to have my financial info made public like that and I'm sure if she saw it she'd be angry.

 

[Texas Proud]

I retired from the National Guard at age 39 and have to wait until 2026 to collect. I sure hope my benefits are not retroactivly changed as I sure can't get back the time I spent during those 22 years of service.

One other thing I'd like to see. Even a 20 year military career must be equivilent to 25 or 30 years of full time, 8 hour a day, work. I don't think I've ever seen a study about it tho. Maybe the 18 hour days are offset by other shorter days in training or other cushy duty?

I'm working on my FERS pension which is no where near as sweet as other public sector jobs. Still, I'm not complaining. I may complain if my benefits are switched mid stream tho.

I do make less than if I worked in the civilian sector. I work in IT and salaries are at least 25% greater.

The military is not the only profession that works more than 40 hours... when I was in puplic accounting it was expected that we work 80 hr weeks for about 3 months (and sometimes 100 hrs)... we then could go down to a reasonable 45 to 50 most of the rest of the year...

When I worked in the trust dept... I used to get strange looks when I left just before 7PM... lots of people worked until 9 to 10PM.. we were expected to work 1/2 of saturday... which usually meant all day sat. at least once a month... sometimes twice...

These are the main reasons I left both of these jobs...

 

[Texas Proud]

I totally agree . They could leave the info but block out the names . My sister's name was on the Long Island retiree list . I would hate to have my financial info made public like that and I'm sure if she saw it she'd be angry.

For some states it is the open laws that require this...

I do agree that a name should not be attached... but some info like position, what dept they work, yrs on the job etc. with the salary...

 

[ziggy29]

I do agree that a name should not be attached... but some info like position, what dept they work, yrs on the job etc. with the salary...

Yeah, taxpayers definitely have the right to know what they're paying for and how much. I don't see adding the names of the pensioners as serving any legitimate "right to know" function.

Even without names, if I see some teacher getting $30K after teaching for 40 years, I'll know to be okay with that. And if I see some administrator on the job for only 15 years with a spiked $150K pension that was more than they ever earned in base pay, I'll know to point to where laws need to be changed so it doesn't happen any more.

 

[73ss454]

I think it's good that they release information relative to the the positions people held and the size of the pension, but I don't agree with releasing the names of the individuals. That could make them a target of someone who is sufficiently angry and who aims their anger at the recipients instead of the policy makers.

I do not agree, since I was one of the ones paying for it I should be able to see where it's going.

 

[ziggy29]

I do not agree, since I was one of the ones paying for it I should be able to see where it's going.

What purpose is there in having the name other than for harassment or scapegoating someone (other than the system itself)? I simply see no compelling public "need to know" interest in having the names of these people. I would place the privacy rights of the individuals a little higher than the public's right to have their name. But by all means, the public should have other details about size of the pension, years of service, job title, final base salary. Those are all relevant and enough to be a "watchdog" for the taxpayer.

 

[Purron]

The military is not the only profession that works more than 40 hours... when I was in puplic accounting it was expected that we work 80 hr weeks for about 3 months (and sometimes 100 hrs)... we then could go down to a reasonable 45 to 50 most of the rest of the year...

When I worked in the trust dept... I used to get strange looks when I left just before 7PM... lots of people worked until 9 to 10PM.. we were expected to work 1/2 of saturday... which usually meant all day sat. at least once a month... sometimes twice...

These are the main reasons I left both of these jobs...

I feel your pain and have been there. Over 20 years in banking, last 10 as a branch manager. Worked Saturdays and many late nights. Part of the reason why I spent the last third of my career working for the feds as a financial regulator. Perhaps it was my little way at getting even with the banking profession

 

[73ss454]

What purpose is there in having the name other than for harassment or scapegoating someone (other than the system itself)? I simply see no compelling public "need to know" interest in having the names of these people. I would place the privacy rights of the individuals a little higher than the public's right to have their name. But by all means, the public should have other details about size of the pension, years of service, job title, final base salary. Those are all relevant and enough to be a "watchdog" for the taxpayer.

All part of public information. You can go on the property appraiser site in most areas and pull up who ever you are looking for. This will also provide pictures of your house, taxes paid and just about anything you'd need to track someone down. Does the public have the right to know if someone was arrested before they were convicted? Does the media have the right to publish peoples pictures, name or otherwise? If the public is paying your salary they have the right to know who you are. JMHO

 

[Emeritus]

I do not agree, since I was one of the ones paying for it I should be able to see where it's going.

so if you buy a product from a company you get all the same information on the same grounds ?

 

[Emeritus]

All part of public information. You can go on the property appraiser site in most areas and pull up who ever you are looking for. This will also provide pictures of your house, taxes paid and just about anything you'd need to track someone down. Does the public have the right to know if someone was arrested before they were convicted? Does the media have the right to publish peoples pictures, name or otherwise? If the public is paying your salary they have the right to know who you are. JMHO

Ok publish all the names of all the stockholders of every public company

If you want the advantage of limited liability corporation you have to give something up

 

[ziggy29]

If the public is paying your salary they have the right to know who you are. JMHO

And what purpose would it serve you? Why do you need to know that in order to make sure the benefits paid out aren't out of line with the pensioner's position and years of service?

It adds nothing and it invites harassment or even violence.

 

[Htown Harry]

I've had my name and salary published by the media three times, once in a small "agency hires Htown Harry" news item and a twice as part of agency-wide lists available on local news media web sites.

I've got no problem with my public agency employer releasing my pension payout when that day comes.

 

[73ss454]

And what purpose would it serve you? Why do you need to know that in order to make sure the benefits paid out aren't out of line with the pensioner's position and years of service?

It adds nothing and it invites harassment or even violence.

Why would anyone need to know anything about anyone. Maybe we should stop all newpapers and internet service also. We can take the right away from the media to publish anything about anyone. There are a lot of things in the world that don't serve much purpose but these are our rights and I don't want to give up any more of them.

I hear Russia is nice this time of year.

 

[ziggy29]

And what purpose would it serve you? Why do you need to know that in order to make sure the benefits paid out aren't out of line with the pensioner's position and years of service?

What would anyone need to know anything about anyone. Maybe we should stop all newpapers and internet service also. We can take the right away from the media to publish anything about anyone. There are a lot of things in the world that don't serve much purpose but these are our rights and I don't want to give up any more of them.

I hear Russia is nice this time of year.

Thank you for not ducking my question. Oh, wait, you did.....

 

[73ss454]

I gave you an answer, here it is again. It's my right and I don't want to give it up. I also said it may not serve much purpose but I still want the right.

Now maybe you can answer mine. Should we take the right away from the newspapers and all media to print someones name and address? Should we close down the internet?

 

[Emeritus]

I gave you an answer, here it is again. It's my right and I don't want to give it up. I also said it may not serve much purpose but I still want the right.

Now maybe you can answer mine. Should we take the right away from the newspapers and all media to print someones name and address? Should we close down the internet?

1) what gave you the idea that it is your right?
2) no

the question of what is public and what is private information is always a balance.


The task of balancing these interests is not one we face anew. In Westinghouse, we enumerated "[t]he factors which should be considered in deciding whether an intrusion into an individual's privacy is justified:"
. the type of record requested, the information it does or might contain, the potential for harm in any subsequent nonconsensual disclosure, the injury from disclosure to the relationship in which the record was generated, the adequacy of safeguards to prevent unauthorized disclosure, the degree of need for access, and whether there is an express statutory mandate, articulated public policy, or other recognizable public interest militating toward access.

638 F.2d at 578.

 

[ziggy29]

Now maybe you can answer mine. Should we take the right away from the newspapers and all media to print someones name and address? Should we close down the internet?

This is a government listing, not "the press" with First Amendment-guaranteed rights. You may have some "right" to know on some level, but I think it's also balanced by these people have some right to privacy and to not be harassed. Comparing it to arrest logs is beyond silly because these are people who will be harassed despite having done nothing illegal, and it's not like the people will need to know to "avoid" these people because they may be criminals.

In the end, given the relatively low importance of knowing the names and addresses (these can ONLY be used for bad means, IMO), the right to privacy and safety of the people who would be on the list is of higher value to me than our right to know relatively irrelevant and unimportant details whose only importance would be to cause trouble for people on the list.

I see no other reason why people demand to know the names except to cause trouble and harass the people on the list. There is no legitimate, beneficial use for it as far as I can tell.

We already recognize limits on the "public right to know" when it threatens security and social order. Military secrets are an obvious example. The public "right to know" is not absolute in practice.