Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-11-2016, 09:50 AM
 
4,285 posts, read 10,731,320 times
Reputation: 3809

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue biker View Post
In a sense the current pension is like a 401k with a match, only the State hasn't kicked in their side of the match. What makes you think they'd "match" a 401k? They'd claim a budget shortfall again and say they'll make it up later. Like they've been doing since Whitman was in office.
401k matches from the employer are done every 2 weeks when the employee gets paid. Very easy to predict how much they are going to owe for a 401k match program every year. Once the state makes the contribution and its in the employees account, that's it. Repeat until they retire, get a new job, whatever.

Pensions are paid out years later and are dependent upon investment returns which can be highly variable and difficult to predict.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-11-2016, 01:35 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,524,902 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by JERSEY MAN View Post
Unfortunately that's the problem. The employees have and always held up their end of the problem but the current administration and prior ones all the way back to Whitman do what they want to and don't hold up their end. Govt. pensions and Social security the employees have the money taken out automatically from the checks.
what have they done to hold up their end of the bargain? their job just like every other person that works? contributions that are lower than anyone in the private sector with benefits that are more generous? people always use that same line but it means absolutely nothing. the person "negotiating" on behalf of the taxpayer isnt properly representing the taxpayer and they will generally be gone before their deal works itself out. the taxpayers shouldnt be on the hook any more than the politician that has long since left the job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2016, 03:35 PM
 
Location: Wayne,NJ
1,352 posts, read 1,521,893 times
Reputation: 1833
Quote:
Originally Posted by GiantRutgersfan View Post
401k matches from the employer are done every 2 weeks when the employee gets paid. Very easy to predict how much they are going to owe for a 401k match program every year. Once the state makes the contribution and its in the employees account, that's it. Repeat until they retire, get a new job, whatever.

Pensions are paid out years later and are dependent upon investment returns which can be highly variable and difficult to predict.
Again, what makes you think the state would keep up their end of the "match" on a biweekly basis?
With the current state pension plan, monies from the employee go into an account and is the employees money as it was deducted from their checks. I don't know what sort of basis the State was supposed to contribute, (monthly, annually, whatever), but the State has been shorting or not making any contributions to keep the budget better balanced. Yes this has gone on for over 20yrs, CC negotiated an agreement with the State workers, the workers increased their contributions, but when it came time for the State to pay what CC negotiated he argued it was "unconstitutional". I admit I am not a constitutional scholar, but if the State not being held to their part of the agreement, why should the workers be held to theirs?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
what have they done to hold up their end of the bargain? their job just like every other person that works? contributions that are lower than anyone in the private sector with benefits that are more generous? people always use that same line but it means absolutely nothing. the person "negotiating" on behalf of the taxpayer isnt properly representing the taxpayer and they will generally be gone before their deal works itself out. the taxpayers shouldnt be on the hook any more than the politician that has long since left the job.
Workers in bargaining units in the private sector often don't pay contributions to their benefits. Actually 25-30yrs ago no one contributed, then employers slowly started deducting for health benefits. In a sense a pay cut. If you're in the 1% this doesn't matter but otherwise their has been this slow erosion of pensions and benefits for working people. Funny how wages for the 1% have gone up 800% while the average working person's wage has gone up 18%,

The state employees have held up their end of the bargain by paying their portion of the contributions from paycheck 1, (if you have a job subject the the Public Employees Retirement System the take additional contributions to cover a shortfall after a probationary period.) Then after the 2011 "scam" bs'ed in by CC they've been paying the increased contributions the employees agreed to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2016, 06:51 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,524,902 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue biker View Post
Workers in bargaining units in the private sector often don't pay contributions to their benefits. Actually 25-30yrs ago no one contributed, then employers slowly started deducting for health benefits. In a sense a pay cut. If you're in the 1% this doesn't matter but otherwise their has been this slow erosion of pensions and benefits for working people. Funny how wages for the 1% have gone up 800% while the average working person's wage has gone up 18%,

The state employees have held up their end of the bargain by paying their portion of the contributions from paycheck 1, (if you have a job subject the the Public Employees Retirement System the take additional contributions to cover a shortfall after a probationary period.) Then after the 2011 "scam" bs'ed in by CC they've been paying the increased contributions the employees agreed to.
that isnt relevant to the discussion.

every employee is holding up their end of the bargain. public workers certainly dont hold it up any more than anyone else. they dont deserve better than their private sector counterpart.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2016, 09:00 PM
 
Location: Wayne,NJ
1,352 posts, read 1,521,893 times
Reputation: 1833
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
that isnt relevant to the discussion.

every employee is holding up their end of the bargain. public workers certainly dont hold it up any more than anyone else. they dont deserve better than their private sector counterpart.
They don't "deserve" better than their private sector counterpart. They DO deserve what they NEGOTIATED FOR!
Suppose 20 some years ago, you take a job, they pay isn't that great but the benefits are very good, there's job security and a decent pension at the end. Then you're starting to get to the end and wait, wait, your employer wants to renege on the bargain.
You're the snow plow driver, or the school custodian, or a cop. You've gone to work all kinds of hours, all kinds of weather, sometimes you get comp time instead of OT, when you've been out 20+ hrs plowing snow, or there's a flood. That's OK though, because it goes with the job, but there's that pension at the end........ Then they pull the rug out, I think Christie Whitman (who's one of the 1%) should PAY BACK the salary she received as Gov. I wonder what she's gonna get as a pension??? Think she's gonna refuse it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2016, 05:25 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,524,902 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue biker View Post
They don't "deserve" better than their private sector counterpart. They DO deserve what they NEGOTIATED FOR!
no they do not. as the financial situation of the employer changes, deals can change. that is what happens in the private sector and nobody blinks an eye. but in the public sector "oh we did our part! you pay what you promised!" that is abuse of the taxpayer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2016, 07:39 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
11,299 posts, read 16,599,958 times
Reputation: 13291
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
no they do not. as the financial situation of the employer changes, deals can change. that is what happens in the private sector and nobody blinks an eye. but in the public sector "oh we did our part! you pay what you promised!" that is abuse of the taxpayer.
Agreed. My defined pension was frozen a number of years ago to where I would not accrual anymore pension rights. So what did I do since there was no union....looked around and changed jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2016, 08:21 PM
 
2,499 posts, read 2,617,763 times
Reputation: 1789
Camara did you contribute to your pension or was it fully paid by the company
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2016, 09:14 PM
 
Location: Wayne,NJ
1,352 posts, read 1,521,893 times
Reputation: 1833
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
no they do not. as the financial situation of the employer changes, deals can change. that is what happens in the private sector and nobody blinks an eye. but in the public sector "oh we did our part! you pay what you promised!" that is abuse of the taxpayer.
To use Verizon as an example, the employer tried to cut benefits and pension while making profits of $1billion a month. While they might have said it's the wireless network, when you make a cell phone call the signal goes to the closest tower and then on a landline to either the receiving tower nearest the receiving phone or landline phone. Meanwhile the CEO of Verizon makes $12million+ per year. It's like the Congressman who complained $174000 (or whatever) wasn't enough. I don't see how this is "abuse of the taxpayer". Is it abuse of the electricity user when their rates go up?
State employees have been paying their share all along, the State stopped (so Christie Whitman could honor her promise to lower taxes) NOW the fund is in peril, everyone says it's the greedy workers. NO it's the lying sack of sh*t politicians!!!! (Whitman, McGreevey,Corzine, and now Christie). CC's the worst one of all for working out an agreement that he could brag about the reneging on the deal.
As I said before, you can bet Whitman will (if she hasn't started already) collect whatever she can get in pensions from the state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2016, 05:23 AM
 
2,499 posts, read 2,617,763 times
Reputation: 1789
When I was hired in 1980 there was no union. I was told I must contribute to the pension based on my employee contract- I could not opt out. I was also told that this contract required me to contribute and as a result I would receive a % of my salary over the number of years I worked. In fact you were given a booklet outlining all of the terms.


Like any contract neither party has a unilateral right to change the terms. A union has no right to agree to changes on my behalf.


I was in essence purchasing a product from my employer. If I never contributed and the pension was fully paid by the employer they would have been free to change it. That is why private employers are able to end or change pensions- they are non-contributory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top