4 ms·

> To the extent that school districts pick up the cost, kids in school today will be hurt because more dollars will go to pension costs and fewer dollars will g

> To the extent that school districts pick up the cost, kids in school today will be hurt because more dollars will go to pension costs and fewer dollars will go to classrooms. To the extent that the state picks up the cost, residents will receive fewer services. Either way, voters will get little for the tax increase they approved in November. The only real problem here is how this was presented. As worded, it sounds like Crane is arguing that the tax shouldn't have gone through. But the pensions were guaranteed, and taxes are how the voters pay for things. What the voters will get for their tax increase is fulfillment of obligations they've already promised. What they're "getting" is teachers in classrooms rather than rioting in the streets. The article comes across as whining about having to pay for things already bought.

anigbrowl 14y ago
The article comes across as whining about having to pay for things already bought. I'm all about funding public education but it's a fact that there's a lot of shitty, shitty deals in pension systems across CA - mostly of higher-level administrators rather than rank-and-file employees, but there you go. There's an opportunity cost to such deals. In my county (Alameda) the county administrator makes about $425k/year - more than the President - and is guaranteed her full salary in retirement, for life. It's nauseating.
- reustle 14y ago
  I understand the arguments for and against pensions and I still think it's a ridiculous concept.
- eli_gottlieb 14y ago
  Yeah, so why not just go after those extreme cases rather than broadly and generally defunding public education and ruining teachers' old age?
  - anigbrowl 14y ago
    I mention it because legally, most of these pension contracts stand on a similar footing in California. I'm not arguing for broad or general defunding of education, but I do think that sector needs root-and-branch reform from the federal level down. I'd need several pages to go into how though.
- arethuza 14y ago
  We have a similar problem in the UK - some public sector administrators seem to make vast amounts of money for jobs that seem secure and rather undemanding to me. What I find particularly annoying is that people at the "sharp end" of the state (rather than administrators) often seem poorely paid for the responsibilities they have. A recent Royal Navy recruitment advert pointed out that you can make up to £95K serving on a submarine - to which my reaction was "that's all the commander of a UK Trident submarine makes?". NB In the case of UK Trident submarine commanders this seems particularly bad as they (and their crews) have far more freedom than people in equivalent positions in other navies. As far as I know, only the UK Trident submarines have the power to launch without any authorization from the PM or anyone else [there were good reasons for this, at least during the Cold War]. So we really trust these men and women.
patio11 14y ago
Voters have little meaningful check on the ability of the California teachers unions (and, more brazenly, public safety unions, and also state employees generally) to unilaterally award themselves extraordinarily expensive compensation schemes. This is particularly true with regards to pensions, since $X0 billion dollar future outlays are routinely described as "minor adjustments to administrative procedures" and often not subject to the discipline of the ballot at all. For example, consider a one-line alteration to a statewide contract for teachers, changing the calculation for defined-benefit pensions from being based off of "the average of the highest 3 years of salary in a career" to "the average of the highest 3 years of salary in a career for careers of less than 25 years, or the highest single year of salary for careers of 25 or more years." That doesn't look like "The teachers just asked for $50 billion in extra pensions", does it? But that's exactly what happened. (If you're unsure of why there's a difference between the two contracts, read up on "pension spiking", which is theft under the cover of law that is an institutional reality for California public employees since "everybody is doing it.")
- wildgift 14y ago
  We need either a smarter mix of politicians (not likely), or some bureaucrats that have to review the financial effects and report their findings on all changes to compensation. Then we would need a smarter press corps. That is more do-able.
- fusiongyro 14y ago
  Sure, but that's a different article about the real problem, while this one complains about how tax money was spent paying taxpayer obligations.

anigbrowl 14y ago

The article comes across as whining about having to pay for things already bought. I'm all about funding public education but it's a fact that there's a lot of shitty, shitty deals in pension systems across CA - mostly of higher-level administrators rather than rank-and-file employees, but there you go. There's an opportunity cost to such deals. In my county (Alameda) the county administrator makes about $425k/year - more than the President - and is guaranteed her full salary in retirement, for life. It's nauseating.

reustle 14y ago
I understand the arguments for and against pensions and I still think it's a ridiculous concept.
eli_gottlieb 14y ago
Yeah, so why not just go after those extreme cases rather than broadly and generally defunding public education and ruining teachers' old age?
- anigbrowl 14y ago
  I mention it because legally, most of these pension contracts stand on a similar footing in California. I'm not arguing for broad or general defunding of education, but I do think that sector needs root-and-branch reform from the federal level down. I'd need several pages to go into how though.
arethuza 14y ago
We have a similar problem in the UK - some public sector administrators seem to make vast amounts of money for jobs that seem secure and rather undemanding to me. What I find particularly annoying is that people at the "sharp end" of the state (rather than administrators) often seem poorely paid for the responsibilities they have. A recent Royal Navy recruitment advert pointed out that you can make up to £95K serving on a submarine - to which my reaction was "that's all the commander of a UK Trident submarine makes?". NB In the case of UK Trident submarine commanders this seems particularly bad as they (and their crews) have far more freedom than people in equivalent positions in other navies. As far as I know, only the UK Trident submarines have the power to launch without any authorization from the PM or anyone else [there were good reasons for this, at least during the Cold War]. So we really trust these men and women.

patio11 14y ago

Voters have little meaningful check on the ability of the California teachers unions (and, more brazenly, public safety unions, and also state employees generally) to unilaterally award themselves extraordinarily expensive compensation schemes. This is particularly true with regards to pensions, since $X0 billion dollar future outlays are routinely described as "minor adjustments to administrative procedures" and often not subject to the discipline of the ballot at all. For example, consider a one-line alteration to a statewide contract for teachers, changing the calculation for defined-benefit pensions from being based off of "the average of the highest 3 years of salary in a career" to "the average of the highest 3 years of salary in a career for careers of less than 25 years, or the highest single year of salary for careers of 25 or more years." That doesn't look like "The teachers just asked for $50 billion in extra pensions", does it? But that's exactly what happened. (If you're unsure of why there's a difference between the two contracts, read up on "pension spiking", which is theft under the cover of law that is an institutional reality for California public employees since "everybody is doing it.")

wildgift 14y ago
We need either a smarter mix of politicians (not likely), or some bureaucrats that have to review the financial effects and report their findings on all changes to compensation. Then we would need a smarter press corps. That is more do-able.
fusiongyro 14y ago
Sure, but that's a different article about the real problem, while this one complains about how tax money was spent paying taxpayer obligations.