Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 108

Thread: No words can express the horror of this pension system.

  1. #1

    Default No words can express the horror of this pension system.

    Edit: actually, I think this system is used across the country.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,6677861.story

    Approaching retirement, Ventura County Chief Executive Marty Robinson was earning $228,000 a year.

    To boost her pension, which would be based on her final salary, Robinson cashed out nearly $34,000 in unused vacation pay, an $11,000 bonus for having earned a graduate degree and more than $24,000 in extra pension benefits the county owed her.

    By the time she walked out the door last year, her pension was calculated at $272,000 a year — for life.

    Robinson, 62, is among a group of public employees who have increased their retirement paychecks by adding such things as vacation time, educational incentives, car allowances and bonuses to their final salaries.

  2. #2
    Pension spiking is a huge issue. Though I do support paying people for untaken vacation days.

    Unless of course the union has negotiated European levels of vacation days. Which is likely.

    Rick Perry just did a similar thing in Texas. Pensions are pyramid schemes whose rules are inevitably rigged by insiders.

  3. #3
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    "By the time she walked out the door last year, her pension was calculated at $272,000 a year — for life."

    Think I found a useful loophole here...
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  4. #4
    Whoever thinks of stopping the [pension system] before it achieves its goals, I will give him ten bullets in the chest. -- Union Arafat

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by agamemnus View Post
    Edit: actually, I think this system is used across the country.
    No, it's not.

    "Robinson, 62, is among a group of public employees who have increased their retirement paychecks by adding such things as vacation time, educational incentives, car allowances and bonuses to their final salaries."

    Be fair, and mention that private pensions do the same thing. Difference being that not too many workers have private pensions these days.

    Instead, that benefit should be called Golden Parachutes for CEOs and upper management. They can demand that kind of largesse after only a couple of months on the job, expect their legal contract will be honored, and presume future shareholders will keep paying.

    When private companies and CEOs do this, it's considered savvy contract negotiations. No one bats an eyelash when an executive walks away with half salary/stock options, guaranteed percentage of future corporate earnings, lifetime corporate gym or private Country Club membership, and use of corporate private jets....after a few months on the job.

    When public workers try the same thing, based at least on years of time worked, it's suddenly a nefarious thing?



    Guns don't kill people....

  6. #6
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    When literally a few thousand C-level execs are able to abuse their power, you get a severe outbreak of vaginal sand. When the hundreds of thousands of public-sector employees do the same thing, you try to give them a pass because they're not j00s.

    Fucking pathetic.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  7. #7
    I don't get it... don't most pensions using a moving average of the last 5 or so years to avoid this kind of issue? At least that's how I thought they were structured - then cashing in a bunch of vacation time/etc. wouldn't appreciably move the dial, since it's split over 5 years.

  8. #8
    Two simple solutions:

    Holidays for us have an annual allowance - use it or lose it. Shouldn't have five years of vacation stored up.
    Abolish final salary pensions. Ideally I'd just have defined contribution plans and abolish all defined benefit ones altogether.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Holidays for us have an annual allowance - use it or lose it. Shouldn't have five years of vacation stored up.
    I actually don't fully agree. I think it's a bit ridiculous when people have oodles of vacation saved up and retire with a huge chunk of money - obviously it's best for employee productivity for vacation to be taken during work and not as a retirement present. But having some flexibility built into a vacation day system is worthwhile - allowing X amount of rollover is reasonable to allow for people who know they will need extra vacation days the next year (say, for some family events, or a wedding/honeymoon, or whatever). Remember that in the US you might only be talking about 10 or 15 days a year, so being able to intelligently allocate them across a few years is not an unreasonable request. There are simple ways to prevent abuse - have accrued vacation expire on a rolling basis (18 months? 24? 36?), giving you some flexibility but not an inordinate amount. It can be quite frustrating to have extra vacation days one year, but far too few the next.

    I fully agree about 'use it or lose it' wrt sick days, though. Allowing people to save up sick days and 'cash' them in later just encourages people to come to work when they're sick, which is a bad idea all around. Modest overconsumption of sick days is better than drastic underconsumption.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    When literally a few thousand C-level execs are able to abuse their power, you get a severe outbreak of vaginal sand. When the hundreds of thousands of public-sector employees do the same thing, you try to give them a pass because they're not j00s.

    Fucking pathetic.
    I don't understand your use of the term j00s. Would you mind explaining that? I get the idea it doesn't mean the same as jews but it's hard to tell and makes your posts seem inane when you use it.
    Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
    If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Being View Post
    I don't understand your use of the term j00s. Would you mind explaining that? I get the idea it doesn't mean the same as jews but it's hard to tell and makes your posts seem inane when you use it.
    CC likes to equate criticism of a large number of groups - notably bankers, the rich, etc. - as antisemitism. He does this a lot to GGT since it bothers her. I think you can safely ignore it and stick to a substantive discussion. See here: http://www.theworldforgotten.com/showthread.php?t=2255

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    I fully agree about 'use it or lose it' wrt sick days, though. Allowing people to save up sick days and 'cash' them in later just encourages people to come to work when they're sick, which is a bad idea all around. Modest overconsumption of sick days is better than drastic underconsumption.
    The very concept of sick days makes no sense to me; all it does it encourage people to lie about when they're sick. If someone is legitimately sick (i.e. they have a note from a doctor), they should be excused. If they're not sick, they shouldn't be able to call in sick just because they have sick days remaining.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  13. #13
    Is it worth the trip to the doctor if you just have a nasty cold? I think employers and employees should stick to a standard of conduct where the employee is expected to stay home as needed but no more, and the employer is expected to believe the employee when they need the time off.

    Giving a certain number of sick days allows for alternative options in the employment contract when they are exceeded due to serious illness - family leave, short/long term disability, etc. It's just a useful counter for dealing with the legalities.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    Is it worth the trip to the doctor if you just have a nasty cold? I think employers and employees should stick to a standard of conduct where the employee is expected to stay home as needed but no more, and the employer is expected to believe the employee when they need the time off.

    Giving a certain number of sick days allows for alternative options in the employment contract when they are exceeded due to serious illness - family leave, short/long term disability, etc. It's just a useful counter for dealing with the legalities.
    Or you could just give workers an extra 5 days off and let them use those days how ever they want.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    I don't get it... don't most pensions using a moving average of the last 5 or so years to avoid this kind of issue? At least that's how I thought they were structured - then cashing in a bunch of vacation time/etc. wouldn't appreciably move the dial, since it's split over 5 years.
    Depends on how much you have saved. I know my father's planning on spiking with his accumulated vacation as mentioned in the original post and even if it's averaged over five years it'll still amount to more than a few percentage points increase. Further, I know that his employing state office actually prefer that to what he could do, demand all of that accumulated time be turned into a lump sum payment. Worse for the State over the long term of course, but way easier for his employing office to deal with as an event.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    Further, I know that his employing state office actually prefer that to what he could do, demand all of that accumulated time be turned into a lump sum payment. Worse for the State over the long term of course, but way easier for his employing office to deal with as an event.
    *faceplanet*

  17. #17
    Jesus christ just use the average of the last ten years or something.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  18. #18
    I agree with some limited flexibility of rolling over, but not five years. Furthermore even if it is allowed, it should not count as "income" for the purposes of final salary as it wasn't salaried income, it was exceptional. They would not have been able to use rolled over allowances again next year. Very simple fix to exclude this from calculations, or use some sort of average.

    Where my dad used to work (private sector) he said there was a big problem of people seeking and getting promotions when opportunities arose, then retiring, as they had final salary pensions in place still.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  19. #19
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,239
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    Is it worth the trip to the doctor if you just have a nasty cold? I think employers and employees should stick to a standard of conduct where the employee is expected to stay home as needed but no more, and the employer is expected to believe the employee when they need the time off.

    Giving a certain number of sick days allows for alternative options in the employment contract when they are exceeded due to serious illness - family leave, short/long term disability, etc. It's just a useful counter for dealing with the legalities.
    In Germany, it depends on the kind of company. Some companies demand a trip to the doctor right from the first day (usually those are the slave-driver companies like callcenters, i.e. low end jobs).

    More usual is the kind, where you can call in sick for one or two days and not having to go the doctor. If you're ill for three days or more, to the doctor you go. And if you abuse the system (i.e. being absent for one day on a regular basis), the company can either tighten the rule for you or even demand a trip to the Amtsarzt (a special kind of doctor whose sole role it is to determine if you're fit to work just for such cases).
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  20. #20
    In the UK anyone sick <1 week 'self-certifies' (no doctor), but there's no statutory sick pay for first three days of absence. So we often have problems with people faking sickness, but it's an issue from the view of struggling without them as at least they're not paid for it. No number of sick days, but if people are unreliable then it can be a disciplinary issue.

    As a 7 day a week business I also can chart what day of a week people call in sick. Most commonly a problem on Saturday's. Showed one of the worst offenders a bar chart once, in 6 months of employment he'd been "sick" on 12 Saturdays and just 1 Monday (he was scheduled for every Sat and Mon). Said if it continued it'd be taken as a disciplinary issue, suddenly no more Saturday Night Fever.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  21. #21
    Why was he so often sick on saturdays?
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  22. #22
    Water-ethanol compounds
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

  23. #23
    ^^ Friday, Friday, fun fun fun, and the aftermath
    "Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt

  24. #24
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    CC likes to equate criticism of a large number of groups - notably bankers, the rich, etc. - as antisemitism. He does this a lot to GGT since it bothers her.

    Or he does it only to GGT, since she's the only one around here who seems to blame the world's problems on the "bankers and accountants and math quants" and other synonyms for "Jew" you'll hear in your average White Power/anti-Semitic hate speech.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  25. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
    Water-ethanol compounds
    A very good explanation, couldn't put it better myself.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  26. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
    Water-ethanol compounds
    Did RB tell you? Did the guy tell RB?
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  27. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Did RB tell you? Did the guy tell RB?
    Employers, businesses, don't have to use science to found their decisions, it's possible the guy had some form of migraine which inflamed mostly around the week-end for this reason or that, but it's several orders of magnitude more likely the guy liked to go out drinking on Fridays when most people do.

    If I were Gregory House, I'd want more information; if I'm Scrooge McDuck, as Randy is, I don't.
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

  28. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
    Employers, businesses, don't have to use science to found their decisions, it's possible the guy had some form of migraine which inflamed mostly around the week-end for this reason or that, but it's several orders of magnitude more likely the guy liked to go out drinking on Fridays when most people do.

    If I were Gregory House, I'd want more information; if I'm Scrooge McDuck, as Randy is, I don't.
    Well said again, except I think Gregory "everyone lies" House would have been quite happy to leap straight to water-ethanol compounds too. Never been called Scrooge McDuck before, I loved Ducktails
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  29. #29
    As I said before, pension-spiking is a big problem. Though I don't oppose allowing workers to build-up vacation time as compensation. Vacation time is compensation, and getting it on a "use it or lose it" basis can build up friction in environments where it's not easy to take time off. This is certainly something I've experienced.

    But the larger issue is these government employees are only unique in that they taxpayers are underwriting this fiscal madness.

    Defined-benefit pensions don't work. Period. And the private sector just exposes that in ways government unions do their best to paper-over.

    From tomorrow's WSJ:
    LAW | March 4, 2012, 7:23 p.m. ET
    Footing the Bill for Pensions
    Unfunded Retirement Plans Burden Younger Partners, but Some Say It Builds Loyalty

    By JENNIFER SMITH

    Retirement should be a happy time for a generation of baby boom-era lawyers near the end of their working lives. Less joy may await the partners they'll leave behind.

    At some of the country's top firms, younger lawyers will foot the bill for deluxe pension plans that could drag down their own earnings for years to come.

    These pensions are largely unfunded: there is no money saved to pay retirees. Instead, most law firms with such plans pay the benefits as they go, using a portion of their current profits.

    Partners at some elite firms are often entitled to between 20% to 30% of their peak pay after retirement—in many cases, for life, according to partners and law firm consultants. For the most profitable firms, that could mean payments of $400,000 to $600,000 a year per retired lawyer.

    Many law firms have moved to phase out unfunded pension plans. But those that haven't must pay them at a time when the corporate legal industry is finding it harder than ever to boost earnings. While law-firm profits are slowly improving after the recession, earnings have lagged behind previous years. Firms are under mounting pressure to lower their billing rates.

    Given those conditions, "it creates a significant burden on the younger partners," says Dan DiPietro, chairman of Citi Private Bank's law-firm group.

    The pension plans were devised decades earlier when life expectancy was lower and firms had fewer partners. That was before tax law changes in the 1980s made other retirement options more attractive for lawyers and law firms. But these pensions are still offered by a core slice of the most profitable law firms in the country, such as Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP and Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP.

    Few attorneys will complain as long as profits keep up. The trouble starts if payments to retirees grow faster than profits.

    "It's a real problem in this environment for a law firm to pay 10 or 15 cents out of every dollar of revenue to partners who have retired from the law firm," says a senior partner at one firm with a generous pension plan.

    Some managing partners at elite firms that still offer generous pensions say that such plans help build loyalty and retain top talent. "Partners take comfort in the fact that it is there. I think it's an important part of our culture," said Kenneth Doran, managing partner at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher.

    The pensions often come on top of other retirement programs, such as 401Ks, in which participants save for their retirement by putting away a portion of their earnings on a tax-deferred basis (often with a company match). Some firms also have profit-sharing plans.

    In its own way, the future liabilities for some top law firms mirror similar problems across the U.S. Benefits promised in more stable economic times seem increasingly unsustainable today. From General Motors Co. and AT&T Inc. to cash-strapped local governments employing public workers, pension liability is becoming a growing concern as the retiree pool swells.

    "It's the same thing you had with pensions in the private sector, where it was all defined benefits and companies were going bankrupt," says James Jones, a former managing partner at Arnold & Porter LLP who is now a senior fellow at Georgetown University's Center for the Study of the Legal Profession.

    Among law firms, hefty pension obligations also can jettison potential mergers or compound financial woes. For instance, some blamed the 2009 collapse of the Philadelphia firm Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen LLP—which followed a failed merger attempt in 2008—in part on its leadership's refusal to scale back their unfunded pension plan.

    At Gibson Dunn, partners who serve there for 20 years get a retirement benefit at age 60 that pays out 20% of their top compensation. At current profits, that could amount to $500,000 a year for eight years or life—whichever is longer. Surviving spouses would get the remaining benefit should a partner die before the eight years are up.

    Gibson Dunn reported record earnings in 2011, with gross revenue of $1.7 billion and average profit per partner at $2.47 million. Mr. Doran says his firm guards against burdening active partners with "runaway obligations" by capping pension payments at 6% of the firm's net income.

    Just how large such obligations loom is difficult to determine. U.S. law firms don't disclose financial details. Few lawyers feel comfortable discussing the subject of partner retirement benefits.

    Top firms with unfunded pensions include Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP; Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP; Debevoise & Plimpton LLP; Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP; and Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP, according to data compiled by the American Lawyer magazine. Those firms declined to comment.

    According to one estimate by law firm consultant Peter Giuliani, the current pension liability at a typical large New York firm with an unfunded plan could amount to $200 million—if the firm had to make the total payout today.

    His calculations are based on a firm of 175 partners with an equity stake and average annual earnings of $2 million per partner, with about 20% of the partners near retirement age. The pension would pay out over two decades. That liability could be much higher at the most profitable firms, according to several people with knowledge of finances at some top law firms.

    Some firms have moved to prune their plans, by shrinking benefit amounts or lowering caps that limit retiree payments to a certain percentage of profits. But getting rid of unfunded pension plans altogether can be a difficult proposition.

    "In a law firm, you have to get a majority vote of the partners to get it done. In some cases it's a supermajority, so 75% to 80% would have to support it," says Mr. Giuliani. "If 25% have an entitlement they don't want to give up, there is no way of doing it."

    One firm that discarded its unfunded pension plan is Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. The firm set up a funded plan, where money is socked away today to pay for future benefits, and now provides individual retirement plans that are owned by the lawyers, says chairman R. Bruce McLean.

    "We paid out the people who were entitled to benefits under the old unfunded plan," Mr. McLean says. "It's a great benefit…The difficulty is that at some point in time, some percentage of your income is siphoned off at the top."

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...978298056.html
    Last edited by Dreadnaught; 03-05-2012 at 12:37 AM.

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    Pension spiking is a huge issue. Though I do support paying people for untaken vacation days.

    Unless of course the union has negotiated European levels of vacation days. Which is likely.

    Rick Perry just did a similar thing in Texas. Pensions are pyramid schemes whose rules are inevitably rigged by insiders.
    Yeah pay them but don't allow it to be calculated into the final pension formula.

    Or better yet... completely do away with pensions. They are dinosaurs.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •