Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Get Illinois Working Again
Next Post: Medicaid votes, budget battles and a very big cut
Posted in:
* I’ve been telling subscribers about this development for the past several days…
One piece of Gov. Pat Quinn’s plan to overhaul state employee pensions may be facing a tough sell with lawmakers.
As part of his proposal to ease the cost of the state’s retirement programs, Quinn has called for the re-tirement age to be boosted to 67.
But, a key Democratic negotiator Wednesday raised red flags about the concept, saying it could trigger a wave of retirements that could result in far less savings for the state.
“There is some feeling that that is a tougher pill to swallow and that creates a rush to the door that we don’t necessarily want to create,” said state Rep. Elaine Nekritz, D-Northbrook.
Nekritz, however, cautioned that no provisions have officially been ruled out in the bid by lawmakers and Quinn to overhaul employee pensions.
Everything is still really fluid, but that specific Quinn proposal has hit a brick wall so far. We’ll see how it goes.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 10:26 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Get Illinois Working Again
Next Post: Medicaid votes, budget battles and a very big cut
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Altering the retirement age only postpones the problem and creates a new one. When your 30 year employees make 60K per year and your first year employees make 30K per year, you lose 30K every year you force the senior employees to stay. While it would delay the pension meltdown it instantly creates a payroll cost hike.
We need to stop messing around and put a plan that weans us off pensions and into 401k type plans. It will hurt for a while and there is no perfect plan but we have to get away from public pensions. The problem is the unions and politicians gain too much power and influence maintaining control over the pensions. They don’t want to let that go because it would take away a very large sword they can hold over public employees. It is the democrats today, but when R’s have power they do the same.
Comment by the Patriot Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 10:35 am
um, hello? there already is a rush to the door going on.
i have been waiting for a pension thread to suggest to the cms brain trust that when they do the scheme for deciding what percentage of health insurance retirees pay, that it be applied against the average premium for all retirees.
if the percentage i have to pay is 40%, i get less benefit with a $600 per month premium compared to someone with a plan that costs $850 per month. dependents extra, of course.
Comment by langhorne Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 10:37 am
TOO LATE!!! People are leaving May 31 in mass. To say there is a lack of trust towards the Gov and Legislatures would be an understatement.
Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 10:41 am
Not quite understanding the average premium idea…we have choices on our plans from QCHP to HMO to OAP. Each plan premium is different with QCHP being the most expensive. I choose OAP coverage. Why should I have to pay an average premium amount to help subsidize those who choose QCHP? Pay 40% of whatever plan you select.
Comment by illilnifan Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 10:45 am
===People are leaving May 31 in mass.==
Bye.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 10:53 am
I agree Rich, but services will be impacted.
Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:05 am
Too late! I am a 36 year employee and my papers have just been filed - I am officialy retired May 31st. As Woody Guthrie used to sing “so long it’s been good to know ya”
Comment by Hunterdon Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:13 am
Pension reform savings goals can be looked at like taxes; the broader the base the lower the rate necessary to generate the same number.
If there is a pension savings goal, the more options taken off the table, the more dollars have to be squeezed out of the remaining options (COLAs, employee contributions,etc).
Comment by steve schnorf Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:15 am
Why hasn’t SB1313 been sent to the Governor? Just curious.
Comment by Mouthy Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:16 am
Its easy for someone not in the state work force to say “bye”. But, my tiny little agency is losing 25% of its employees on June 30 and they won’t be replaced. We are already extremely short staffed, due to the unofficial hiring freeze for the past 10 years. I am already working 6 days a week with unpaid overtime to get my work done. At some point, those of us left behind say we can’t do anymore. Yes, services will suffer. There simply are not enough worker bees to get the work done.
Comment by lincolnlover Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:28 am
maybe it has to do with being unconstitutional? As rich said on this blog some time ago ,if you think raising the retirement age is an impairment……
Comment by foster brooks Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:28 am
are there enough new young teachers of quality ready to fill the holes that will be created by the mass of people filling out retirement papers as we speak?? Next thing we will be hearing about is huge teacher shortages in critical areas such as math, science, ESL.
Comment by Headin South Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:32 am
I’d like to see the numbers on that “rush for the door,” especially given that nothing is settled yet. How many folks would rush out based on speculation vs. fact. Not too many, one hopes. When your personal economic future is at stake, best to stay with facts.
And if lots do rush–is that a tragedy. Cemetery full of the indispensable and so on. And as the national press has told us, ad nauseum, there are lots and lots of talented young people out there looking for jobs. Let’s let a few of them in.
Comment by cassandra Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:36 am
===People are leaving May 31 in mass.==
Recent college grads, take note.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:41 am
People are indeed rushing to leave.
Comment by Observer Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:42 am
Part of the discussions is reduce or eliminate the COLA for retirees. If that is to occur, will the state continue to allow automatice increases to active employees? Retirees need the COLA more than active employees.
Comment by Observing Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:45 am
Stop thinking short term. Good God folks.
Comment by Shemp Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:49 am
Illini fan
If you and I are at the same percentage level, we should get the same dollar amount of subsidy to apply to whatever our premium may be. You shouldn’t get a bigger subsidy dollar wise bec your plan is more expensive. Working off the avg makes it more fair.
Comment by Langhorne Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 11:54 am
Langhorne, now I understand your thinking that insurance should be a set subsidy amount vs. percentage of premium.
That said could it be 1313 has not been sent for signature that it is a bargaining chip in AFSCME negotiations to get them to agree to concessions and if they don’t the state is clearing show one of the alternatives which can be worse.
Comment by illilnifan Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 12:00 pm
SERS projection is 4,000 retiring by July1. More will go by the end of CY. That’s a huge amt of institutional knowledge. There will be a hiring lag and difficulty getting new people up to speed. These are not clerks at a store. The impact will also be clustered.
Comment by Langhorne Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 12:05 pm
There are some highly skilled people working at the state in IT, Legal, Accounting and other technical areas. A loss of as high as 25% could not only impact services in could in effect shut down an agency or a whole department. People are leaving based on speculation. Many are young enough and skilled enough to retire at the State, collect a pension, and then work in the private sector.
Comment by Observer of the State Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 12:19 pm
I don’t think the legislators likely understand all the factors under all the different systems that have been set up by law and reform isn’t as simple as the Chicago businessmen want to portray the issues. Insurance is another issue. The state needs to stop subsidizing retired teachers and community college workers without letting the younger workers into the pool to spread the risk.
Comment by Liberty_First Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 12:24 pm
Having talked to people who are going at the end of May, I can definately say they are going because of a lack of trust. Because of recent actions, decisions, rulings and announcements they no longer trust either the governor or the legislature and to a certain extent the courts.
The brain drain and operational disruption will be real and felt. I am losing 3 tiers of management above me and half my section. Am I suppose to start sending my time off slips to the agency director?
Comment by Lucky than Good Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 12:31 pm
If there is going to be a mad rush for the door, then Quinn needs to direct Mr. Weems to green light the advertisement of those positions and put a mechanism in place to approve selected applicants quickly. The way the state currently posts jobs, screens applicants, interviews applicants and hires the approved candidates is too long and could be a real concern if necessary services are facing interruption.
One thing to keep in mind - and this is nothing against longtime state employees - companies and firms routinely lose large amounts of employees to retirement, downsizing, mergers, etc. Large employers who sieve thousands to tens of thousands of employees at one time or over a short period often rebound quickly and some even rebound better than they were before.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 12:32 pm
Rich, you and obviously many others are greatly underestimating the impact of the retirement exodus. In the social services and public safety departments, where they operate 24/7, there is a panic in the executive ranks over the sheer volume of retirements that could be happening next week. This is a lot bigger story than you know.
Comment by Budget Watcher Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 12:49 pm
Large employers who sieve thousands to tens of thousands of employees at one time or over a short period often rebound quickly and some even rebound better than they were before.—–_
Governments are not the same as large employers in respect to employee training. It is just a fact.
—
Comment by Except Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 12:49 pm
Agree with those saying don’t underestimate the rush to retirement that is occurring. Further adding to the complications is the mandatory hiring freeze at agencies affected by facility closures
Comment by Generation X Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 12:55 pm
These job losses are not being filled because agencies and university departments believe the state legislature will require a percentage of their budgets be returned to pay for pension debt obligations. So, fewer workers doing more work means less money paid into the retirement and more retirees drawing from the underfunded system. Result? The pension system is even MORE unsustainable. And I believe this is intentional. Break it quick so they can dump it.
And these are not entry-level jobs that are being vacated. Your average 22-year-old college graduate with no relevant work experience isn’t qualified to run a university press marketing department or run a geological survey. To think otherwise is ignorantly assuming that state workers are all janitors.
Comment by overburdened in illinois Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 1:01 pm
Screw me once…shame on you. Screw me twice, shame on me.The money is on the table. I better pick it up.
Comment by Madison Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 1:08 pm
I may be remembering this wrong - but IIRC, one big problem is that it takes 4-6 weeks to get someone hired in many union covered positions. People who are retiring only have to give 2 weeks notice. I personally know of 2 different people who are retiring May 31st, and are immediately going to be hired back on a 75 day contract just so they can train their own replacements! This is a direct consequence of our low staffing levels because of attrition, but still.
Also, that doesn’t even cover the jobs you have to fill with “seniority hires”. Someone will retire, but you almost always have to give the job to the most senior union member that applies for it (unless there is definitive proof they are least qualified - if not, you get a union greivance). Now, with the “senior” applicant bumping his/her pension amount because of higher pay in the new position, they then retire 12 months later and you have to start all over again.
The State can’t always just hire a young person directly into a union posistion they want to fill. Many times you have to shuffle many upper-level people around to hire a young person at low-level jobs. It’s not like a school, where you can have a tenured teacher retire and hire a young student teacher as a cheaper replacement - immediately saving money.
Comment by Lester Holt's Mustache Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 1:13 pm
Except - why can’t the state be the same - or at least try? Why does it take so long to announce vacancies, interview candidates and offer the job to the most-qualified person? And why should it take so long to “train” someone? Why does the most-qualified applicant need that much “training” in the first place? The reason of “It just can’t be done!” is unacceptable.
Overburdened - in a job market in which many qualified persons are looking for work all over the state, I think you are underselling the possibility of the U of I or a large state agency to attract top-shelf talent who can come and nearly readily replace recent retirees (how’s that for alliteration?!). Workers are mobile.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 1:15 pm
=== If there is a pension savings goal ===
Good point, Schnorf. If there is a concrete goal, I don’t know what it is.
Do you? Does anyone?
Its kinda tough to get everyone to agree on a path forward if no one can agree on the destination.
To that point, I haven’t heard anyone suggest what the plan is to “use” all of the pension savings we’re supposedly generating.
Are we gonna fully fund schools? Restore all the cuts to human services? Pay off our backlogged bills?
As far as I know, we’re creating a $1 billion slush fund for Quinn and others to spend after the election.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 1:17 pm
Team Sleep -
Because that is what is in the current AFSCME contract. The State signed it. Whether the CMS negotiators try to change it for this next contract - which I beleive will not affect the massive amount of people retiring May 31st - is another topic all together.
Comment by Lester Holt's Mustache Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 1:23 pm
–Many are young enough and skilled enough to retire at the State, collect a pension, and then work in the private sector.–
Regardless of today’s circumstances, if you can do that, why wouldn’t you?
–The brain drain and operational disruption will be real and felt. I am losing 3 tiers of management above me and half my section. Am I suppose to start sending my time off slips to the agency director?–
The mystery of who to send time-off slips to might not be the best illustration of the perils of “brain drain.”
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 1:34 pm
They’re trying to stop the big exodus by hitting the retirees. Since both groups are talking a hit, they’ll argue that it makes more economic sense to stay. The courts will be busy in a little while.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 1:40 pm
Lester, Many people are NOT going to give 2 weeks, they are waiting to see what happens. Many will give it at the last minute based on what the Legislature puts on the bill. I am hoping they post it Monday. June 1 could be a bad day.
Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 1:40 pm
Except,
Those large employers shed employees because they are losing customers. That’s not the case here, if anything state agencies have increased their numbers of customers.
Comment by JT11505 Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 2:13 pm
Lester, given that, I would posit the question as to whether the non-economic portions of a state & union CBA - job posting, hiring times/requirements, training, etc. - would be covered by the State Constitution should Quinn seek to adjust them mid-contract. After all, you are not infringing upon a worker’s pension or healthcare by speeding up the hiring and training processes. Granted, it may impact pay raises, but the immediate impact would have nothing to do with anyone’s fringe benefits. And if current union folks have an issue with taking on too much work done by those who have retired, I would hope they would encourage their stewards and leadership to push for the hiring of new blood.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 2:46 pm
If you could retire and still find work in the private sector why continue to work for the State?
I think people underestimate how committed some workers are to public service. They will stay with the State for a long time knowing they provide a needed service. It is just when it starts to be overwhelmingly against them that a tough decision needs to be made. I prefer the private sector myself but from a short time working at the State I met many people that felt public service was more than just a job.
Comment by Observer of the State Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 2:58 pm
Speaking as someone who left the State and fell into the not-always-welcoming arms of the private sector — it may not be as easy to find another job with similar pay and benefits. My current job pays a good amount more than my old one did, but the costs for health/dental insurance, 401k and other stuff means that my takehome is about the same. I’m not crabbing — I’m lucky to have a good job. But don’t be so sure that a similar job is waiting on the other side of the fence, especially in these times.
Comment by soccermom Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 3:08 pm
Heard a rumor that legislation will be written to apply to everyone who still working on June 1 to capture people who retire at end of June try to avoid any changes. Anyone heard anything to correspond w/ the May 31st comment earlier?
Comment by D.P. Gumby Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 3:51 pm
State workers he been talking for months about retiring before June 1st so not to be covered or uncovered by the lack of a employment contract. I received a call first thing this morning from someone who is retiring immediately … in panic.
Comment by gg Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 4:06 pm
== Bye. ==
Rich, this type comment is one of the reasons teachers are so angry about this issue. It shows a lack of respect for people who have given decades of service. One of the largest factors on classroom achievement is consistency of a school staff. Turnover lowers achievement. If a teacher with 30+ years leaves, you can’t replace the effect such a teacher has not only in their classroom, but also on their grade level team and their school community in general. A large exodus of teachers from the classroom robs students of decades of experience, and whole schools of the insights and long term vision that no amount of youthful enthusiasm can replace.
Comment by MiC Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 4:16 pm
Sleep - to be honest, I have no clue. I would assume that much of the next contract would just be copied language from the current contract.
My bet is that the negotiators for CMS are too focused on cutting the State’s economic impact (cola/pension/healthcare) to spend much time worrying about language in the HR section.
Unfortunately, my guess is also that Henry Baer off AFSCME is too focused on making himself all red-faced, playing it up for the crowd, and trying to make himself look good for the union reps to bring this up. If he would shut up about how unfair life is for poor AFSCME members for 5 seconds, maybe they could work something out. You know, like making it easier on everyone to get new AFSCME members who can fill these soon-to-be open positions.
Comment by Lester Holt's Mustache Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 4:20 pm
A number in my agency are scrambling to get out ASAP. Those of you out there who think that they will easily be replaced lack understanding of the system. Many of us have advanced degrees and years of experience in the private sector before accepting a position with the state. 15 years ago, I was recruited and encouraged to apply for my position. We don’t all push brooms or paper. The inefficiencies due to the blago years will be much worse when those who understand the ” work-arounds” leave. Won’t be long till the next ”How could this tragedy have happened” headline appears. No doubt some lower level lazy state union employee will be blamed.
Comment by Johnnie F. Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 4:38 pm
I called the 2 retirement systems I’ve invested in regarding retirement dates. The reason everyone is leaving May 31 is because if you retire at any time during June, your actual retirement effective date will be July 1 and therefore under the terms of the new contract.
Comment by Former Merit Comp Slave Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 4:52 pm
Didn’t Malcolm Weems send a memo out stating that the reforms would not take effect until Jan. 1? He is a pretty trustworthy guy so I will take him at his word.
Comment by Raising Kane Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 4:57 pm
— The mystery of who to send time-off slips to might not be the best illustration of the perils of “brain drain.” —
That was meant to be a quip, not an illustration. An illustration would be getting your FOID card 2 years after applying for it.
Comment by Lucky than Good Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 4:59 pm
Thanks all. This doesn’t appear to have an impact for State University Retirement System, which is where my interest (and principle) is. But the issue was causing further frenzied anxiety.
Comment by D.P. Gumby Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 5:02 pm
Raising Kane - You are putting a lot of faith in someone that probably isn’t involved in the details of the negotiations.
If they stamp an “effective immediately” date on it and send it to the Gov and he signs quickly, a lot of people could be roped in.
Comment by Choice? Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 5:11 pm
The small agency I deal with has roughly 70 people, almost 20% of whom are “Rule of 85″ ready. These are the 20-35 year people with the vast majority of the institutional knowledge and memory.
It is a niche field, not pre-trained in any academic setting, where it takes about 2 years to start to know what one is doing and 4 years to approach competence (if mentored well by one of the good experienced people).
a stampede to the exits there will be severely debilitating to agency function - as there aren’t hordes of qualified people waiting to be hired, and young grads - even very bright ones - will have a long learning curve to get rolling.
Comment by titan Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 5:14 pm
If the Director of CMS sent a letter to all state workers telling them not to rush to retire because the effective date of the bill would be Jan. 1. And, as a result, eligible employees do not retire and are financially penalized, there would be a clear cause of action for litigation. So, I dont think employees should rush to the door.
Comment by Raising Kane Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 5:19 pm
The Director of CMS sent a letter to all state workers telling them “any chnges will LIKELY not go into effect before Jan. 1, 2013″.
Comment by Amused One Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 5:29 pm
It’s still a representation.
Comment by Raising Kane Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 5:35 pm
Correct Amused One. Likely Not is what it said. I’ve got my retirement paperwork ready for May 31.
Comment by Wow Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 5:46 pm
July 1 is not necessarily going to be the effective date of the new union contract. The current contract was not ratified until well beyond the June 30th expiration of the past contract. Check the contract book, it is dated effective September 25, 2008.
Comment by Ready To Get Out Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 6:19 pm
Training for new hires? In corporate it exists yes but it doesnt at the state bc few areas have had a new hire in ages. Haha. Look for a ton of people to leave, the sun to rise anyway, and 75 day contracts as the new version of old classification spsa unofgicially
new
Comment by Peter Snarker Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 7:04 pm
A friend of mine works for the Dept. on Aging. He said his estimate is that a very, very large portion of the entire Agency will be gone by July 1. He said that after 25+ years he’s throwing in the towel and retiring by July 1. He’s tired of being a pawn.
No one trusts the Union to represent them anymore. They said not a word when Madigan rushed through the bill to screw the retirees on their insurance. No one trusts the Madigan-led legislature - House and Senate both. No one in he-”double toothpicks” trusts Quinn.
It appears that there will be a very large exodus over the next 60 days. Rich says “bye”. I say “good luck” keeping the technological parts of the State up and running. As for hiring a new group of college graduates, who in their right mind would want to start a career with the State after watching this circus?
If all of these people leave, then Quinn just made the Pension funding problem exponentially worse. Lots more $$$ going out than coming in to the pension system. Maybe that was his plan. But then there will be that ‘ol Constitution thingy that he just can’t get around.
Those still working are thinking that those already retired will be given by the courts what was promised to them regarding insurance and cost-of-living raises, etc. So, those who can retire will retire. 4,000 is a very low number.
Most of you on this blog might not like it, but the courts will uphold the contracts made with people when they retired. And the State will have to live with it.
Why aren’t you all as mad at the Legislature for putting the State in this mess as you are the retired people who just want what they were promised - and what the state constitution guarantees them?
Dear God, where do we find Governors like Quinn? Is anyone but me bothered about living in a State that is the laughing stock of the nation?
Comment by Jechislo Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 7:11 pm
==It’s still a representation.==
By a person with absolutely no authority to bind the state. And no matter how honest he might be, he’s working for a bunch that couldn’t keep a promise if their mothers were looking over their shoulders.
Comment by anon Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 7:20 pm
Have you seen the unemployment numbers for recent college grads? They’ll line up for openings. But c’mon, think in terms of this blog. Rich retires and is replaced by a new grad in journalism. Think we’d notice any difference? Hells yes, and so will the state.
Comment by Peter Snarker Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 7:37 pm
–As for hiring a new group of college graduates, who in their right mind would want to start a career with the State after watching this circus?–
Perhaps those who would like the security of 25-plus years with the same employer. Not a lot of that going around these days outside of government.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 7:38 pm
Wordslinger - Yeah, you’re probably right. They’ll just put in 4 or 5 years and get the State-provided training and experience needed to get a “real job”.
Comment by Jechislo Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 7:46 pm
–They’ll just put in 4 or 5 years and get the State-provided training and experience needed to get a “real job”.–
Happens all the time, everywhere, in going concerns.
–Rich retires and is replaced by a new grad in journalism.–
He’ll have to buy him out first, like any other business.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 7:48 pm
After all the downsizings and layoffs we went thru at my agency over the last 12 years, I wouldn’t count on my “good government job” as lasting 25 plus years. Not in Illinois.
Comment by Emily Booth Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 8:00 pm
Training? Haven’t you heard? There’s no training. Too expensive. As the trainers left one by one, they were not replaced. It’s DIY training and it’s been like this since 2000.
Comment by Emily Booth Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 8:02 pm
Word - You missed my point. All business has turn-over, usually more so than the state, much more so. That’s the problem - no succession plans, no training systems. Just some dude who has been in the position likely 3 decades. The middle-age demographic has been hollowed out long ago bc as you point out yourself above, they’ve left already. So it is a problem. But also an opportunity.
Comment by Peter Snarker Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 8:11 pm
Emily - exactly. You get it. There hasnt been a need for training in any systemic manner in eons. It doesnt exist. The GA kicked the pension issue down the road for a long time and now it’s come to a head.
Similarly, if an organization ignores its HR and talent for years, eventually there are consequences. That goes for private sector or govt
Comment by Peter Snarker Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 8:17 pm
Rich, you’re usually more insightful.Doesn’t requiring someone to wait five years or until age 67 in order to get a substantially reduced COLA from the current one effectively raise the retirement age?
Comment by truthteller Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 9:07 pm
Director said “likely not take effect until Jan” - key word is likely.
Governor Quinn, in a follow up speech to his announcement of what he wanted to do to the retirement rules, said we would all have plenty of time to make a considered decision - that we should not immediatly retire.
The Governor’s words would seem to be a promise - not Like Weem’s commentary. But, a promise from a politician is worth what?
Comment by Long Term State Employee Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 9:23 pm
The “public aid” offices are down to staffing levels where program integrity is heading for failure and most likely it will fail sooner than later. Little to no staff has been hired for these offices for years while at the same time the number of recepients of medicaid and food stamps has climbed dramatically. If replacement staff was hired tomorrow (and it will not be) it takes at least a year for a new hire to be able to learn to do the job with the antique computer systems and the current conglomeration of policies and procedures that there are for each type of benefit program. If you think this is overstated take a look at the policy manual on the State website. In its previous paper form it used to be a book about 5 feet wide. When program integrity fails folks will be on the 6pm news with their kids wondering how and when they will get their food stamps, all heck will erupt and it will not be an easy fix. To just say “bye” to more of these workers in my opinion shows a lack of understanding of these realities.
Comment by Hear me now and believe me later Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 9:49 pm
rich FU and BYE
Comment by FU Thursday, May 24, 12 @ 9:52 pm