Isn't it the public sectors turn to take a hit? (insurance, retirement plan)

[cvap]

Everyone I know has given up something in this downturn, from 20% paycuts to reduced hours etc.
As soon as a governor of any state talks about cuts the TV fills up with ads saying don't touch the state budgit or our kids and elderly will suffer.
How about tearing up their contracts just like they're gonna tear up AIG's employees contracts. How about tearing up UAW and teamsters contracts too. They are all getting tax dollars.
Once your retired you should be on your own, just like the private sector.
Does anyone agree?

[texdav]

Well I relly doubt teh courts are going to let them tearup the contrcts;politicvans are just playing to the madening crowd. There are already public workers being layed off. California just annouced thousands of teachers being layed off accord to reports.Do you really believe that they didn't know there were contrcts that had to be honored? The way to break contrcts is bankrupsy or going to courts which can take years to fainally settle and milions in cost.As far as on your own that would mean that they would ahve to be compensated at much higher rates just as the public sector.How about the police;fire and other public servises being bill driect to the indivdual like the private sector.Revenues would be increased tremendously and people that use the services would pay. Think like sewer lines;street frontage and others could be finances by teh indivduals instead of government.That way more people would be on their own.

[sunsprit]

Big misconception posted above about "honoring" the CA teacher's contracts and layoffs ... those are annual employment contracts, with no guarantee of renewal. My understanding is that CA is upping the minimum class size to 36 students per teacher ... and if a class doesn't have 36 qualified students (for example, an advanced placement or language class, etc), then it will not be scheduled; another teacher may have to have more students per class to take up the load.

CA's teaching contracts require the school districts to notify teachers at this time of the year about their non-renewal for the next school year. In actual practice, this has happened to many teachers every year for years, but by the time the next school year comes around, the teachers are offerred another contract due to the student enrollment levels.

IMO, what needs to happen is a lot of municpal workers need to be "let go", and their jobs outsourced to for-profit companies. Janitorial services, building maintenance, street cleaning & repairs ... many of these tasks are performed very inefficiently in-house, as well as fleet maintenance and groundskeeping services.

For example, I used to have an associate who got a job at a major Fire Department fleet garage. Being the junior tech of the group, he got the "grunt" work of doing stuff like routine services on the Fleet cars, and did a lot of brake jobs. The first time that he did a complete brake job on a car in less than a morning, he was taken out back ... literally ... and had it "explained" to him by his union brother municipal techs that he was NOT to perform a brake job on a car in less than a FULL DAY of work. The attitude was that it was impossible to do a "safe" and "proper" brake job on a car in less than a day, and that was the union position on the matter. So my former tech used to head out for hours every time he had a brake job to "road test" the workmanship. I saw more of him when he was a Fire Dept service tech at my shop than I did when I worked with him in the same shop previously.

Any of you who've had a "brake job" done by a reasonably competent shop know it doesn't take a tech a day to do a "full" brake job on the fleet cars that the fire dept's drive. A decent tech can replace rotors and loaded calipers and bleed the system fairly quickly ... and does so when there is a profit/employment incentive to be productive. And the retail shop isn't cutting corners on safety, either. There's simply too much at stake in today's ligitigious society to let improper work out the door. You'll find out when you take your car in to one of the mass marketers for brake work with a "come-on" discount cheapie price to hang new friction materials on your car ... it will need rotors and hardware and calipers and other stuff to be done properly so they can call it "safe" and "warrant" their work. You will rarely get out the door for the advertised minimum cost ... that's their "gimmick" in marketing.

I agree that once we're retired, we should be "on our own". But there is a problem with that right now ... the gov't has been confiscating a substantial portion of my self-employed earnings for over 40 years, with a promise to give me a future retirement benefit package. I believe I could have invested that money much better for a better return all these years ... if the other investments I made are any indicator, I could have put even more into them and had a bigger nest egg today. I'm not looking to my SS to be the main source of my income in the future, especially where it's bankrupt with entitlements to folks who haven't paid in to the system.

On other fronts ... no, we shouldn't cancel UAW contracts due to gov't bail-out money. We shouldn't have bailed out the companies. We should have allowed the companies with excessive labor costs that were failing to fail, restructure, downsize, go bankrupt, etc., and let the chips fall where they may for all the employees. Some would have to get other jobs, doing other manufacturing or other work entirely. Just ask the folks who made big mainframe computers, or buggy whips, or hand operated vacuum cleaners ....

[texdav]

Basically uo have a contrct and the benefits are part of your compoensation. After you retire its controlled by a independent board and no government funding. Private industries like the auot unions are having a problem because they have under funded their retirement systems in order to pay the high retirement cost in that industry.For example the retirement funds in my city when they work is entriely paid by the employeee. The city sets aside funds and invest in very conservative investments. the when the empoyeee retires they contribute out of this fund into the retirement plan that they do not control.Many times the retirement fund makes more than it declared in interest so they distribute additional chacks at the end of the year.Once retired the city doesn't pay any more but contributes to the insurance by paying part.Many private do the same thing and other do matching 401k. City emplyeees here also pay into social, security has they voted to long ago. Some local and state employees elected not to long ago as the courts allowed.