First most CA Public Employees are exempt from SS like teachers are in many states. There are 1000s of agencies in CA at all government levels. It seems each has its own contribution and they all seem to pay into the various pension funds. How anyone keeps track is beyond me. It looks like they are as a group under funded by about 27%. Or are 73% funded, whichever way you like it. The tax payers are on the hook for the difference. SACBEE is a VERY LIBERAL RAG so I don't know how true these figures are.
California's state-managed public employee pension funds took in $33.8 billion from employer and employee contributions in 2012 and paid out $28.2 billion in benefits to 874,734 retirees, according to a new Census Bureau report.
There are five state-managed pension funds but the two biggest, the California Public Employees Retirement System and the State Teachers Retirement System, account for all but a fraction of their overall economic activity.
Collectively, the five held $430.2 billion in assets of various kinds - corporate stocks being the largest single bloc at $177 billion -- in 2012 but had $592.2 billion in calculated obligations for 1.9 million public employee members of the systems, the report said.
Investment earnings in 2012 were just under $14 billion, while employees contributed $6.2 billion and state and local governments kicked in another $13.7 billion.
I don't understand a lot of this stuff. Why can state and city employees go on strike when federal ones can't? Also, why do states, counties and cities give in so much? I mean seriously, when pilots walk off on strike they are usually forced by injunction to go back on the job. Can't tell me police, fire, teachers, etc. aren't more critical to our country than airline pilots.
Well it's understandable. With police, you are paying people to beat up bad guys on your behalf; with FD, you are paying them to risk their lives to save your house. Most cities just write the check. What if your top cops go find better paying jobs in close-by cities (oh, it happens). Then you are pretty screwed.
But with the UAW or even teachers, these are not held in high esteem by the public, so they have to fight tooth and nail to get what they believe they need.
UAW average wage among all workers isn't that much, but when you compare it to the median wage in America, it's pretty good.
FYI-- the average pension drawn by last year's California public service retirees was $38,000. Outliers' data shouldn't drive arguments IMO.
This is much more of a problem to the national bottom line than any private sector union shenanigans. But nobody is really fighting it, as it is some kind of taboo.
That is why myself and the few Conservatives left in CA have been screaming. With NO help from the Private sector Unions. Yet they are the ones getting shafted. Private sector Unions have a balancing factor that Public employee Unions do not have. The people giving the raises to the public employees have no skin in the game except getting re-elected.
I don't understand a lot of this stuff. Why can state and city employees go on strike when federal ones can't?
Strikes by some groups fall under different rules. The Pilots Union is not really under Public employees. Reagan decided it was too disruptive and ordered them back to work. Truman did a similar thing when the RR workers went on strike after WW2. A teachers strike is generally localized and not disruptive to more than that city as in Chicago. I think actual Federal Employees sign some sort of agreement not to strike. Not sure as they do not have to belong to the various unions. And a large share do not.
FYI-- the average pension drawn by last year's California public service retirees was $38,000. Outliers' data shouldn't drive arguments IMO.
When you consider that a person can retire with as little as 5 years the lower end is not bad. I think the real rip off is the managers, cops and firemen. Though I would not lose any sleep over the teachers. Many school districts pay an average close to $100k per year for teachers. Starting pay in CA sucks for teachers. Thanks to to the Teachers Union that protects the old worthless teachers that should be put out to pasture.
That's exactly the kind of crap I am thinking about, and it goes much deeper than law enforcement. It's a crime. Like what you pasted says, there's literally no way I could create such a retirement fund. Criminal. 30 years in a position where after 5-10 you are unfireable anyway, you can retire at 90%, often 90% of an income padded with needless OT to fudge the numbers. Why don't the rest of us have those options?
When the average Highway Patrolman makes around $130k you can see how they could get a very nice retirement. With automatic 2% a year increase. I know our Teamster retirement does NOT have any increases and NO Healtcare benefits for retirees. Just for reference the top 1700 CA highway patrol cops made over $125k. With about 100 making between $200k to $330k. They are looking at a dandy retirement. And how many times are they putting their life on the line out on the Interstates. Cushy job if you can get it.
But what's the average pension drawn by a retiree after 20-30 years? That's what needs to be analyzed. Also, what was contributed to that 38K compared to what you or I would need to contribute to receive the same 38K or equivalent for as long as we live...
Being in the PD isn't nearly as dangerous as they want you to believe.
I suppose some of it makes sense, private sector unions will never speak against the public sector. Kind of like how good cops never speak against bad cops.
Starting wage for a cop in my town is something like 55-60K - and this is a low crime affluent area. Add several years tenure and OT controlling traffic at a construction site or other dangerous work, and you'll hit 6 figures without problem. Pensions for cops can come after what, 15 years? The Praetorian class, an expense that needs to be faced head on, much more dangerous than autoworkers or teachers.
Being in the PD isn't nearly as dangerous as they want you to believe.
Same goes for the fire dept. Sad thing is the paid firemen get big pensions and the 1000s of volunteer firemen that make the paid ones job easier get NOTHING. No more than 10% of the cops are in dangerous ghetto type jobs. They go in pairs and are more likely to shoot first and ask questions later. Looks to me like being a civilian worker in a shipyard is more dangerous than being a cop.
Fairly dangerous---19 deaths per 100,000. About the same as taxi drivers in a big city.
Starting salary for an Officer (not a cadet) in the California Highway Patrol is $67,000 a year. Maximum is $84K, and of course there are add-ons for specialities. Retirement is 90% of the average of your 3 highest years of pay. So figure a 20 year man might retire on $75K a year.
So that would mean if you were a working stiff you'd have to have about $2 million in your IRA to get $75--$80K a year out of it.
> the average pension drawn by last year's California public service retirees was $38,000. Outliers' data shouldn't drive arguments IMO.
Now that's starting to give data that's useable. I'd like to see the median and the quartile values for the CA public service retirees you cite. Is it available?
The problem with the outliers being used to generate outrage is those are the problem that's endemic in our society: the wealthy folks have done much, much better and the poorer folks and the almost shrunken away middle class have lost ground. People in big business management are doing just fine, thank you. The folks in highly paid jobs running things are doing well. But the peons are not doing so well. That's what the 38,000$ indicates as a retirement.
What needs to be done is to taper the retirement ratios on a progressive scale--if you are paid $45,000 as public servant for your last 3 years of salary, you might get 70% as your retirement; someone making 90,000$ would get 55% of their highest 3 years, e.g.. We actually reward the pigs with the current system. And the public punishes the little guys such as the teachers in the classroom or the desk clerk in the auditor's office who are making more pedantic salaries.
In Ohio, the FD retirement fund has the employer paying in 29% of the salary while the worker is paying in 10%, which may have been raised in the last year, into the retirement pension funds. This is based on the long gone idea that being around burning buildings is much more dangerous to their health than it is in the modern day with breathing equipment and all kinds of protections for their respiratory systems.
For policemen, I believe the employer pays in 25% for the state systems. Much less than for the fire department folks.
Also note, that most firemen work a very nice schedule with 3 days on and then several, 5?, off. Many have other businesses they run during their off time days. So they accrue Soc Security entitlements along with all kinds of benefits for owners and upper management folks in all kinds of retirement funds of their own.
This is old but it's interesting for the then current examples and amounts stated. Also, it's complicated because there seem to be several facets to the retirements given to the UAW folks. I haven't taken time to read through thoroughly. But it seems that $4000 and more for just the pension aspect of UAW work and add the thousands they get per month in SS, would make a pretty good income. I could live on $70,000 per year.
Not sure what they are calling PSP in their examples. Maybe better minds than mine can explain this plan from 2008. Probably vastly improved after the election and payback to GM -UAW.
So figure a 20 year man might retire on $75K a year
Time for reality check. There are 1000s of CA Hwy Patrolmen making over $125k per year. The $84 base salary gets raised every year. And their retirement is based on best years. The likely retirement is over $100k.
To maintain $75k per year through your likely age of 90 for a person retiring today at 65 it would be doable with $2 million in a 401K. If your wife happens to live to 100+ she will likely go on welfare. Assisted living will likely cost over $100k per year 20 years from now. That is each. Two people in assisted living today is over $100k in not the greatest places.
So here is the issue that I see. A person in the private sector is not going to be allowed to save enough in a 401K to retire like the public servants are doing today in states like CA. When I retired in 2006 the maximum allowed in a 401K was $13k per year. In the 1990s it was like $9k per year. Even at an average of $13k over 30 years it would be under $400k. And if you happen to be unlucky as many have been they may lose most of that when the stock market takes a dump. My wife's 401k was in a Paine Webber account in the 1990s. It went from $348k down to $106k in the 1999 dot.com bubble crash. It has not gotten back close to the peak.
to see the salary of anyone working in the State of CA go to there agency or type in their name.
Fairly dangerous---19 deaths per 100,000. About the same as taxi drivers in a big city.
How many taxi drivers make $100k per year with 90% of that in retirement? That is a great example of the inequality of our whole system, Public vs Private. Not to mention the taxi driver is expected to know every street in the city. A cop only worries about where the donut shops are located. :P
This is based on the long gone idea that being around burning buildings is much more dangerous to their health than it is in the modern day with breathing equipment and all kinds of protections for their respiratory systems.
Good point. I have an 80 year old friend that has suffered with emphysema since retiring from the Fire department 25 years ago. He and his wife live in a 30 foot trailer in a dumpy little mobile home park. He is one of those on the bottom barely getting by. No fancy breathing apparatus back when he was fighting fires.
We actually reward the pigs with the current system. And the public punishes the little guys such as the teachers in the classroom or the desk clerk in the auditor's office who are making more pedantic salaries.
No doubt about that. The worst offenders in CA are the city managers, attorneys, College professors, coaches and administrators. Many retired with over $200k per year. And it is getting worse exponentially as more of the boomers retire from the public jobs. We will not reach the peak of this current retirement bubble for 10 more years. How underfunded will all the pension plans be at that time? The top paid workers and retirees need to be cut back at least 20% until the pension funds are fully funded. Without raping the tax payers anymore.
I would just as soon stay with a pension fund that is not in danger of going broke. The Alaska Teamsters pension is not tied to the International Teamsters. Locally held and administered. I have a friend on the Pension Trust board. I'm not complaining at all.
As bad as the Teamsters can be, they don't hold a candle to the UAW. I still remember one negotiation when our general manager was in a rare mood. He offered us more than we asked for on the new contract. The business agent said thank you but we are happy with what we asked for. Of course we all wanted to know what he was smoking? He was also the business agent for the AT&T unit. And if we got that much the techs at AT&T would want what we got. And he knew there was not a chance that would happen. We still got more in our retirement than the other unit so we were happy. 37 years a Teamster and not one day on strike. How many UAW members can say that. All the while making more than any factory worker was worth.
Incorrect I think. $84,000 is the maximum limit for an officer:
"Annually, an officer's base pay is $67,764. 5.0% increases occur yearly until the top step base salary of $84,036 is reached. " (CHP Website)
The CHP law enforcement pension is calculated by taking the number of years officers have worked and multiplying that by 3 percent to obtain the percentage of salary to be received after officers unpin their badge.
The limit is 30 years, or 90 percent of those tail-end salaries officers received in their last three years of duty.
Senior officers (over 20 years) can earn an additional 4% per annum.
Swing shift, motorcycle can earn a bit more.
A Flight Officer (Pilot) could conceivably retire at $100K a year, with longterm service and other incentives packed in, but that's not the norm, of course.
So yeah, an outlier number (20+ years of service, special duties, incentives, overtime, etc) might reach that number but I doubt most CHP officers do, given these stats.
Here is the actual pay of the highway patrolmen from 1000 to 1010. I have taken off the names to protect their IDs. It is listed. The first 1000 make more. from the state under the FOIA:
SERGEANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,364.32 SERGEANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,332.63 OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,329.29 OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,324.81 SERGEANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,320.47 SERGEANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,297.85 OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,290.64 OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,288.39 LIEUTENANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,287.34 OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,264.55
Again you are playing the outlier card, picking senior officers with 20+ years service (perhaps 30 years), with bonuses, incentives, overtime, special duty pay, etc.
This doesn't work for a balanced argument on pension plans. Rather, using outliers is an ideological position looking for facts to support itself.
More than one clinical study shows that both liberals and conservatives suddenly lose all their math skills when confronted with statistics that conflict with their ideology. I confess to it myself sometimes.
Again you are playing the outlier card, picking senior officers with 20+ years service (perhaps 30 years), with bonuses, incentives, overtime, special duty pay, etc.
This doesn't work for a balanced argument on pension plans. Rather, using outliers is an ideological position looking for facts to support itself.
No I am showing that over 6000 Highway patrolman are making $100k or more. And if they are at 30 years service will have an average retirement of over $100k per year. At the expense of the tax payers. Tax payers that are not allowed by law to accumulate those sort of retirement numbers.
Do the UAW folks actually pay into their pension fund, or is it all from GM/C/F and the buyers of those vehicles/services who pay for the pension of the UAW'ers exclusive of the Soc Sec that they pay?
It boggles my mind that some are actually OK with this LEO compensation. I'd rather pay the mythical 60K/year to a UAW janitor.
I can almost guarantee the UAW janitor gave more of himself to the job over his career than most cops have. I also believe they have a legitimate right to a pension that is negotiated for them. What does not seem right is Our pension and I am sure the UAW as well had limitations put on the top amount allowed when the ERISA act was changed around 1990. No possible way for me to work long enough and pay in enough to get $100k per year. I worked with a guy that was in the Operating Engineers all during the pipeline. Worked lots of 16 hour days and one whole year straight 365 days. Made lots of money and contributed lots into the OE3 pension fund. About 6 years before he retired the Union told him he had reached some sort of maximum allowed. It was $7200 per month. He worked another 5-6 years and they just added it to his salary. Taxed of course. He retired at 54 years of age and gets his $7200 per month. So I think you can see what I am driving at. Private defined pensioners get the shaft.
This is interesting right from the horse's mouth. They somehow base the UAW retirement on your SS benefit. Strange for sure. Looks like the most you can get is $36k per year with SS:
UAW members believe the foundation for a secure retirement rests on a three-legged stool: Social Security, a defined-benefit pension plan and personal savings.
Our goal is to provide all retirees and their families with a reasonable replacement of their working-career income so they can enjoy a productive retirement free from financial worry. What is the pension received by a typical autoworker?
A typical UAW-represented worker at Chrysler, Ford or General Motors who has reached eligibility for receipt of an 80 percent Social Security benefit receives just over $18,000 per year from his or her employer.
Autoworkers who retire prior to Social Security eligibility are entitled to a supplement which increases annual income from their employer to about $36,000. When retirees reach the age for an 80 percent benefit (age 63) or retire after that, they receive only the basic benefit, and the employer no longer pays the supplement.
I recall a discussion on Louisville talk years back with someone who understood the finances. He gave the data for a particular union's funding of the worker pension vs the pension fund for the people who _run_ the union. It was like 65% funded for the workers; for management of the union, 103%.
The management made sure their pension fund was never coming up short and denying themselves a good one.
" It was like 65% funded for the workers; for management of the union, 103%."
Even if you're not represented by a union, that is usually the case. Some of the white collar (professional) workers in my company are covered by a legacy defined benefit pension plan. That plan was terminated in 2003, but any accrued benefits remained in place. The funding level always seems to be around 70%-80%, depending on how it's measured.
However, middle and upper level managers are covered by a different pension plan, and that one has always been 100% or more funded.
That's $86,200 per year. I could live on that. And add on his Social Security income too which probably maximum.
The only retirement I'll get is $349.21 per month, non-Cola'ed, when I hit the age of 65. That's from my 7 years of service at McDonnell-Douglas/Boeing. Since then, it's just been 401k contributions and matches.
Heck, if I was getting $7200 per month, I don't think I'd know what to do with it all! Although, I guess that it still gets taxed? And, depending on where you live, it might really not go all that far. I'd be happy with it, but if I lived in San Francisco, New York City, etc, I'd probably feel poor!
If you lived in the SF Bay Area or New York metro area, got $7200 taxable or partially taxable pension income per month, were supporting 2 people and a mortgage, you'd have to watch your budget pretty carefully.
Some states don't tax pensions and social security (only 12 don't I think, including retiree havens like Florida and Nevada), but some states that don't tax pensions have very high property taxes, so...the waters are always filled with sharks.
Someone asked several tens of posts ago about the ROI for someone who contributes to, and then collects SS,
Well it's not possible to come up with a typical ROI for SS because there are too many variables involved in the payout. - When do you start collecting? - How many years do you live to collect? - Does your spouse collect a lower amount upon your death?
However, it is possible to come up with an estimate of how much you contributed over a working lifetime and what those contribution might be worth at age 65. I put together a simple spreadsheet that does just that. Assume someone works and pays into SS at the maximum rate for 45 years, from 1967 to 2011. Assuming a nominal annual return of 6% on those contributions (not your employers), then the value of your contributions for those 45 years would be approximately $330,000.
If you start collecting SS at age 45 (meaning you started working when you were 20), your monthly benefit would be around $2500/month, or $30,000/year. That's for every year that you live, along with COLAs.
If you were to take the $330,000 amount and start depleting it by $30K/year (10% withdrawal initially), you would run out of money in around 12 years.
It comes with the decline of unions and manufacturing:
Or is the decline in auto manufacturing BECAUSE of the UAW? I would submit the D3 would have NOT set up factories in Mexico if they had not been bullied by the UAW during the 1990s. Of course NAFTA made it a lot easier to build vehicles in Mexico and ship them back here. Even with the two tier Union contracts we are adding more capacity in Mexico than the USA. I would say over regulation could be playing a big part as well.
That is a disturbing article. I read it yesterday.
Some states don't tax pensions and social security (only 12 don't I think, including retiree havens like Florida and Nevada), but some states that don't tax pensions have very high property taxes, so...the waters are always filled with sharks.
You are correct. All things have to be considered including liking the place. The only downside I find from living in a place like Hilo Hawaii is the isolation from the rest of the World. They Do not tax defined pension income so that is a big plus. Our property tax on 2.5 acres with two homes and a flower farm was only $800 per year. Sales tax 4.5% on everything. Of course the smart folks do 90% of their food shopping at the Farmer's Markets. You can still buy a pretty nice home on an acre or more for $200k. Close to the water for $400k. Utilities are high so solar is advisable. If you pick your location you will never need heat or AC. Gas is only about 25 cents more than CA. And Hawaii claims to be the best place for longevity. Kaiser is there for us that are on their wonderful Medicare Advantage program. And you can buy a ocean front home completely off the grid with NO utility payments for less than a fixer tract home in CA.
"Or is the decline in auto manufacturing BECAUSE of the UAW?"
You know Ford had a lot of problems with it's Mexican operations in launching the new Fusion and MKZ (or whatever the Lincoln version is called). I really think the biggest reason domestics don't always hold up as well as many Asian vehicles is Detroit's purchasing practices. Toyota and Honda work with their vendors. It's more of an adversarial and low bid process at D3. The old saying says you get what you pay for. Ironically, much of the rest of American industry has moved to more partnering and less focus on the lowest bid from vendors because it often ends up ugly the old way. Basically, vendors want to work for Toyota, but only deal with Detroit because they have to. Not good!
I've always found that once you're in Hawaii for say a week, you really do become more relaxed and healthier. It's not just geographical separation, it's time zone influenced as well I think. Also there is so much to do and it's so nice outside much of the time, that you really don't care to get wrapped up in the news and politics while you're there.
I really think the biggest reason domestics don't always hold up as well as many Asian vehicles is Detroit's purchasing practices.
I have read that as well. The Domestics beat the vendors down to the last few cents profit. Then get what they pay for.
Also there is so much to do and it's so nice outside much of the time, that you really don't care to get wrapped up in the news and politics while you're there.
We used to spend 3 weeks at a time in Hilo until flying became such a hassle with xrays and groping. I do miss the relaxed atmosphere. Don't hardly turn on my computer and never watch TV over there. Do a lot of snorkeling and sight seeing. When we get totally fed up with CA ignorance we will just pack it up and head over for our last move. CA is only for the rich and the poor and the Public Union bunch.
Man oh man, blaming the UAW for GM's downfall is like blaming the horse tenders and buglers and cooks for losing the Battle of the Little Big Horn. You *could* make some tentative connections but laying it all on them---highly unlikely.
I have a suggestion. Before anyone can criticize the UAW worker, he has to go into a time machine, go back to the 1970s through the 90s, and build cars on a GM assembly line for 6 months straight.
Man oh man, blaming the UAW for GM's downfall is like blaming the horse tenders
I think there are plenty of people to blame for the demise and loss of market share by GM. I just think the UAW has as much fault as any other entity. Striking against a company bleeding red ink is hardly going to help matters much. So you tell US who you think is to blame for GM going from 50% market share to 19% today? You tell US why with the new UAW contracts, that are no more than the Foreign transplants, why GM is still moving production out of the USA?
I have a suggestion. Before anyone can criticize the UAW worker, he has to go into a time machine, go back to the 1970s through the 90s, and build cars on a GM assembly line for 6 months straight.
Why would anyone with higher than a high school education take a job like that? I remember because at the time it paid way more than it was worth. Helping the demise of the Domestics. Today's $15-$20 per hour is more than fair for menial labor assembling cars. Sadly the UAW has ruined it for a lot of high school kids that could use a job. And I dug ditches for leech lines in the hot CA sun, at minimum wage the last two years of HS. No one can tell me assembly line work is any harder than that.
"So you tell US who you think is to blame for GM going from 50% market share to 19% today?"
Easy---whoever was responsible for designing and marketing cars that nobody wanted to buy.
Surely, it would be an untenable position to say that GM's cars were the world's best but that the company failed because the UAW didn't bolt them together correctly.
And if the argument presented was that GM had to cut corners on the cars to pay the UAW, then one would have to explain why the Germans aren't ashamed to charge a lot more for their cars (with no apparent dampening of buyer enthusiasm), and one would have to explain why GM can cream $10,000 off the top as profit on an Escalade?
I think the German question is pretty easy. People equate BMW and MB with status. Roger Smith put the nail in that for domestics when he started the look alike, but tart 'em up approach to US cars. It wasn't long before a Buick was just a higher priced Chevy with a fancier seat. No prestige or status in that anymore!
I will try to address your rather convoluted arguments.
There is little doubt the D3 did not keep up with what the fickled US buyers wanted. That is partly lousy management and partly the UAW fighting any changes in the way the factories were run. Not to mention VW and the Japanese were offering more for less with their vehicles. That started in the 1960s.
I don't think anyone with any knowledge would say GM made the World's best across the line. Some were good, some great and most mediocre. Was the mediocrity at all the blame of the UAW. Of course it was. A loose bolt here a missing piece there. Of course Chrysler has their own cross to bear with UAW potheads being allowed on the line.
The Germans charge more because they give the buyer more. We have already debunked the higher pay for German Union workers. The $80k Escalade has more room for profit same as any luxury car. Not to mention 30% Mexican content. Not denigrating Mexican Union workers. They did a much better job building my 1998 Suburban than the UAW did with my 2005 GMC Hybrid PU truck.
Forbes wrote a piece claiming how much more the German autoworkers make than US auto workers. The German News paper says it ain't so. And Forbes ran a second article to try and save face.
It's a paradox: At a time when the economic elites in the United States and Great Britain are turning to Germany's recipes for industrial success as role models, the social structure in Germany is increasingly moving in the direction of a three-class society. This is a fundamental shift for a social market economy whose policies have long been aimed at ensuring that the country's prosperity is fairly distributed to all echelons of society. That system now appears to be eroding fast.
These days, it is executives, with their compensation skyrocketing into the millions, who are at the top. The second tier consists of the well-trained and reasonably well-paid legions of white-collar and skilled workers in modern information and industrial societies. Bringing up the rear are professional groups that were once considered part of the core of the traditional working world: salespeople, cooks, waiters and teachers, for example, who often earn less now than they did a decade ago.
Man oh man, blaming the UAW for GM's downfall is like blaming the horse tenders and buglers and cooks for losing the Battle of the Little Big Horn. You *could* make some tentative connections but laying it all on them---highly unlikely.
We can disagree. While there's no doubt the management was a bunch of idiots and ultimately responsible, you can't say that a union that held the company's operations hostage until it got gold-plated retirements and jobs banks DIDN'T affect the competitiveness of the company. If you have high labor costs, you make it up somewhere else. You cut the quality of components and you niggle down the prices from your vendors. You delay new product introductions. That had a big effect.
Comments
California's state-managed public employee pension funds took in $33.8 billion from employer and employee contributions in 2012 and paid out $28.2 billion in benefits to 874,734 retirees, according to a new Census Bureau report.
There are five state-managed pension funds but the two biggest, the California Public Employees Retirement System and the State Teachers Retirement System, account for all but a fraction of their overall economic activity.
Collectively, the five held $430.2 billion in assets of various kinds - corporate stocks being the largest single bloc at $177 billion -- in 2012 but had $592.2 billion in calculated obligations for 1.9 million public employee members of the systems, the report said.
Investment earnings in 2012 were just under $14 billion, while employees contributed $6.2 billion and state and local governments kicked in another $13.7 billion.
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2013/08/california-pension-funds-took- -in-338b-paid-out-282b-last-year.html
But with the UAW or even teachers, these are not held in high esteem by the public, so they have to fight tooth and nail to get what they believe they need.
UAW average wage among all workers isn't that much, but when you compare it to the median wage in America, it's pretty good.
FYI-- the average pension drawn by last year's California public service retirees was $38,000. Outliers' data shouldn't drive arguments IMO.
That is why myself and the few Conservatives left in CA have been screaming. With NO help from the Private sector Unions. Yet they are the ones getting shafted. Private sector Unions have a balancing factor that Public employee Unions do not have. The people giving the raises to the public employees have no skin in the game except getting re-elected.
I don't understand a lot of this stuff. Why can state and city employees go on strike when federal ones can't?
Strikes by some groups fall under different rules. The Pilots Union is not really under Public employees. Reagan decided it was too disruptive and ordered them back to work. Truman did a similar thing when the RR workers went on strike after WW2. A teachers strike is generally localized and not disruptive to more than that city as in Chicago. I think actual Federal Employees sign some sort of agreement not to strike. Not sure as they do not have to belong to the various unions. And a large share do not.
FYI-- the average pension drawn by last year's California public service retirees was $38,000. Outliers' data shouldn't drive arguments IMO.
When you consider that a person can retire with as little as 5 years the lower end is not bad. I think the real rip off is the managers, cops and firemen. Though I would not lose any sleep over the teachers. Many school districts pay an average close to $100k per year for teachers. Starting pay in CA sucks for teachers. Thanks to to the Teachers Union that protects the old worthless teachers that should be put out to pasture.
That's exactly the kind of crap I am thinking about, and it goes much deeper than law enforcement. It's a crime. Like what you pasted says, there's literally no way I could create such a retirement fund. Criminal. 30 years in a position where after 5-10 you are unfireable anyway, you can retire at 90%, often 90% of an income padded with needless OT to fudge the numbers. Why don't the rest of us have those options?
When the average Highway Patrolman makes around $130k you can see how they could get a very nice retirement. With automatic 2% a year increase. I know our Teamster retirement does NOT have any increases and NO Healtcare benefits for retirees. Just for reference the top 1700 CA highway patrol cops made over $125k. With about 100 making between $200k to $330k. They are looking at a dandy retirement. And how many times are they putting their life on the line out on the Interstates. Cushy job if you can get it.
Being in the PD isn't nearly as dangerous as they want you to believe.
Starting wage for a cop in my town is something like 55-60K - and this is a low crime affluent area. Add several years tenure and OT controlling traffic at a construction site or other dangerous work, and you'll hit 6 figures without problem. Pensions for cops can come after what, 15 years? The Praetorian class, an expense that needs to be faced head on, much more dangerous than autoworkers or teachers.
Same goes for the fire dept. Sad thing is the paid firemen get big pensions and the 1000s of volunteer firemen that make the paid ones job easier get NOTHING. No more than 10% of the cops are in dangerous ghetto type jobs. They go in pairs and are more likely to shoot first and ask questions later. Looks to me like being a civilian worker in a shipyard is more dangerous than being a cop.
Starting salary for an Officer (not a cadet) in the California Highway Patrol is $67,000 a year. Maximum is $84K, and of course there are add-ons for specialities. Retirement is 90% of the average of your 3 highest years of pay. So figure a 20 year man might retire on $75K a year.
So that would mean if you were a working stiff you'd have to have about $2 million in your IRA to get $75--$80K a year out of it.
Now that's starting to give data that's useable. I'd like to see the median and the quartile values for the CA public service retirees you cite. Is it available?
The problem with the outliers being used to generate outrage is those are the problem that's endemic in our society: the wealthy folks have done much, much better and the poorer folks and the almost shrunken away middle class have lost ground. People in big business management are doing just fine, thank you. The folks in highly paid jobs running things are doing well. But the peons are not doing so well. That's what the 38,000$ indicates as a retirement.
What needs to be done is to taper the retirement ratios on a progressive scale--if you are paid $45,000 as public servant for your last 3 years of salary, you might get 70% as your retirement; someone making 90,000$ would get 55% of their highest 3 years, e.g.. We actually reward the pigs with the current system. And the public punishes the little guys such as the teachers in the classroom or the desk clerk in the auditor's office who are making more pedantic salaries.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
In Ohio, the FD retirement fund has the employer paying in 29% of the salary while the worker is paying in 10%, which may have been raised in the last year, into the retirement pension funds. This is based on the long gone idea that being around burning buildings is much more dangerous to their health than it is in the modern day with breathing equipment and all kinds of protections for their respiratory systems.
For policemen, I believe the employer pays in 25% for the state systems. Much less than for the fire department folks.
Also note, that most firemen work a very nice schedule with 3 days on and then several, 5?, off. Many have other businesses they run during their off time days. So they accrue Soc Security entitlements along with all kinds of benefits for owners and upper management folks in all kinds of retirement funds of their own.
Hard to feel sympathy for the firemen.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Not sure what they are calling PSP in their examples. Maybe better minds than mine can explain this plan from 2008. Probably vastly improved after the election and payback to GM -UAW.
http://www.uawgmjas.org/myuaw-gmretirement/assets/E-Books/GM_Work_or_Retire.pdf
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Time for reality check. There are 1000s of CA Hwy Patrolmen making over $125k per year. The $84 base salary gets raised every year. And their retirement is based on best years. The likely retirement is over $100k.
To maintain $75k per year through your likely age of 90 for a person retiring today at 65 it would be doable with $2 million in a 401K. If your wife happens to live to 100+ she will likely go on welfare. Assisted living will likely cost over $100k per year 20 years from now. That is each. Two people in assisted living today is over $100k in not the greatest places.
So here is the issue that I see. A person in the private sector is not going to be allowed to save enough in a 401K to retire like the public servants are doing today in states like CA. When I retired in 2006 the maximum allowed in a 401K was $13k per year. In the 1990s it was like $9k per year. Even at an average of $13k over 30 years it would be under $400k. And if you happen to be unlucky as many have been they may lose most of that when the stock market takes a dump. My wife's 401k was in a Paine Webber account in the 1990s. It went from $348k down to $106k in the 1999 dot.com bubble crash. It has not gotten back close to the peak.
to see the salary of anyone working in the State of CA go to there agency or type in their name.
http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/
PS
These poor overworked hwy patrol get 7 weeks paid vacation the first year. With regular increases in vacation days.
How many taxi drivers make $100k per year with 90% of that in retirement? That is a great example of the inequality of our whole system, Public vs Private. Not to mention the taxi driver is expected to know every street in the city. A cop only worries about where the donut shops are located. :P
This is based on the long gone idea that being around burning buildings is much more dangerous to their health than it is in the modern day with breathing equipment and all kinds of protections for their respiratory systems.
Good point. I have an 80 year old friend that has suffered with emphysema since retiring from the Fire department 25 years ago. He and his wife live in a 30 foot trailer in a dumpy little mobile home park. He is one of those on the bottom barely getting by. No fancy breathing apparatus back when he was fighting fires.
We actually reward the pigs with the current system. And the public punishes the little guys such as the teachers in the classroom or the desk clerk in the auditor's office who are making more pedantic salaries.
No doubt about that. The worst offenders in CA are the city managers, attorneys, College professors, coaches and administrators. Many retired with over $200k per year. And it is getting worse exponentially as more of the boomers retire from the public jobs. We will not reach the peak of this current retirement bubble for 10 more years. How underfunded will all the pension plans be at that time? The top paid workers and retirees need to be cut back at least 20% until the pension funds are fully funded. Without raping the tax payers anymore.
As bad as the Teamsters can be, they don't hold a candle to the UAW. I still remember one negotiation when our general manager was in a rare mood. He offered us more than we asked for on the new contract. The business agent said thank you but we are happy with what we asked for. Of course we all wanted to know what he was smoking? He was also the business agent for the AT&T unit. And if we got that much the techs at AT&T would want what we got. And he knew there was not a chance that would happen. We still got more in our retirement than the other unit so we were happy. 37 years a Teamster and not one day on strike. How many UAW members can say that. All the while making more than any factory worker was worth.
"Annually, an officer's base pay is $67,764. 5.0% increases occur yearly until the top step base salary of $84,036 is reached. " (CHP Website)
The CHP law enforcement pension is calculated by taking the number of years officers have worked and multiplying that by 3 percent to obtain the percentage of salary to be received after officers unpin their badge.
The limit is 30 years, or 90 percent of those tail-end salaries officers received in their last three years of duty.
Senior officers (over 20 years) can earn an additional 4% per annum.
Swing shift, motorcycle can earn a bit more.
A Flight Officer (Pilot) could conceivably retire at $100K a year, with longterm service and other incentives packed in, but that's not the norm, of course.
So yeah, an outlier number (20+ years of service, special duties, incentives, overtime, etc) might reach that number but I doubt most CHP officers do, given these stats.
SERGEANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,364.32
SERGEANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,332.63
OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,329.29
OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,324.81
SERGEANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,320.47
SERGEANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,297.85
OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,290.64
OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,288.39
LIEUTENANT, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,287.34
OFFICER, CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL $133,264.55
http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/
This doesn't work for a balanced argument on pension plans. Rather, using outliers is an ideological position looking for facts to support itself.
More than one clinical study shows that both liberals and conservatives suddenly lose all their math skills when confronted with statistics that conflict with their ideology. I confess to it myself sometimes.
This doesn't work for a balanced argument on pension plans. Rather, using outliers is an ideological position looking for facts to support itself.
No I am showing that over 6000 Highway patrolman are making $100k or more. And if they are at 30 years service will have an average retirement of over $100k per year. At the expense of the tax payers. Tax payers that are not allowed by law to accumulate those sort of retirement numbers.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
It boggles my mind that some are actually OK with this LEO compensation. I'd rather pay the mythical 60K/year to a UAW janitor.
I can almost guarantee the UAW janitor gave more of himself to the job over his career than most cops have. I also believe they have a legitimate right to a pension that is negotiated for them. What does not seem right is Our pension and I am sure the UAW as well had limitations put on the top amount allowed when the ERISA act was changed around 1990. No possible way for me to work long enough and pay in enough to get $100k per year. I worked with a guy that was in the Operating Engineers all during the pipeline. Worked lots of 16 hour days and one whole year straight 365 days. Made lots of money and contributed lots into the OE3 pension fund. About 6 years before he retired the Union told him he had reached some sort of maximum allowed. It was $7200 per month. He worked another 5-6 years and they just added it to his salary. Taxed of course. He retired at 54 years of age and gets his $7200 per month. So I think you can see what I am driving at. Private defined pensioners get the shaft.
That's $86,200 per year. I could live on that. And add on his Social Security income too which probably maximum.
Has anyone found the data for UAW retirements currently paid out? Where's Rocky?
I need the mean, median, quartiles.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
UAW members believe the foundation for a secure retirement rests on a three-legged stool: Social Security, a defined-benefit pension plan and personal savings.
Our goal is to provide all retirees and their families with a reasonable replacement of their working-career income so they can enjoy a productive retirement free from financial worry.
What is the pension received by a typical autoworker?
A typical UAW-represented worker at Chrysler, Ford or General Motors who has reached eligibility for receipt of an 80 percent Social Security benefit receives just over $18,000 per year from his or her employer.
Autoworkers who retire prior to Social Security eligibility are entitled to a supplement which increases annual income from their employer to about $36,000. When retirees reach the age for an 80 percent benefit (age 63) or retire after that, they receive only the basic benefit, and the employer no longer pays the supplement.
http://www.uaw.org/page/pensions
Something tells me the business managers get a slightly different deal.
I recall a discussion on Louisville talk years back with someone who understood the finances. He gave the data for a particular union's funding of the worker pension vs the pension fund for the people who _run_ the union. It was like 65% funded for the workers; for management of the union, 103%.
The management made sure their pension fund was never coming up short and denying themselves a good one.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/census-obama-s-1st-term-real-m- edian-income-down-2627-people-poverty
Even if you're not represented by a union, that is usually the case. Some of the white collar (professional) workers in my company are covered by a legacy defined benefit pension plan. That plan was terminated in 2003, but any accrued benefits remained in place. The funding level always seems to be around 70%-80%, depending on how it's measured.
However, middle and upper level managers are covered by a different pension plan, and that one has always been 100% or more funded.
The only retirement I'll get is $349.21 per month, non-Cola'ed, when I hit the age of 65. That's from my 7 years of service at McDonnell-Douglas/Boeing. Since then, it's just been 401k contributions and matches.
Heck, if I was getting $7200 per month, I don't think I'd know what to do with it all! Although, I guess that it still gets taxed? And, depending on where you live, it might really not go all that far. I'd be happy with it, but if I lived in San Francisco, New York City, etc, I'd probably feel poor!
Some states don't tax pensions and social security (only 12 don't I think, including retiree havens like Florida and Nevada), but some states that don't tax pensions have very high property taxes, so...the waters are always filled with sharks.
Well it's not possible to come up with a typical ROI for SS because there are too many variables involved in the payout.
- When do you start collecting?
- How many years do you live to collect?
- Does your spouse collect a lower amount upon your death?
However, it is possible to come up with an estimate of how much you contributed over a working lifetime and what those contribution might be worth at age 65. I put together a simple spreadsheet that does just that. Assume someone works and pays into SS at the maximum rate for 45 years, from 1967 to 2011. Assuming a nominal annual return of 6% on those contributions (not your employers), then the value of your contributions for those 45 years would be approximately $330,000.
If you start collecting SS at age 45 (meaning you started working when you were 20), your monthly benefit would be around $2500/month, or $30,000/year. That's for every year that you live, along with COLAs.
If you were to take the $330,000 amount and start depleting it by $30K/year (10% withdrawal initially), you would run out of money in around 12 years.
Yes, if only I could plan it so the check to the undertaker bounces;)
Or is the decline in auto manufacturing BECAUSE of the UAW? I would submit the D3 would have NOT set up factories in Mexico if they had not been bullied by the UAW during the 1990s. Of course NAFTA made it a lot easier to build vehicles in Mexico and ship them back here. Even with the two tier Union contracts we are adding more capacity in Mexico than the USA. I would say over regulation could be playing a big part as well.
That is a disturbing article. I read it yesterday.
You are correct. All things have to be considered including liking the place. The only downside I find from living in a place like Hilo Hawaii is the isolation from the rest of the World. They Do not tax defined pension income so that is a big plus. Our property tax on 2.5 acres with two homes and a flower farm was only $800 per year. Sales tax 4.5% on everything. Of course the smart folks do 90% of their food shopping at the Farmer's Markets. You can still buy a pretty nice home on an acre or more for $200k. Close to the water for $400k. Utilities are high so solar is advisable. If you pick your location you will never need heat or AC. Gas is only about 25 cents more than CA. And Hawaii claims to be the best place for longevity. Kaiser is there for us that are on their wonderful Medicare Advantage program. And you can buy a ocean front home completely off the grid with NO utility payments for less than a fixer tract home in CA.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/14-3945-Government-Beach-Rd-Pahoa-HI-96778/211- 1386830_zpid/
You know Ford had a lot of problems with it's Mexican operations in launching the new Fusion and MKZ (or whatever the Lincoln version is called). I really think the biggest reason domestics don't always hold up as well as many Asian vehicles is Detroit's purchasing practices. Toyota and Honda work with their vendors. It's more of an adversarial and low bid process at D3. The old saying says you get what you pay for. Ironically, much of the rest of American industry has moved to more partnering and less focus on the lowest bid from vendors because it often ends up ugly the old way. Basically, vendors want to work for Toyota, but only deal with Detroit because they have to. Not good!
I have read that as well. The Domestics beat the vendors down to the last few cents profit. Then get what they pay for.
Also there is so much to do and it's so nice outside much of the time, that you really don't care to get wrapped up in the news and politics while you're there.
We used to spend 3 weeks at a time in Hilo until flying became such a hassle with xrays and groping. I do miss the relaxed atmosphere. Don't hardly turn on my computer and never watch TV over there. Do a lot of snorkeling and sight seeing. When we get totally fed up with CA ignorance we will just pack it up and head over for our last move. CA is only for the rich and the poor and the Public Union bunch.
I have a suggestion. Before anyone can criticize the UAW worker, he has to go into a time machine, go back to the 1970s through the 90s, and build cars on a GM assembly line for 6 months straight.
I think there are plenty of people to blame for the demise and loss of market share by GM. I just think the UAW has as much fault as any other entity. Striking against a company bleeding red ink is hardly going to help matters much. So you tell US who you think is to blame for GM going from 50% market share to 19% today? You tell US why with the new UAW contracts, that are no more than the Foreign transplants, why GM is still moving production out of the USA?
I have a suggestion. Before anyone can criticize the UAW worker, he has to go into a time machine, go back to the 1970s through the 90s, and build cars on a GM assembly line for 6 months straight.
Why would anyone with higher than a high school education take a job like that? I remember because at the time it paid way more than it was worth. Helping the demise of the Domestics. Today's $15-$20 per hour is more than fair for menial labor assembling cars. Sadly the UAW has ruined it for a lot of high school kids that could use a job. And I dug ditches for leech lines in the hot CA sun, at minimum wage the last two years of HS. No one can tell me assembly line work is any harder than that.
Easy---whoever was responsible for designing and marketing cars that nobody wanted to buy.
Surely, it would be an untenable position to say that GM's cars were the world's best but that the company failed because the UAW didn't bolt them together correctly.
And if the argument presented was that GM had to cut corners on the cars to pay the UAW, then one would have to explain why the Germans aren't ashamed to charge a lot more for their cars (with no apparent dampening of buyer enthusiasm), and one would have to explain why GM can cream $10,000 off the top as profit on an Escalade?
There is little doubt the D3 did not keep up with what the fickled US buyers wanted. That is partly lousy management and partly the UAW fighting any changes in the way the factories were run. Not to mention VW and the Japanese were offering more for less with their vehicles. That started in the 1960s.
I don't think anyone with any knowledge would say GM made the World's best across the line. Some were good, some great and most mediocre. Was the mediocrity at all the blame of the UAW. Of course it was. A loose bolt here a missing piece there. Of course Chrysler has their own cross to bear with UAW potheads being allowed on the line.
The Germans charge more because they give the buyer more. We have already debunked the higher pay for German Union workers. The $80k Escalade has more room for profit same as any luxury car. Not to mention 30% Mexican content. Not denigrating Mexican Union workers. They did a much better job building my 1998 Suburban than the UAW did with my 2005 GMC Hybrid PU truck.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/haydnshaughnessy/2012/05/06/revisiting-how-germany-b- uilds-twice-as-many-cars-as-the-u-s-while-paying-its-workers-twice-as-much/
It's a paradox: At a time when the economic elites in the United States and Great Britain are turning to Germany's recipes for industrial success as role models, the social structure in Germany is increasingly moving in the direction of a three-class society. This is a fundamental shift for a social market economy whose policies have long been aimed at ensuring that the country's prosperity is fairly distributed to all echelons of society. That system now appears to be eroding fast.
These days, it is executives, with their compensation skyrocketing into the millions, who are at the top. The second tier consists of the well-trained and reasonably well-paid legions of white-collar and skilled workers in modern information and industrial societies. Bringing up the rear are professional groups that were once considered part of the core of the traditional working world: salespeople, cooks, waiters and teachers, for example, who often earn less now than they did a decade ago.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/german-labor-reforms-create-greater- -gap-between-rich-and-poor-a-830972.html
We can disagree. While there's no doubt the management was a bunch of idiots and ultimately responsible, you can't say that a union that held the company's operations hostage until it got gold-plated retirements and jobs banks DIDN'T affect the competitiveness of the company. If you have high labor costs, you make it up somewhere else. You cut the quality of components and you niggle down the prices from your vendors. You delay new product introductions. That had a big effect.