[East of the River]

Originally Posted by CTartist

I see everyone posting about how many state employees there are. I wanted to see for myself if CT is way higher which I assume we would be. Here is what I found on "governing.com". They are just about the facts/numbers without a political tilt.

The page I have it on is CT but I am not sure if it will show up that way if you click on it. (you need to select CT in the drop down box)

Comparison vs. National Averages

CT Full Time Employees per 100,000.......530
National Average per 100,000.................537
CT Monthly Payroll per 100,000...............$449
National Average per 100,000.................$507

These numbers don't look outrageous compared with other states. So my question is what is going on that things seem/are so bad.

States With Most Government Employees: Totals and Per Capita Rates

It's not the number or salary as you posted we are inline with other states. It's the retirement package. We have cut ours quite a bit 70% benefit if you started working before 1981 (note this is different then the teacher plan described above) to around a 50% benefit currently. I think the studies showing the huge 40% compensation gap use the current workforce makeup which includes 3 different tiers. Employees starting since 2011 or 13 I think are closer to other state workers, but still higher then most private sector jobs. I recall a radio interview with someone from Uconn and some one from Yankee institute, that basically said that state salaries (after the last few wage freezes) are about 3-5% lower then the private sector but the benefits are about 25-30% higher (for new hires) .

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by Robert137

[/b]

See this.

TRB: Normal Retirement

The document is a general summary of the Teachers retirement Plan. The 75% applies if the teacher has at 35 years of service and retires at "normal retirement." Most retiring teachers won't get this much.

I don't dispute that old teachers can get this much. What you guys don't understand is that no teachers who were hired after july 1 2011 are going to get any where near that amount. Its called the "hybrid plan" and I already linked to it. Not only are the max percentages lower for these new teachers the minimum retirement age has been increased to 63 (excluding disability)

If you guys want to screw over all the old teachers out of their pensions go for it. Those contracts have come and gone and there's nothing that can be done about. Go ahead and waste your time and the Govts time and money in court.

So I don't see the point in bringing up that XX teachers with 38 years of service get XX %. That has no bearing on the current budget. The only thing that is going to fix that is death of these old teachers.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by CTartist

I see everyone posting about how many state employees there are. I wanted to see for myself if CT is way higher which I assume we would be. Here is what I found on "governing.com". They are just about the facts/numbers without a political tilt.

The page I have it on is CT but I am not sure if it will show up that way if you click on it. (you need to select CT in the drop down box)

Comparison vs. National Averages

CT Full Time Employees per 100,000.......530
National Average per 100,000.................537
CT Monthly Payroll per 100,000...............$449
National Average per 100,000.................$507

These numbers don't look outrageous compared with other states. So my question is what is going on that things seem/are so bad.

States With Most Government Employees: Totals and Per Capita Rates

It's the total comp that matters, not the number of employees per 100,000.

It used to be that state and town jobs were lower paying. You traded off the job stability, lighter work load, and generous benefits against the private sector where jobs are far less stable, employers far more demanding, and benefits a heck of a lot thinner. All these decades of union manipulation of the system have jacked up the pay to be at parity with the private sector.

Unlike the private sector, you can't move the jobs to a low cost southern state or offshore them to China so there is no restraint on union demands.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

So I don't see the point in bringing up that XX teachers with 38 years of service get XX %. That has no bearing on the current budget. The only thing that is going to fix that is death of these old teachers.

Of course it matters. The state didn't fund the pension system properly. If it were funded at 100%, a retired teacher would be no burden at all to the taxpayer. A currently working teacher with 20+ years into the system is an enormous future liability to the state. Or even worse, a liability to the town if/when the state kicks the can back to the towns to deal with.

The way you fix this is to freeze the old pension system today. You're vested in what you've accrued to date. From today forwards, it's a defined contribution plan. This ain't hard and lots of states have done this years ago. Every nonunion corporation on the planet did it in the 1980's.

[JayCT]

The Connecticut State Employee unions apparently have ratified the concession proposal that would save the state $1.5 billion. Jay

https://ctmirror.org/2017/07/18/stat...n-sources-say/

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

The way you fix this is to freeze the old pension system today. You're vested in what you've accrued to date. From today forwards, it's a defined contribution plan. This ain't hard and lots of states have done this years ago. Every nonunion corporation on the planet did it in the 1980's.

This is what my FS Tim Herbst did when he got elected in my town and now we are on better footing. He is running for Governor and the CT pensions are high on his list to fix. I really don't think he will decimate the pensions because his mom and dad are both teachers. I believe he will have a more centered approach.

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by East of the River

It's not the number or salary as you posted we are inline with other states. It's the retirement package. .

Got it, thanks. So I guess a lot of this is state workers retiring and pensions kicking in. Does anyone know if and when this pension problem will stabilize?

[RunD1987]

Originally Posted by CTartist

This is what my FS Tim Herbst did when he got elected in my town and now we are on better footing. He is running for Governor and the CT pensions are high on his list to fix. I really don't think he will decimate the pensions because his mom and dad are both teachers. I believe he will have a more centered approach.

Big issue is the power and strength of the Unions. Will they allow pensions to be frozen. There should be a 60% employee contribution and 40% State contribution to Pensions.

[NewEnglandMan22]

Originally Posted by CTartist

Got it, thanks. So I guess a lot of this is state workers retiring and pensions kicking in. Does anyone know if and when this pension problem will stabilize?

I heard from a friend who works for Waterbury that some retirement packages in the 80s/90s included healthcare with grandfathered $5 and $10 copays for services which would be very generous by today's standards. This conversation was a few years ago so take it with a grain of salt but even if its a little true then the true cost is probably absurdly difficult to calculate and when are we ever likely to put a bit extra in just in case our math is off??

I know it's a dead horse but I'ma go there! TOLLS!!!! Please, please please...... just start the process. Ugh!

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by NewEnglandMan22

I heard from a friend who works for Waterbury that some retirement packages in the 80s/90s included healthcare with grandfathered $5 and $10 copays for services which would be very generous by today's standards. This conversation was a few years ago so take it with a grain of salt but even if its a little true then the true cost is probably absurdly difficult to calculate and when are we ever likely to put a bit extra in just in case our math is off??

I know it's a dead horse but I'ma go there! TOLLS!!!! Please, please please...... just start the process. Ugh!

Tolls have been eliminated from the budget conversation this year. I guess the legislature is having a hard enough time trying to get budget agreeable to the majority let alone adding in the debate about tolls. Jay