Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: CAIR-Chicago files federal complaint over religious headwear rule on driver’s license pics
Next Post: Sponsor thanks governor for vetoing his bill
Posted in:
* Mayor Lori Lightfoot speaking today at the IBEW Local 134 Membership Development Conference…
In this state, we do have significant challenges with our pensions. Unfortunately, decisions that were made by people who stood in my office for years, people at the state level, they didn’t make sure that your pensions were secure.
But pensions are a promise. And I know that again from my upbringing. When you work hard and you struggle, in particular when you’re doing work as a government employee, you have a right to expect that the work that you have done is going to be rewarded at the end of your working life with a pension that pays you not just a living wage, but a comfortable retirement that you can build on.
That’s under siege, unfortunately, in our city and our state. But the one thing that I will make sure that I do as mayor of this city is I will make sure that we live up to the promise that we have made to working men and women. Because pensions are absolutely a promise and I’m not going to do anything to ever allow those pensions to be endangered.
But that means we have some tough decisions to make and we’ve got to do that in partnership together. I will be calling upon Don and other members of organized labor to partner with us to finally make the structural changes that are necessary to make sure that our pensions are secure and that no one has to worry that they’re not going to have their pension at the time of their retirement.
Thoughts?
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:19 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: CAIR-Chicago files federal complaint over religious headwear rule on driver’s license pics
Next Post: Sponsor thanks governor for vetoing his bill
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Can someone please list all examples of Constitutional structural changes for us dummies?
Comment by Moby Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:21 am
She is going to try to enact a city version of consideration, and it is going to fail.
Reformers gonna “reform.”
Proof again there is a world of difference between a reformer and a progressive.
Comment by Thomas Paine Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:29 am
Promises can be broken, but the pension clause of the constitution can’t be.
Comment by Angry Republican Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:30 am
==But that means we have some tough decisions to make and we’ve got to do that in partnership together.==
You gotta wonder what “touch decision” she has in mind.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:31 am
“Structural changes” is usually code for we can’t pay you what we promised you. Well sorry mayor, but the Illinois Supreme Court already ruled that structural changes to current employee public pensions aren’t Constitutional. You should save your speech for new employees.
Comment by A Jack Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:32 am
Don’t have much until I see a proposal. Is she going to proposes some kind of consideration, like Thomas Paine says, or some other cuts, like lower pay increases today, or the like?
Either there are cuts somewhere or there are tax hikes. Or both. The question is who feels the pain.
Comment by Perrid Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:33 am
…mistakes were made…
Comment by Responsa Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:34 am
There are a variety of constitutional reforms that can be implemented, including limiting future wage increases (which influence pensions), negotiating forms of compensation that are not pensionable, changing pensions for future employees, and replacing pensions for future employees with IRA-type retirement accounts.
As long as all parties want to try and find solutions that don’t involve maintaining the status quo and simply contributing more money, it can be done.
Comment by OOO Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:36 am
What right is the Mayor alluding to ?
“you have a right to expect …a pension that pays you not just a living wage, but a comfortable retirement that you can build on”
Comment by Donnie Elgin Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:37 am
More talking in circles. Nothing will get fixed. Death by a thousand cuts.
Comment by SSL Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:38 am
===replacing pensions for future employees with IRA-type retirement accounts.===
Don’t know that’ll work in the real. Please explain.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:42 am
Soo this folks is Lightfoots “We had to destroy the village in order to save it” moment. http://www.nhe.net/BenTreVietnam/
Comment by Soo... Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:43 am
Same old song. Absent a total overhaul of the legislature and S Ct there ain’t going to be any pension reform other then deferring govt contributions. It’s sad but if you want pension reform move out of state
Comment by Sue Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:44 am
There are no possible “structural changes” that save enough money to make a dent in the unfunded liability that are Constitutional. Period. I’m getting tired of this movie!
Comment by formerpro Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:45 am
===“We had to destroy the village in order to save it”===
Please explain. Thanks.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:47 am
OOO said “There are a variety of constitutional reforms that can be implemented, including limiting future wage increases (which influence pensions), negotiating forms of compensation that are not pensionable, changing pensions for future employees, and replacing pensions for future employees with IRA-type retirement accounts.
As long as all parties want to try and find solutions that don’t involve maintaining the status quo and simply contributing more money, it can be done.”
The tricky situation with the state pensions, is that the employees do not contribute to social security. Thus, simple thinking solutions are really budget busting solutions if our pensions do not maintain the same standard as social security - it is questionable whether Tier II meets that threshold and we will see when the first Tier II pensioner retires and if not will sue the State to match social security.
An IRA type retirement (or a 401K type retirement as many republicans advocate for) is a budget buster of enormous magnitude. For new employees to contribute into the 401K, the state will have to match said contributions - in addition new employees will not be contributing to the old pension system, however the old pension system will still need to be maintained (thus the state will now have to pay the money that the new employees would have contributed) in addition to that, the state will have to pay mandated social security payments. Thus, you have just maybe tripled or quadrupled the obligation of the state. Keep in mind that changes to the pension law (Tier II was in 2011); about 25 percent of the work force is now Tier II so any changes will be committing the state for a very long time.
Comment by Paul S Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:56 am
===to finally make the structural changes that are necessary===
The only “structural change” that matters is amending the constitution to allow for progressive tax brackets. The question goes before voters in 2020. I hope we can count on you to help get out the vote for that, Mayor Lightfoot.
Comment by Nick Name Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:00 am
I am guessing she is saying: all you people in this room will be fine as there is nothing we can do to change what you have coming. Those coming behind you? We are going to make changes.
Comment by Been There Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:04 am
==replacing pensions for future employees with IRA-type retirement accounts.==
This would be a financially heavy lift. Tier I funding is relying on continuing growth in the Tier II population. As more Tier I’ers pass, and more new employees on Tier II enter the pool, the fund becomes more self-sustaining. Attempting to create a new Tier III, while conceivable, would throw a real wrench in that wheel.
Comment by DarkDante Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:04 am
Also, I think I have been reading in the Sun-Times that Lightfoot has been discussing extending the ramp. I believe that this would require a legislative fix, allowing a re-ramp. Could this be what she means by structural change?
Comment by DarkDante Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:06 am
==I’m not going to do anything to ever allow those pensions to be endangered…BUT that means we have some tough decisions to make.==
The collective response of IBEW Local 134 to this remark should have been “Sez you.”
Comment by Jocko Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:07 am
The only constitutional way to control pension costs is through the 3 F’s of payroll: freezes, furloughs, firings.
Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:08 am
perfidy
perfidy
perfidy
Pensions are Not a promise if you’re going to pursue Raunerite “structural reform”
Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:10 am
Nothing changes until municipalities and/or the State actually cannot make the payments. Then, the brethren of public labor saves their own behinds in exchange for the new folks getting at 401K style of program. This is always how it was/is going to end.
Comment by All In Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:21 am
If the state constitution can be changed to impose a graduated income tax on higher earners, who not a constitutional change to allow for a reduction in pensions above a certain annual amount.
When I see what some of these professors and doctors pull out of the pension fund I start to get why default seems attractive to some people.
Comment by Melvoin Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:21 am
Amen Mayor. It takes a Village to fund a pension. That includes the pensioner.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:22 am
The US leveled Ben Tre in order to retake it. the famous quote justifying the “tough decisions” came after the battle out of frustration.
Unlike Major Booris in Ben Tre, Lightfoot clearly picked the time, place and audience purposefully. But She’s still attempting to mitigate/defend/justify the backlash she knows going to get from whatever her “structural reforms” or “tough decisions” will be.
Comment by Soo... Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:26 am
What a lot of people don’t understand that this is really not strictly speaking a pension. It’s more like a state variant of social security.
in a private pension a company of throws money into a fund that should be enough to pay off the obligations. That they often don’t is part of their problem.
What this and other states have, is a thing where current employees and the State fund the current retirees. So if future employees don’t pay in, the funding evaporates.
And a low-interest-rate environment isn’t helping matters either.
The mayor really should pray for a late 70’s style inflation. Inflating your way out of the debt is about the only hope. Assuming of course that the benefits aren’t indexed to inflation…..
Comment by Fav human Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:30 am
Tough decisions are “We had to destroy the village in order to save it”?
Huh.
===…from whatever her “structural reforms” or “tough decisions” will be.===
Which might not be… “We had to destroy the village in order to save it”
There’s no indication of any village, or any burning. In actuality, the ambiguity is the curiosity, not the example you seem to see.
‘Cause, frankly, *you* admitted *you* don’t know what those tough decisions she may choose. Right?
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:33 am
Just a friendly reminder that if you’re looking at the grand 401K, that was never designed to be a substitute for a pension, you should look at whether or not the employees currently pay into Social Security. If they don’t, you have a huge cost moving them into that system. If they don’t have S.S. and you don’t offer them something equal or better than S.S. (the current tier II doesn’t) then you’re in violation of federal law.
Comment by penshun Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:34 am
The only legitimate way to restructure the municipality’s pension debt is to pass legislation in Springfield allowing municipalities to file for bankruptcy under Chapter 9 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, which I can’t see ever happening in Illinois.
Comment by Bankroller Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:40 am
Code for ” I’m just pandering for votes for my re- election”…dont worry boys, this is my version of kicking the can….
Comment by Arron shocked Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:56 am
===“I’m just pandering for votes for my re- election”===
She’s not on the ballot until 2023.
Do better, thanks.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:58 am
Melvion, medical school professors are paid sums commensurate with their talents and knowledge. It is one of the few areas in higher education where free market plays a part. I know I want the professors who are teaching my family doctor are among the best, not cut-rate Caribbean doctors.
Complain about administrator bloat if you want - that’s a better target. I want the best that can be hired to teach our doctors, and I’m very willing to pay a few dollars a year for them.
Comment by RIJ Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:59 am
Wrong willy
She’s not on the ballot until 2023.
Do better, thanks.
First thing any politician does after winning is think about the next election. Where was any real action on her part other the same old spin which will result in nothing. Do better…thanks
Comment by Arron shocked Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:08 pm
===First thing any politician does after winning is think about the next election.===
That’s what gets mayors and governors in trouble.
Look at Pritzker, it’s not pandering, he executed an agenda.
Look at Rauner, he pandered endlessly for his re-election, and got none of his agenda.
Keep up. It’s not about the 2023 re-election, Lightfoot is trying to find an agenda that works for her and can get support, support she thought would be there with her lopsided win, but seems stalled, like things do, when you don’t have the execution of your plan.
“I’m just pandering for votes for my re- election”
No. She’s trying to find where the sweet spot is to move her agenda.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:13 pm
Hilarious. There won’t be any pension reform. Besides, it would require legislation in Springfield. Lightfoot has clearly not been paying attention.
Comment by Kane County Frank Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:29 pm
If and when pub pension related tax increases and critical service diminution hit the red zone with enough voters, then folks are going to learn about when a contract legally can be modified and/or voided and a constitutional protection becomes vulnerable. But that time has not arrived. Yet.
Comment by Cook County Commoner Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:33 pm
“Look at Pritzker, it’s not pandering, he executed an agenda.”
What is the difference between an agenda and pandering? Winning?
Comment by Bruce (no not him) Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:33 pm
===What is the difference between an agenda and pandering? Winning?===
Wisely moving your agenda from words to votes to execution.
Lightfoot has tried, very unsuccessfully, to corner a governor, the legislature, and now is trying, again, to talk a lot about things that she needs significant support from others.
It appears if she tries to talk it out, publicly, her hope, apparently, is others in the GA and the Governor will pick up on it.
Funny thing is, Lightfoot, her Crew, whoever there, seems to think talking it out publicly is the big play.
The best play, for her and an agenda specifically, is to game it out with those who can help.
Not much learning going on so far.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:37 pm
== The tricky situation with the state pensions, is that the employees do not contribute to social security. ==
First things first. Most current SERS participate in Social Security, a minority don’t. Members of TRS don’t. Some SURS do, some don’t.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:52 pm
Mayor Lightfoot has ordered a hiring freeze for all City departments and a newspaper article the other day stated that layoffs “are also on the table.”
Comment by Christopher Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:53 pm
== … municipal bankruptcy … ==
Technically, it is allowed today. You just have to get the General Assembly’s permission first.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:55 pm
Pension planning 101 - Old School - was 3 legged.
Pension - work based
Social Security
Personal savings - i.e. - IRA, 401K, 403b, 457, Insurance annuity, etc.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 12:59 pm
To RNUG at 12:52pm: Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund employees (which only receives operating money from IL, not pension funding) may or may not pay Soc Sec taxes, depending on their employer.
Lightfoot is forshadowing some kind of move by the City, and wanting the unions to acquiesce. Bad move, since they are unlikely to take the fall for the City. CPS just declined a large pay raise, while she refuses to negotiate with CPD.
Comment by revvedup Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 1:04 pm
When the unions and the politicians sign contracts they know the government can’t afford, it’s not a promise…its a fraud.
Comment by Public Citizen Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 1:21 pm
Who was she blaming Daley or Rahm or both?
Comment by Bill D Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 1:36 pm
==Lightfoot is forshadowing some kind of move by the City, and wanting the unions to acquiesce.==
I think you’re right. I’m guessing she needs to lay off people. And since she said this to IBEW those people will be electricians.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 1:38 pm
Don’t understand why “pension reform” is still a topic for discussion. There was pension reform. It’s called Tier II. I think reform is a sneaky way of saying whacking. Apparently reform hasn’t happened until pensioners take a cut in their paychecks. Confused about why those folks don’t just say that in the first place.
Comment by AnonymousOne Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 1:46 pm
==There was pension reform. It’s called Tier II.==
Any pension plan that does not take something awawy from current employees is not “reform” in the book of many of the anti-pubic employee pension types.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 1:56 pm
I’m sure that there will be many constructive suggestions given at the City Club symposium on pensions featuring Kristen McQueery, Lawrence Msall and IPI. Fair and Balanced?
Comment by Obama’s Puppy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 2:12 pm
Truth be told- at some point in the future- perhaps 10 years out- the retiree pension annual servicing costs will truly outstrip the taxpayers ability to service the annual expense. Politically- taxes won’t be able to be raised enough to pay for pensions and all other govt expenses. At that point the issue will be fit the pension tab or forego other vital programs. It’s going to happen- it’s just a question of when. The Pension Boards know with some precision what the future servicing needs are - maybe it would be good public policy to ask that the numbers be shared with the public
Comment by Sue Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 2:13 pm
==Truth be told- at some point in the future…==
By that time in the future the tier 2 employees will begin to retire and help reduce the cost of state pensions.
Comment by Enviro Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 2:31 pm
=== ==Truth be told- at some point in the future…==
By that time in the future the tier 2 employees will begin to retire and help reduce the cost of state pensions.===
Tasty stuff.
If you don’t understand Tier I or Tier II, - RNUG - will hopefully have a seminar for you. Please, use PayPal or Venmo to prepay. Thanks.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 2:33 pm
===Besides, it would require legislation in Springfield.===
There was legislation in Springfield. Got shot down 7-0 in 2015 by the ILSC. Keep up.
Comment by Nick Name Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 2:35 pm
===When the unions and the politicians sign contracts they know the government can’t afford, it’s not a promise…its a fraud.===
Pensions aren’t part of the union contracts. They’re provided for in state law.
Comment by Nick Name Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 2:36 pm
==By that time in the future the tier 2 employees will begin to retire and help reduce the cost of state pensions.==
Proceed with caution. We’ve got a few decades until Tier Two workers will be fully vested in a career-long pension.
By that time, Tier Two pensions will have been enhanced multiple times. Assuming otherwise ignores years of precedent.
Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 3:07 pm
===Proceed with caution. We’ve got a few decades until Tier Two workers will be fully vested in a career-long pension.
By that time, Tier Two pensions will have been enhanced multiple times.===
Couple decades… wonder where Tier I will be then?
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 3:10 pm
“Any pension plan that does not take something awawy from current employees is not “reform” in the book of many of the anti-pubic employee pension types.”
And they keep hocking up the drivel that Democrats and Madigan were/are in bed with AFSCME and other public employee unions. Democrats were in large part responsible for Tiers I and II reforms, one of which was struck down by the court. They got nothing for it in return, like Republican commitment and votes on a graduated income tax. Gov. Quinn knows better than anyone how that worked out politically. Madigan was despised by some or many public employees.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 3:14 pm
== We’ve got a few decades until Tier Two workers will be fully vested in a career-long pension. ==
I’m .. NO.
They are part of the system from day 1 and, given IL SC rilings on State pensions, “vested” (as in legal ownership) from day 1. They just can’t collect a pension, in most cases, until they have a minimum of 8 years in and a minimum age.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 3:18 pm
==Couple decades… wonder where Tier I will be then?==
Either still working, in year “x” of a multiple decade retirement, or in a better place. Perhaps somewhere warm.
Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 3:23 pm
===still working===
In a couple decades?
Hmm.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 3:28 pm
Oswego- tier 2 won’t save the State and/or local plans from the fiscal abyss. Tier 2 went into effect in 2011 which means any employee entering into service prior to 2011 has the higher benefit. Assume an entry age of maybe 23 and a life expectancy of 85 plus the retirees on tier 1 will be around until the next century. Tier 2 won’t hit until 2046 or later(2011plus 35 years of service). There is just no way under the Sun given the State’s anemic growth rates that Illinois will find a way to pay the pensions as more boomers enter retirement and still pay for other services. Pritzker’s tax bump assuming he does limit the new rates to 8 percent and leaves as he says folks under 200/250 0f annual income alone doesn’t move the needle in terms of sufficient revenue. Illinois will either need to impose a draconian tax increase on everyone other then the truly indigent or find a lawful way to cut pensions unless of course we stop funding a huge number of other programs. If I am wrong- tell me how you see the State and municipalities paying for pensions as the annual costs continue to increase consistent with the actuarial reports
Comment by Sue Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 3:39 pm
- Sue -
I defer to - RNUG -.
I’m sure you’ve read his work.
He’s gone down this road, chapter and verse, where it all stacks up.
If - RNUG - is gracious enough to respond…
===…tell me how you see the State and municipalities paying for pensions as the annual costs continue to increase consistent with the actuarial reports.===
… you’ll get an answer from the local pension expert in due course.
Be well.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 3:44 pm
“freezes, furloughs, firings” Yes, that would reduce the payroll, but since by that point the person is already on the Pension roles, it’s effect would likely be minimal. But if you’ve been paying attention, you’d know that kids are dying because there’s not enough staff. So what’s it going to be? Pension reform or tragedy?
Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 4:22 pm
==Bad move, since they are unlikely to take the fall for the City==
They might not look at it as “taking a fall”. The trades have a manpower shortage. If unions need manpower to man the jobs and if the city plans to cut services this might help both parties.
As far as what Lightfoot will do, I think she will take a little from column A and a little from column B. I think she will both raise taxes a little and cut services a little.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 4:27 pm
Freeze hiring raises etc everything should be fine
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 4:34 pm
Sue, under the latest actuarial projections state contributions to SURS will increase from about $1.638 billion to $3.492 billion between 2019 and 2045 (a 26 year period), by which time SURS is supposed to be 90% funded. This represents a compound annual growth rate of a bit less than 3%, and contribution growth rates for the other state retirement systems are likely in the same ballpark. In what way is this unaffordable or unsustainable if nominal GDP grows, say, 4% per year (2% real GDP growth + 2% inflation)? Now I grant you that these projections are based on 6.75% expected annual investment returns which may be a tad optimistic in the current market environment, but still - it is not at all obvious that the required contributions are unaffordable for the state.
Comment by Andy S. Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 4:46 pm
Clearly spending freezes and salary freezes are in order for all state government and its workforce.
Comment by Cronish Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 4:49 pm
Cornish- LOL- Pritzkers first actions as governor have been to raise salaries and benefits. I guess he doesn’t concur with the fiscal realities you recommend
Comment by Sue Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 5:25 pm
== If I am wrong- tell me how you see the State and municipalities paying for pensions as the annual costs continue to increase consistent with the actuarial reports ==
1. Tier 2
2. Progressive state income tax
Comment by Enviro Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 5:38 pm
==Some SURS do, some don’t.== RNUG, about SURS and Social Security, I am 99.9% sure that no SURS employees pay into Social Security. Even those in the self-managed plan, do not pay into Social Security.
Comment by Joe M Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 5:46 pm
- Enviro -
Well played. That’s tasty.
Short and sweet.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 5:46 pm
Put a constitutional amendment up and I will vote for it. Public service unions won’t, they seem to rule, but otherwise its all talk.
Comment by 44th Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 6:59 pm
Sue….someone who was 23 in 2011 will be 85 in 2073. That’s considerably short of “the next century.”
Comment by ajjacksson Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 7:04 pm
Enviro- JB’s own people suggest the new tax will raise at best 3.5 billion a year most of which is being gobbled up by his new spending proposals- Do you have any idea how fast the State’s annual pension bill is growing. 3 billion a year doesn’t come close to even resolving our current structural deficit and past bill obligations. Trump all to the folks at TRS- the new tax revenue might help but it’s hardly the silver bullet
Comment by Sue Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 7:16 pm
Talk to. Not Trump
Comment by Sue Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 7:17 pm
- Sue -
You should look up some of - RNUG -‘s responses to you….
Maybe I will…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 7:20 pm
With all the doom and gloom, between pensions and social security going broke, I guess we’ll all be living under a bridge in a refrigerator box together.
Comment by Ano Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 7:25 pm
No, smart people save additional money for retirement. My family is asking there is no social security when for our retirement. If there is well that’s great then.
Comment by Cronish Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 7:36 pm
“Saving as if” there is no social…
Comment by Cronish Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 7:36 pm
dont panic everyone’s pension is safe
Comment by foster brooks Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 10:41 pm
“They are part of the system from day 1 and, given IL SC rilings on State pensions, “vested” (as in legal ownership) from day 1.”
When I left state employment in 2001, I was forced to pay out my accrued pension benefits. There is a minimum service length before workers are truly vested.
Comment by Odysseus Tuesday, Aug 27, 19 @ 11:28 pm
Odysseus: I don’t think you were forced, you simply took that option. Vested for tier 1 is 8 years of service and 10 years for tier 2. If you quit under the vesting service limit you have the option to not cash out your contributions and if you do not cash out you could hire back in as tier 1 today even after quiting in 2001. You would simply have a break in service, however still part of the tier 1 pension system.
Comment by Just A Dude Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 8:33 am