Sun, Feb 26, 2012, 10:00 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

Explore news, videos and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

To get started, first

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    Public retirement ages come under greater scrutiny

    With public workers eligible to retire at 55 or 60, governments look to boost retirement ages

    COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- After nearly 40 years in public education, Patrick Godwin spends his retirement days running a horse farm east of Sacramento, Calif., with his daughter.

    His departure from the workaday world is likely to be long and relatively free of financial concerns, after he retired last July at age 59 with a pension paying $174,308 a year for the rest of his life.

    Such guaranteed pensions for relatively youthful government retirees — paid in similar fashion to millions nationwide — are contributing to nationwide friction with the public sector workers. They have access to attractive defined-benefit pensions and retiree health care coverage that most private sector workers no longer do.

    Experts say eligible retirement ages have fallen over the past two decades for many reasons, including contract agreements between states and government labor unions that lowered retirement ages in lieu of raising pay.

    With Americans increasingly likely to live well into their 80s, critics question whether paying lifetime pensions to retirees from age 55 or 60 is financially sustainable. An Associated Press survey earlier this year found the 50 states have a combined $690 billion in unfunded pension liabilities and $418 billion in retiree health care obligations.

    Three-quarters of U.S. public retirement systems in 2008 offered some kind of early-retirement option paying partial benefits, according to a 2009 Wisconsin Legislative Council study. Most commonly, the minimum age for those programs was 55, but 15 percent allowed government workers to retire even earlier, the review found. The study is widely regarded as the most comprehensive assessment of the issue.

    Police and firefighters often can retire starting even younger — at around age 50 — because of the physically demanding nature of some of those jobs.

    Yet with cities, counties and states struggling to pay pension bills, changes are afoot.

    In November, San Francisco voters supported a local ballot initiative to hike minimum retirement ages for some city workers. Since that time, laws increasing retirement ages for government workers were signed in Rhode Island and Massachusetts in efforts to address underfunded pension systems.

    Earlier in New Jersey, part of a legislative deal struck between Democrats and Republicans raised the normal retirement age from 62 to 65.

    An initiative circulating for California's 2012 state ballot seeks to increase the minimum retirement age to 65 for public employees and teachers, and to 58 for sworn public safety officers.

    Godwin said all the antagonism toward public retirees is misplaced. His pension payout follows 36 years as an English teacher and school administrator in California, with two years' sick-leave credit added for never being absent.

    He said lack of accountability on Wall Street and exorbitant corporate salaries are a more justified target of the public's anger.

    "Those things I think are a much larger problem than what a public employee is making as a pension," he said. The AFL-CIO labor coalition's Executive PayWatch project estimates chief executives went from making 42 times the average blue collar worker's salary in 1980 to 343 times as much last year.

    Overall, Americans are working to older ages — even with the expanded ability for some to collect partial pensions younger if they retire. Over the past 20 years, the average retirement age for men has edged up to 64, for women to 62, according to the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

    Data compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics show 29 percent of people between 65 and 69 worked at least part-time last year, up from 24 percent a decade ago and 21 percent in 1994. Almost 7 percent of people 75 or older were employed in 2010, compared to less than 5 percent 15 years ago.

    Experts say no reliable figures exist that could show whether public sector workers retire younger than their private-sector counterparts. That's because the Bureau of Labor Statistics has no way of defining "retirement," and nearly all analyses involving the American workforce begin with the bureau's data.

    It is clear, though, that most private-sector workers no longer receive defined-benefit pensions that will pay them for life. Most must wait until age 65 or 67 to collect their full Social Security benefit or draw from 401(k) accounts that are invested in the stock market and, in many cases, have sustained significant losses during the recession.

    It is this shift in the style of benefits, and not the age of retirement, that should be scrutinized, said Hank Kim, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based National Conference on Public Employee Retirement Systems, which advocates for government pensions.

    "I think the biggest difference between the private and the public sector is that, for whatever reason, the private sector has largely abandoned the pension system," he said.

    Kim believes that shift has left a generation of private employees — who make up the bulk of the American labor force — unprepared for retirement. In 2010, there were 18 million government workers and 94 million private sector workers in the U.S.

    Rising retirement ages and reduced pension payouts for many private-sector workers are emboldening those seeking to rein in the obligations of overextended public pension systems.

    Former California state Assemblyman Roger Niello, a Republican, is backing the proposal to take the age issue to California voters next year.

    "It's a huge concern, arguably maybe the biggest concern aside from things where the system is being abused, like pension-spiking," said Niello, referring to the practice of artificially inflating retirement benefits by boosting pay at the end of an employee's career.

    Defenders say union-negotiated retirement packages help attract and keep people in jobs necessary to society, whether teaching, environmental protection, law enforcement or garbage collecting.

    Maureen Reedy, a long-time elementary instructional specialist in Upper Arlington, Ohio, a Columbus suburb, said benefits form part of the financial equation workers use to decide whether to go into public service.

    "After 20 years, most teachers are making $50,000 — woo-hoo," she said. "Our pension and our security are part of the long-range outlook of our profession."

    Ohio, New Jersey and Wisconsin were among states this year that sought to limit the power of public employee unions, in part out of concern over rising pension costs. Reedy, 53, was considering retirement before Ohioans voted in November to repeal a new law making sweeping changes to the collective bargaining abilities of unions representing 350,000 public workers. Pension changes are still on the state's agenda.

    Some states began raising retirement ages around five years ago, before the issue had garnered wide public attention. Illinois and Missouri, for example, increased the normal retirement age to 67. Before the change, Illinois workers could retire with full benefits at 60 after just eight years of service.

    Matt Mayer, president of the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, a conservative think tank in Ohio, believes states' pension woes could be remedied by having their public pension systems operate more like the federal Social Security system.

    "Frankly, I don't have as much a concern about when they retire as I do about when they get access to the pension," he said. "I believe in the economic freedom of workers. If a teacher wants to retire at 55, fine. They just don't get their pension until 65."

    ___

    Thompson reported from Sacramento, Calif.

     

    59 comments

    • PETER  •  Los Angeles, California  •  1 month 18 days ago
      Godwin is full of horse pucky--trying to compare the millions of G workers to a relatively small number (by comparison) of high paid executives in the business . Sounds like the same old lliberal bable that goes on and on and on.
    • Leonard  •  2 months ago
      What does a school teacher do to earn a pension of almost $175,000 per year?? Most pension plans provide income equal to about 50% of average pay. Having said that, does this mean this person earned almost $350,000 per year -- seems like a lot even if this person was an administrator.
    • mac_daddy_diesal  •  2 months ago
      omg gimme a break where have all those jobs gone when u could graduate high school and fall into a job like that, yearly raises n vacations weekends off #$%$ happen no wonder people are starting to get crazy and riot theres nothing left for the youth were suppose to get nothing and like it 174,000 a year ahahah come ooooooooooon
    • Ron  •  2 months ago
      What they don't say is that the public sector pensions are insulated from market risk because in many cases, they are guaranteed a rate of return. If the pension fund doesn't generate that rate of return, the taxpayer has to make up the difference. The public sector unions own the politicians, so who is negotiating for the taxpayer? Nobody.
    • Chris  •  2 months ago
      You liberals like the words "fair" and "even playing field", right? Lets get rid of government pensions, and make everyone be paid equally upfront, and save for thier own retirement. Then, you can retire at whatever age your own physical discipline allows instead of getting a free ride from the taxpayers. Lets face it, union/government workers have it pretty well, and it is due largely in part to the circle of corruption between politcians and organized labor.
    • Liberaltarian  •  2 months ago
      If you no longer need incentives to hire the workers you want, do not offer incentives. The only safe forms of compensation are cash and stock. No options, no pensions, no health insurance, no vacation, no loans, no promises, no lies, no confusion, no mother (name your company) to grow dependent on. You work. You get paid. You take care of yourself and your future.
    • A Yahoo! User  •  2 months ago
      Government workers should retire 10 years later than workers for private companies. And we don’t need so many public workers to consume taxpayer’s money. Many of their workers can be better done by computer networks or robot.
    • reality fan  •  2 months ago
      I work till 70, just to keep living..doesn't increase my retirement quality///Healthcare. These #$%$ feel entitled....
    • pmb  •  2 months ago
      "They have access to attractive defined-benefit pensions and retiree health care coverage that most private sector workers no longer do. " When did private sector workers EVER have access to retiring at 59 with a pension like that? Come on.
      "After 20 years, most teachers are making $50,000 — woo-hoo," she said. "Our pension and our security are part of the long-range outlook of our profession."
      Im sure private sector workers with 20 years in are crying a river about the poor teachers only making 50 grand for 9 months worth of work and not having to pay their own retirement and healthcare costs.
    • Jacqueline  •  2 months ago
      The problem I have is that they retire for one day and then get rehired. So now the public is giving them two paychecks and can't afford to hire on more new workers that are desperately needed. And as for our "poor" teachers in wisconsin. They throw around numbers like we only make 24K-50K. But we have a website that lists their salary by school and by name. At my daughters school each teacher makes $78K plus up to $49K in retirement. Now I can see high school teachers making bigger bucks but so we really need to pay the 4K and 5K teachers $78K? We seriously need to rethink the qualifications we use for teaching if you think a 5K teacher needs a masters degree.
    • Dave  •  2 months ago
      Government pensions are also tax free and the federal and state governments offer reciprocity so they don't pay any federal or state tax. In addition these generous retirements are protected during bankruptcy proceedings. It really sucks!
    • Frank Peterson  •  2 months ago
      About time... and they should pay for part of their medical coverage too.
    • pmb  •  2 months ago
      These teachers are the 1%. You factor in all the free benefits they get and the summers off and they are upper middle class. Clearly we need to spread the wealth around- lets tax any pension over the average pay of the profession at 100%, that way these folks can still get what they were promised and yet get to learn what its like to see the tax man come take it away. All nice and legal like.
    • Georgiaboy61  •  2 months ago
      Public sector workers - millions of them - at the local, state and federal level - were promised benefits that cannot possibly be funded into the future on a sustained basis. The government lied to them, just like it lied to everyone else. Welcome to the club, folks, and don't get too comfortable in retirement; when those govt. pension checks stop coming, you may need to dust off your briefcase.
    • Constitutionalist  •  2 months ago
      Oh, while I am at it:

      Public school teachers are government employees as they are paid via tax dollars.

      In my experience as I look back on my life, it has become obvious that there are many conflicts of interest here:

      1-If the Teacher's children attend the same school system, do you think that their children have an advantage over the other children who do not have that same connection?

      2-Do you think that they and their children will have a better chance of obtaining government jobs, scholarships, or other access to government ?

      Answer: You bet.

      Has geometry changed since the time of Euclid or Pythagorus? A triangle still has a total of 180 degrees, a square has 360. The only things that have changed: The method of teaching it, the students, and perhaps the text books.

      So, teachers demand higher pay for what? The product that they have created has not gotten demonstrably better especially when compared with the rest of the world as US students are falling further and further behind.

      They claim to be a brotherhood aka union, but refuse to give younger teachers an opportunity as they are the first to be let go during times of cutbacks. Higher paid tenured teachers refuse to relinquish or share with those who are lower paid but who are eager to teach and who may have better teaching methodologies.

      I spent 30+ years in the private sector. I can tell you that I could never hold a gun to the head of a customer in order to get them to buy from me. I had to persuade them with facts. The public sector employee has the cudgel of law which they can and do use to coerce the private sector to do what they want not even if it makes no sense and is not beneficial to society in the long run. IMO this is selfishness run amok hiding under the guise of altruism.
    • blame yourself  •  2 months ago
      no one should be able to work in the public sector more than 15 years-redisribute the opportunity not the wealth.

      at least-public workers should retire later than the private sector not earlier

      public sector benefits should be lower tsan private sector

      no one is entitled to a job or entitled to become a buden on the taxpayer

      redistribute the wealth of the public sector and we all win

      the public sector wage earner should be the next level above minimum wage, instead the private sector middle class
    • Anonymous  •  2 months ago
      A lot of public retirement plans - especially at management levels - are just as outrageous as congress critters retirement plans. Police, Fire services, and especially water districts are famous for their extemely generous medical and pension plans.

      That said, for many rank and file public workers the base salaries are 60-80% of the comparable job in the private sector. You pay a price for that medical plan and retirement plan, and it is out of your base salary.

      For many, the retirement at 50 is on a sliding scale: Twenty years service and retirement at 50 often means 25% of your salary is your retirement, and you still pay your full time share of medical benifits - often half of your retirement check at 50 goes to pay your portion of the medical plan! Thirty years service and retirement at 60 may be 70% of salary, and so on.

      Plus, anyone who thinks that teachers salaries are generous has never worked in the field - paying for your students supplies and field trips out of your own pocket because the politicians demand school budgets be used for 'special' programs such as cultural sensitivity classes, ESL programs, ethnicaly appropriate lunch programs, etc. And the 9 months work quoted? 9 months of 8 hour days, 2 jhour after school pta and admin meetings, 3 hours grading homework and preparing lesson plans, weekends preparing exams and reading term papers. all so you can have 3 months during the summer - to go to classes that are essential to keep current, obtain advancement, or increase the odds you are going to have your contract renewed when the politicos who have been buying votes with tax money decide to cut back on education!
    • Henry  •  2 months ago
      I have two acquaintences who retired early, waited the required 6 months, and are now on as full time consultants at their former jobs!
    • Lukaroo  •  2 months ago
      Well before we start on everyone else let's take a look at federal and state representatives, congress, judges, vice pres and pres. Then we can take a look at the rest. PS don't the fringe benfits such as lifetime health care, better than anyone else's on the planet by the way, security services, just to name a few.
    • Frederick  •  2 months ago
      "I think the biggest difference between the private and the public sector is that, for whatever reason, the private sector has largely abandoned the pension system,"

      Ya think??? Might it have something to do with the fact that these extraordinarily generous pensions are financially unsustainable??? Might that be the reason we don't see them in the private sector anymore???

      The axiom "what can't go on forever won't" couldn't more more apt when it comes to these public pensions. It can't go on forever, so it won't.... (and yes, I believe Mr Godwin played by the rules and didn't break the law and really didn't do anything wrong, but come on...)

    LIFELONG INVESTING ON FACEBOOK