Young workers want good old fashioned pension

[ziggy29]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregLee Not at all, unless you supposing that there are no open positions for public school teachers. (And that is not so.)

Not my supposition at all. It still applies if you replace "no" with "fewer." And certainly you can't deny "fewer," can you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregLee why would someone especially want a job where others are more likely to be fired?

1. Because it's a JOB (and a full time, highly benefited job) when many outstanding people have been without work for months, if not years.

2. Because the flip side is that they are more highly rewarded and compensated if they are excellent. If a teacher really has confidence in her/his ability, wouldn't this be a perk?

[GregLee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy29 It still applies if you replace "no" with "fewer."

No it doesn't. I can imagine a world in which teaching jobs are so desirable that the best students of a generation apply for them and that only the best are hired. In that special case, the only way to increase the number of very bright teachers hired would be to create more open positions by firing others. So, is that like the world we actually live in?

Quote:

2. Because the flip side is that they are more highly rewarded and compensated if they are excellent.

"Flip side"? I just don't see how it follows that if more poor teachers are fired, the better ones remaining will be paid more.

[ziggy29]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregLee "Flip side"? I just don't see how it follows that if more poor teachers are fired, the better ones remaining will be paid more.

Because most proponents of this "reform" are also talking of a merit-based system, not a primarily seniority-based system. In such a system, those who are better will be paid more. I talk about a system "where we do A and B" and all you can do is look at A (flexibility to remove poor teachers) in a vacuum and trash the idea without considering that it also comes with B (merit pay for performance). Why do you keep ignoring B? You refuse to touch it or acknowledge it as part of the discussion, and I'm curious as to why.

You keep coming back to "recruiting". How does it encourage "recruiting" (much less retaining) the best when you tell them that no matter how good they are, they won't earn as much as a mediocre colleague who has been there one year longer? Can you please tell me how that encourages recruiting and retaining the best? No, on second thought please don't -- this thread has drifted enough already. I'm done with this tangent and I'm done beating my head against an immovable wall here.

[FUEGO]

I'll offer my 2 cents on the subject, since I recently made a jump from the private sector into the public sector. Generally speaking, I don't think young people give much thought at all to pensions or 401ks when making job decisions. Just my observations from talking to lots of young people around age 30 (my peers). Most young people here in the public sector don't really understand what their pension plan is, or how it is funded, or when they can get money from it, etc. Nor do they understand the different deferred comp plans we have (401k, 457, etc) or how to use them to their advantage.

In the private sector, I have seen a similar general indifference among young folks to retirement savings plans. Retirement is something that people think of when they are older. Who has enough right now to save anything for later? Young people are focused on saving for a house, a wedding, a baby, etc, not retirement (if they are saving at all).

The only time I have talked up how awesome getting a government pension will be is when I sat down with my former employer to let them know I was leaving, and I told them how generous the pension is. I wanted to see if they would do something to match that component of my compensation. Of course I will most likely never get any benefit from my pension, since I doubt I will work in the current position the requisite 7 years for minimal vesting (for a tiny pension at age 65) or the 20+ to get any sort of a meaningful pension.

[GregLee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy29 Because most proponents of this "reform" are also talking of a merit-based system, not a primarily seniority-based system. In such a system, those who are better will be paid more. I talk about a system "where we do A and B" and all you can do is look at A (flexibility to remove poor teachers) in a vacuum and trash the idea without considering that it also comes with B (merit pay for performance). Why do you keep ignoring B? You refuse to touch it or acknowledge it as part of the discussion, and I'm curious as to why.

Your B should help attract better teachers. But your A would not. That is the point I made above. To think that firing bad teachers will attract brighter ones to the job is confused. If you want to attract better people to the job, doing B makes sense. Doing A doesn't, though it might be desirable for other reasons. I hope I've been clear.

[almost there]

Time to de-rail the teacher thing......
Did a bunch just take their pensions and start posting here lately?
Seems to be an issue, or something.........

Actually,
Young workers these days just want a permanent job.
With at least 40 hours a week.
And without the fear of being let go at any time for any reason.
And something out side the service sector. (about all that's left)
Waiting tables, cash register etc.........

[Independent]

Wow, the OP said nothing about Public vs. Private.

But Ha mentions government in post #5 and we quickly get 60 posts on that issue.

[Independent]

I'm going to talk about the original issue, young workers who say that DB plans look more appealing.

I'd like to ask them to discuss how their DB benefit would be impacted if they changed jobs every 5-10 years, and there was some significant inflation during their careers. I'll guess most haven't thought about that.

This is the other side of the coin from what we saw in the 1990's. When companies were bringing in DC plans, and workers looked at the prior 10 years' stock returns, many figured DC was the road to riches.

Somehow, the grass is always greener on the other side.

[Bimmerbill]

OK, so maybe I should rephrase my IT comments. All the IT staff here could walk out the door and get raises. I guess I consider that underpaid, or underpaid compared to local market conditions.

A quick search of the local want adds shows 10 or so IT jobs paying more than what I make for comparable work, to include full benefits and 401ks.

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Independent But Ha mentions government in post #5 and we quickly get 60 posts on that issue.

Yeah, he's a troublemaker ....

(He met my expectations...)

[ChadR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregLee Your B should help attract better teachers. But your A would not. That is the point I made above. To think that firing bad teachers will attract brighter ones to the job is confused. If you want to attract better people to the job, doing B makes sense. Doing A doesn't, though it might be desirable for other reasons. I hope I've been clear.

I think this is where many would just say they agree to disagree. To most people who view themselves as hardworking and ambitious the ability to obtain a job where they are rewarded based on their merrit as well as work with others who are high performing is very attactive!!

I've worked on both sides of this fence. I worked in a segment of the private industry where average annual turnover is 15%+ I have never worked with a stronger group of individuals. "Deadwood" as has been mentioned before just can't last in that kind of environment. I now work in a company that has only done layoff's once in it's entire 70+ year history. While people do get fired here job security is very high. The performance of the average worker here is noticibly below the folks at my old job.

I've thought about being a teacher many times and have talked to a number of current and former teachers. The ones that I talked to who left the teaching profession all did so because of the politics of the system, not the pay. They were tired of being held back by seniority and working with people who had done the job a certain way for 20+ years that they refused to change or try new ideas.

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nun the VA is really expensive.

May be. However I doubt if you wish to endure what I did (as a Vietnam vet) to get the little services I do get through the system.

The VA provides services well outside the norm of "normal" medical coverage, and its specialized care in a lot of areas does cost more. That's the nature of the "beast", in most service connected situations.

BTW, the vast majority of my medical "benefits" come from a system of my contributions to a retirement plan, held by my former employer (private - non governmental). I use VA services very little, but I am thankful for what they provide, beyond the "typical" situation.

[nun]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDude The average teacher in Wisconsin makes about $50,000 a year plus benefits. With pension and healthcare added in, total compensation goes up to about $85,000-$90,000. How many unemployed people in America would take that job? Last year, our district had 12 openings, and got 2700 resumes........apaprently some people think that being a teacher isn't that bad of a deal..........

People in America have been beaten down. If they get health insurance it's invariably expensive. Their salaries don't keep up with inflation. Education continues to increase in cost. $50k salary is low paid considering the need for college and higher degrees and that they are teaching and care for our children.

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by devans0 I am an exception to the norm, but my DC is much better than my DB is. I w**k still and have DB grandfathered in, but it was frozen to the current level, no cola, three years ago. I also have a DC. I have just passed the 5 year minimum for for 401k withdraw but already have a DC benefit that equals my DB. Thirty years of DB is being passed by 5 years of DB. From my view, DB is a secure bond-like guarantee while a DC can build rapidly. This rapid growth is largely from LBYM and extreme saving and investing into DC. DC gives me control to make my FIRE happen. DB meant trudging the road to a happy destiny by a longer slower route.

I think this is mixing apples and oranges....

A DB plan is fully funded by the company... your 401(k) is most funded by you... with some match...

If you look, I bet that the amount the company put into your 401(k) is a lot less than they would have to put in a DB plan if it was not frozen...

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregLee Your B should help attract better teachers. But your A would not. That is the point I made above. To think that firing bad teachers will attract brighter ones to the job is confused. If you want to attract better people to the job, doing B makes sense. Doing A doesn't, though it might be desirable for other reasons. I hope I've been clear.

Just curious as to your thinking....

Is it OK to pay a higher salary to a better teacher no matter how many years they have IOW, say a teacher with 5 years shows they are a better teacher than one with 20 years... can we pay the 5 year teacher more money? (not trying to get into the old discussion on how we can not measure a teachers performance.... lets say for discussion we can)


Now onto the other side... say the teacher has shown they are not good at all in teaching... can we get rid of them

In our current system the answers are NO and NO (well, mostly no from what I read)... I would like them to be YES and YES... what are your answers?

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bimmerbill OK, so maybe I should rephrase my IT comments. All the IT staff here could walk out the door and get raises. I guess I consider that underpaid, or underpaid compared to local market conditions. A quick search of the local want adds shows 10 or so IT jobs paying more than what I make for comparable work, to include full benefits and 401ks.

Then why not take the job

I missed your first post so I don't know the context... but am curious as to why everybody is staying....

[donheff]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDude The average teacher in Wisconsin makes about $50,000 a year plus benefits. With pension and healthcare added in, total compensation goes up to about $85,000-$90,000. How many unemployed people in America would take that job? Last year, our district had 12 openings, and got 2700 resumes........apaprently some people think that being a teacher isn't that bad of a deal..........

I think you are overstating it Dude. In 2003 when Bush proposed to have agencies fully fund the cost of the old CSRS retirement system (FERS is already fully funded) the CBO estimate was they would pay about 17.2% of pay (the employees contribute 7%). CSRS is a gold plated system. Most teachers pay something for their retirement so, to be generous (on the state side) take 20% of $50K = $10K. Health benefits for a family cost maybe another $10K if the employer pays everything. More likely it will cost the employer $7-8K, with the employee paying 30% or so, and a whole lot less for a single. So that $85-90K is more like $67 - $68K. But, even that makes the comparison generous since most comparable private sector $50K/year jobs (i.e. jobs for college grads) include employer assisted HC and a 401K match. That amount needs to be subtracted from the teacher's $65K to make the jobs comparable.

Edit: now to be fair, those teachers are getting the summer off. Disclaimer -- I was a teacher a long time ago and DD is teacher now.

Edit, edit: I left teaching for a much better paying, less nerve racking Federal career

Quote:

Originally Posted by nun People in America have been beaten down. If they get health insurance it's invariably expensive. Their salaries don't keep up with inflation. Education continues to increase in cost. $50k salary is low paid considering the need for college and higher degrees and that they are teaching and care for our children.

True. My DIL got $160K year straight out of law school. The "average" teacher has many years of experience and in many, if not most, cases a master's degree.

[HFWR]

The advantage, in my view, of a DC plan is that the money is generally yours early on. No need to wait for 20-30 years, and age 55 or more, only to be let go just before vesting. At least if the company dumps you, you get the full value...

As for teachers, we need a way to get rid of crappy teachers, crappy administrators, AND crappy students...

[MasterBlaster]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HFWR The advantage, in my view, of a DC plan is that the money is generally yours early on. No need to wait for 20-30 years, and age 55 or more, only to be let go just before vesting. At least if the company dumps you, you get the full value...

that's a good point. Those DB plans are usually very much back-end loaded. So for those that job-hop around a few times a DC plan just may be the more valuable plan.

[chinaco]

There are a few DC plans that I have seen that beat a traditional pension... but they are very rare.

However, I have also seen a few DB plans that yield paltry benefits also.

Most retirement benefit plans (DB or DC) have been pared back by employers... except perhaps for govt plans.

I believe govt retirement plans will be pared back to reflect the norm in private industry.


The new normal: Employees will carry more of the burden for funding their retirement using their wages.