[auggie22]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

I do not pay attention to any thing Yankee policy institute has to say or print. They are just a local version of Fox news and/or Americans for Prosperity.

But even if I go with their data diet and healthy living isn't going to save anything. You can't diet yourself against brain cancer.

The three percent raise is still a pay cut since it wouldn;t cover the rise in inflation during the same time.
Inflation is 2-3% every year, so the union still effectively lost 9-12% in salary over five years. If healthcare went up they lost money there too.

I received bigger raises than that nearly every year I've been in the private work force. I only had one year where my raise was 1%.

I wouldn't be seeking that union reps advice and if he thinks this negotiation was successful I would still slap him in the face.

You misunderstood - that is a 3% annual raise in 3 of the first five years of the agreement, then annually for the last 5. Over a 10 year period that is in excess of inflation. Someone in the private sector would take that deal 10 times out of 10.

The actual article is a collection of quotes taken from a speech that the chief union negotiator gave to the state employee union membership - it is not a YP editorial.

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by auggie22

You misunderstood - that is a 3% annual raise in 3 of the first five years of the agreement, then annually for the last 5. Over a 10 year period that is in excess of inflation. Someone in the private sector would take that deal 10 times out of 10.


The actual article is a collection of quotes taken from a speech that the chief union negotiator gave to the state employee union membership - it is not a YP editorial.

I would be insulted with small raises like that especially over a 10 year period and seek a new employer.


IF that info is correct the union would break even or maybe beat inflation by 2-4% after 10 years. That is a dog of a deal. I have done much better in private sector in the last ten years



Inflation is 2-4% every year. The rates are easy enough to look up so I'm not going to write them down here.

[auggie22]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

I would be insulted with small raises like that especially over a 10 year period and seek a new employer.


IF that info is correct the union would break even or maybe beat inflation by 2-4% after 10 years. That is a dog of a deal. I have done much better in private sector in the last ten years



Inflation is 2-4% every year. The rates are easy enough to look up so I'm not going to write them down here.

Inflation is historically (last 30 years) just a nudge over 2%. If you are seeing 2.5% wage growth over 10 years for the same role ( not a promotion ) then you are killing it.

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

I already know that, my and wife's IRA are in VAnguard index funds with fees which are lower or equal to hedge fund fees. The point is - currently hedge funds receive zero fees because they do not manage any pension funds to my knowledge. That is the prize here.


How much money is in Ct's pension funds ? I dont know but it must be in the billions.

Most pension plans have a portion of their assets allocated to hedge funds, including CT's. Its fairly standard.

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

Most pension plans have a portion of their assets allocated to hedge funds, including CT's. Its fairly standard.

I would have to see a source for that, I doubt that is true. Hedge funds are too risky, and there may be statutory rules regarding investment risks for pension funds.



For example, in the insurance industry there are statutory rules that state how much risk an investment fund/account can take. These are called "separate accounts."



Mutual funds also have similar rules that are stated in their prospectus'. Such as, no more than 10% of the funds investments can be invested in "junk bonds" as one example.



Most hedge funds "pre qualify" their shareholders. In the industry they are called "qualified investors" they also sign a disclosure stating something to the effect "I realize this is risky and may lose all monies invested, additionally if I lose all the funds it will not result in a hard ship on me."


There's also minimum investment amounts, minimum investment time, and max withdrawal rules.


I don't think a pension fund would mess with all of that. I personally have seen a hedge fund close in only three months because they took heavy loses during that time and the shareholders decided to bail.

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by auggie22

Inflation is historically (last 30 years) just a nudge over 2%. If you are seeing 2.5% wage growth over 10 years for the same role ( not a promotion ) then you are killing it.

If you are still including inflation that;s only 5% over ten years, that is a joke and the rise in health insurance premiums will make it even worse.

If you are saying they are only going to "net 2.5%" after including inflation that is not only a joke, but an insult.

Either way doesn't look good to me and I don't see how the union won if that is what they negotiated.



That is another win for Malloy the DINO.

[auggie22]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

If you are still including inflation that;s only 5% over ten years, that is a joke and the rise in health insurance premiums will make it even worse.


If you are saying they are only going to "net 2.5%" after including inflation that is not only a joke, but an insult.


Either way doesn't look good to me and I don't see how the union won if that is what they negotiated.

Then I will respectfully say that you are out of touch with what is happening in a mature industry. I work in Fintech, and to see sustained real wage growth ( in excess of inflation ) over an extended period in the same role ( not a promotion ) is incredibly rare. I would personally take real wage growth of .5% a year for ten years and be over the moon.

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

I would have to see a source for that, I doubt that is true. Hedge funds are too risky, and there may be statutory rules regarding investment risks for pension funds.



For example, in the insurance industry there are statutory rules that state how much risk an investment fund/account can take. These are called "separate accounts."



Mutual funds also have similar rules that are stated in their prospectus'. Such as, no more than 10% of the funds investments can be invested in "junk bonds" as one example.



Most hedge funds "pre qualify" their shareholders. In the industry they are called "qualified investors" they also sign a disclosure stating something to the effect "I realize this is risky and may lose all monies invested, additionally if I lose all the funds it will not result in a hard ship on me."


There's also minimum investment amounts, minimum investment time, and max withdrawal rules.


I don't think a pension fund would mess with all of that. I personally have seen a hedge fund close in only three months because they took heavy loses during that time and the shareholders decided to bail.

Quit while you're ahead. You really don't know what you're talking about.
https://www.ott.ct.gov/pensiondocs/2017CIFCAFR.pdf
Page 60.

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

Quit while you're ahead. You really don't know what you're talking about.
https://www.ott.ct.gov/pensiondocs/2017CIFCAFR.pdf
Page 60.

Trust me I know what I'm talking about. I read page 60 and the AIF alternative investment fund does not say what percentage is invested in hedge funds. It also states that the return was 8.5% but during the same time the S&P returned 11%.
The return if 8.5% in the AIF and is also not allocated among the three investment buckets. The hedge funds could have had a lose and the other two buckets covered their loses. The fact you dont see this as an issue and tells us how much you do not know.



So not only is teh pension funds losing on returns in comparison to the S&P 500 index they are paying higher mgmt fees. That is a loser.

I can go on and on for days weeks or even years on this subject.

I worked with hedge funds before I never saw any pension funds invested in them. That doesnt' mean it isn't possible but without the percent of funds invested that data is worthless.

The state has billions of dollars in its pensions. If one perecnt was invested in hedge funds that woudn't surprise me.

Thank you for telling me my 25yrs of experience in tax and accounting is worthless though. I did go to a public university so maybe that's the issue.

[davwve]

84.7% or $1,717,799,736 of the AIF (Alternative Investment Fund) is held in fund of funds.


For context, the AIF is approx. 6.22% of the CRPTF's (CT Retirement Plans and Trust Funds) total FV.