oh man, you're right - there are some people in California who get that! I should have said "90% permanent salary replacement is so far from normal that nobody

oh man, you're right - there are some people in California who get that! I should have said "90% permanent salary replacement is so far from normal that nobody can in good faith call it a major part of the compensation story. Anyone who used that as advertising for the job would be sued for lying. The average length of service at time of retirement across the entire California public education system is only 25 years. Only around 11% of all CA education employees even hit 35 years at retirement, and less than a quarter of those make it to 40, so a maximum of 5% of all education staff end up with a 90% salary replacement - and this group is more likely to be administrative staff than elementary school teachers, and more likely to be out of SF than in it." BUT for the arbitrary reason that it supports my argument, we are going to ignore any teachers that are getting 90% salary replacement, as a fair way to compensate for arbitrarily discarding all private sector benefits from the comparison. So I was right after all - nobody in the comparison group is getting 90% salary replacement.