2014
This is a complicated issue and one faced by many state and local governments. Once hired does a government employee have a vested right in the pension and health benefits in effect on the date of hire? For any employer other than government the answer is a resounding no. Benefit programs are changed regularly on a perspective basis.
Regular readers know I am opposed to taking away benefits that were earned especially when there is no time for workers to adjust accordingly. But to say retiree medical coverage in effect for a worker hired today must remain unchanged for the next thirty years or more is ludicrous. Vested usually means not losing what you have already received such as once a pension is vested, the amount accrued cannot be reduced. I would extend that to say once a person retires their health benefits, but not cost sharing should be considered vested, but there is no legal requirement to do so.
As this article points out politicians are not averse to playing the sympathy card. But why teachers and peace officers are entitled to so much more than the people paying the taxes to provide these benefits is a mystery (at least to me). Nevertheless, that is the position taken by public unions and in this case is apparently part of a state’s constitution.
Note that in this case the proposed change would only allow negotiations for perspective changes, not unilateral changes.
What do you say, should government workers receive special treatment not afforded other workers; workers paying the taxes that support public employees?
POLITICAL DIARY Liberals vs. Pension Reform
By ALLYSIA FINLEY CONNECT. Feb. 3, 2014 2:50 p.m.
A preemptive attack by unions and their Democratic friends in Sacramento appears to have killed a pension-reform initiative that was slated for the November ballot.
San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed, the initiatives sponsor, has conceded that gathering enough signatures to qualify the measure for the November ballot will be a tall order if Attorney General Kamala Harriss official description is allowed to stand. Mr. Reed argues that the initiatives description, which appears on signature cards and ballot, is inaccurate and could cloud voters opinions.
According to the AGs characterization, the initiative “eliminates constitutional protections for vested pension and retiree healthcare benefits for current public employees, including teachers, nurses and peace offices, for future work performed.” Note how Ms. Harris singled-out government workers who are viewed most favorably by the public.But more to the point, its unclear whether future pension benefits are vested under state law and doubtful that retiree health care is protected. Mr. Reeds initiative would make clear that under state law future benefits arent vested, which would allow government employers to negotiate pension changes with workers on a prospective basis.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
My answer to your question is an UN-equivocal and resounding NO! I am opposed to government unions at all levels-federal,state and especially municipal. And this is coming from someone who is now a city employee, albeit part time.This is why you see four cop cars pulling over old ladies for minor traffic violations which is what i saw the other day. I guess she could have been a terrorist. I am old enough to remember” car 54 where are you” ? Tuddy and Muldune they worked together in one car. Now everyone gets their own car with computers, cameras….the works.Yes work rules have changed considerably since i was a young man and thanks to unions and the right to bargain for salary and working conditions!
This week a friend of mine’s refrigerator stopped working so he went out to Sears to to buy another one.” Old Betsy” lasted almost 35 years- a testament to a time when things were really built to last. On the way out to the store he was ticketed for having snow on his roof. He is also disabled and walks with a cane. He pleaded with the empathic officer but to no avail. He got a $100.00 dollar ticket. When he got home he called me and told me what happened. He called the municipal office where the ticket was issued as he did not understand why he had to appear in court.
I had to explain to him how it works in the real world. I told him you can’t just mail it in because the issuing officer will more than likely get time and a half for appearing in court and maybe even double time if he has to appear on one his off days.
And so its not that I am opposed to collective bargaining per se…its just that its a “stacked deck”, a cozy relationship between politicians and government unions which in my opinion benefits both and at the expense of the tax payer. Yes, you scratch my back and I will scratch yours and together we make each other more powerful.
LikeLike