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.
Hello All,
Was hoping someobody could confirm whether or not the state has changed their benefit plan for hires after 1/1/2021. I was thinking about applying for some state jobs but a friend mentioned that they are not providing medical retiree benefits anymore. Does anybody know if this is accurate? This was one of my main motivators for applying. Trying to find something that will provide free or low cost health insurance when retired. I've got about 10 years to go. Thanks!
Previously it was fully paid with 20 years service, and I believe 50% funded after 10 years of service. That's now gone if you didn't start before Jan 1 2021.
The current NC State Treasurer is a bit of a backwater dolt who has failed at every goal he's attempted, so I guess this is the best they could come up with after his other attempts at reducing health care costs failed miserably. The net result is that they became infinitely less attractive as an employer. This means they will have to pay more in salary to replace, and that means salaries for existing employees will need to be pulled up to match, which will offset any perceived savings.
Previously it was fully paid with 20 years service, and I believe 50% funded after 10 years of service. That's now gone if you didn't start before Jan 1 2021.
It used to be FIVE years for full benefits, until they realized people were retiring from other jobs, working 5 years for the state, and then getting state pension (funded by payroll deductions) and benes forever. It was some time around 2007 that the 5 was bumped up to 20, which I found pretty extreme (I was in the "5" window, thank goodness). I agree that if they're getting rid of them altogether, they will lose a LOT of applicants in the future. You can thank our GOP legislature who believe cutting costs is always the best option.
The net result is that they became infinitely less attractive as an employer. This means they will have to pay more in salary to replace, and that means salaries for existing employees will need to be pulled up to match, which will offset any perceived savings.
I am a 32-year state employee. No way will existing salaries be pulled up to match, at least in the departments I've worked for.
I am a 32-year state employee. No way will existing salaries be pulled up to match, at least in the departments I've worked for.
The loss of morale and turnover and general upheaval that would result if long-time employees are suddenly watching new hires make substantially more would force this to occur. It wouldn't be a department or agency level decision, it would come from OSHR and apply to all of them, probably in the form of a reclassification effort or similar.
It used to be FIVE years for full benefits, until they realized people were retiring from other jobs, working 5 years for the state, and then getting state pension (funded by payroll deductions) and benes forever. It was some time around 2007 that the 5 was bumped up to 20, which I found pretty extreme (I was in the "5" window, thank goodness). I agree that if they're getting rid of them altogether, they will lose a LOT of applicants in the future. You can thank our GOP legislature who believe cutting costs is always the best option.
I believe when they moved from 5 to 20 was in October 2006. I started with the state in the Spring 2007, so missed that window by months. I wound up doing 13 years and leaving. So I suppose I can at least get my medical at 50%, but that might not be too much better than what I can get on the private market, but who knows what that will look like in 20-25 years anyway.
Either way, I couldn't work one more day for the State, so I'm not too concerned. I'm making more money and have much more professional freedom currently. My wife and I are aggressively saving for retirement and retirement healthcare by maxing out our 401k's and her HSA account (for the family). We don't plan on spending a dime of the HSA investment until we're both retired in 20+ years.
The loss of morale and turnover and general upheaval that would result if long-time employees are suddenly watching new hires make substantially more would force this to occur. It wouldn't be a department or agency level decision, it would come from OSHR and apply to all of them, probably in the form of a reclassification effort or similar.
This already happens when newly created positions pay a modern salary while you still have older positions getting the same paltry salary they had when they were created 15 years ago.
The loss of morale and turnover and general upheaval that would result if long-time employees are suddenly watching new hires make substantially more would force this to occur. It wouldn't be a department or agency level decision, it would come from OSHR and apply to all of them, probably in the form of a reclassification effort or similar.
Already happens. My old department (not gonna say who, going to retire soon and want to keep my job until then!) upped the starting salary for my job classification by around $4k. I was making $200/year more than that amount (been in the job over 11 years), and new hires came in making only $200 less than me. Existing employees making less than the new minimum got raises to bring them up. I got squat. I had to leave a job I liked to get any money.
Departments set their minimum hiring rate. My old department even with the increase they did still pays less than other departments for the same job classification.
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.