Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
meganeck wrote:On the news last night the Governor was urging the House and Senate to pass his pension reform plan and then with the savings put it to fund higher education and the MAPS program. Doesn't sound like it will happen but can always hope.
So you think it's an acceptable idea for the General Assembly to pass an illegal, unconstitutional pension reform plan in order to fund higher education? Please do all state employees and retirees - and all citizens who respect the rule of law- a favor and never run for the General Assembly.
They legally and ethically should not be changing any already accued or previous pensions, but they really need to switch to a 401k system or something similar that requires the employee to fully fund his/her own retirement. My understanding is that the pension fund they had setup for a long time was completely unrealistic in being able to sustain paying into this and in turn is a large part of the problem now. I do not see how anyone could just take money out of your pension, but if problem has not been changed it needs to be so no future issues arise from something like retirement which should never of become a problem in the first place. This board/discussion makes me want to move out of Illinois quickly....
-------------
The Supreme Court has ruled on this. Employees cannot be forced into a different retirement plan against their will. Period. Stop this talk of pension reform for current employees. It's illegal. Not. Going. To. Happen.
Switching employees to a 403(b) would actually be more expensive for the state. That would immediately make all employees eligible for Social Security, and that would immediately cost the State 6.2%. That could not be deferred/holidayed/skipped. Then employees would need to receive their employer match to the 403(b)- 10% is fairly common in higher education. That could also not be deferred/skipped. That makes 16+% total retirement contributions. Suddenly the Illinois state employee pension plan (8-9%) is looking very affordable.
I literally took your side except didn't specifically say excluding current employees as well.... fine then they change it and model it off the private sector retirement plans for all new employees and leave the old employees retirements alone. Whatever it does not really matter they have to fix the problem some way and I would rather be part of the solution than the problem. You may have a better retirement now, which I am assuming since no one would get defensive about a better retirement plan, but since the state is in shambles all that extra retirement money doesn't matter since we will pay higher property, income and sales taxes to make up for the deficit which over time will most likely cost more than the extra money made from a better retirement plan. All the while the roads and infrastructure are crumbling from lack of construction funds and that in turn causes more problems for your car costing more money on repairs and making it less fuel efficient.
I am just saying someone needs to break all these numbers down because all we hear about is ideas from our politicians and in the long run no one really puts out all the numbers. I mean I want a chart that shows savings and also shows what it could effect elsewhere in the budget. Not specifically referring to retirement, just all of the plans they have in general it would be nice to see a real cost breakdown. There has to be somewhere that we can change and get back to an even budget.
Leatherneck10 wrote:The Supreme Court has ruled on this. Employees cannot be forced into a different retirement plan against their will. Period. Stop this talk of pension reform for current employees. It's illegal. Not. Going. To. Happen.
Switching employees to a 403(b) would actually be more expensive for the state. That would immediately make all employees eligible for Social Security, and that would immediately cost the State 6.2%. That could not be deferred/holidayed/skipped. Then employees would need to receive their employer match to the 403(b)- 10% is fairly common in higher education. That could also not be deferred/skipped. That makes 16+% total retirement contributions. Suddenly the Illinois state employee pension plan (8-9%) is looking very affordable.
We do already have the option for a 403(b), but yea, switching all retirement accounts to a 403(b) could be very problematic. Also, at this point we do not get employer matching in our 403(b) plans. That doesn't mean that they couldn't implement some type of matching if they were able to switch to a pure 403(b) plan for all new employees (like you said, they can't for existing employees), but we do not currently have it.
Scott Lawson - Board Admin
Western Illinois University Alum/Fan/Employee
Member of the Marching Leathernecks - 1996-2000
Northeastern Illinois University announces furlough days
From the Associated Press:
Officials of Northeastern Illinois University say 1,000 of the school's employees will be required to take one furlough day a week starting next week.
The decision comes as Illinois continues to operate without a budget, denying funds and financial aid dollars to the state's public universities.
University President Sharon Hahs said Thursday that the Chicago institution is well-situated for the rest of the school year. Hahs said she regrets having to impose the furlough days, but it is a necessary step to make sure the university can operate in the fall.
In addition to administrators and non-union employees, some unions also have agreed to the furloughs following negotiations with the university.
Other state universities have had to take measures to ensure continued operations despite the lack of state funds.
WIU0812 wrote:I literally took your side except didn't specifically say excluding current employees as well.... fine then they change it and model it off the private sector retirement plans for all new employees and leave the old employees retirements alone. Whatever it does not really matter they have to fix the problem some way and I would rather be part of the solution than the problem. You may have a better retirement now, which I am assuming since no one would get defensive about a better retirement plan, but since the state is in shambles all that extra retirement money doesn't matter since we will pay higher property, income and sales taxes to make up for the deficit which over time will most likely cost more than the extra money made from a better retirement plan. All the while the roads and infrastructure are crumbling from lack of construction funds and that in turn causes more problems for your car costing more money on repairs and making it less fuel efficient.
I am just saying someone needs to break all these numbers down because all we hear about is ideas from our politicians and in the long run no one really puts out all the numbers. I mean I want a chart that shows savings and also shows what it could effect elsewhere in the budget. Not specifically referring to retirement, just all of the plans they have in general it would be nice to see a real cost breakdown. There has to be somewhere that we can change and get back to an even budget.
---------------
Higher taxes absolutely have to be an integral part of the solution. Probably the first part. Illinois cannot cut its way out of its financial problems. I don't see any way we can run a state that provides the level of services we as Illinoisans expect on a 3.75% flat tax. Maybe 3.75% would be fine for Mississippi (though in actuality most Mississippians pay 5%), but most Illinoisans don't want to live in a state that provides Mississippi-level service to its residents.
I don't have a clue why Illinois teachers think they need their own special retirement system. They have high school teachers covered under TRS. University teachers under SURS. F'ing ridiculous IMO. Once again, I direct your attention to South Dakota. All public servants covered under their SDRS. The federal government switched over to a new plan back in 1987. They only have that single plan for all new hires. Yes they have to maintain the old one as well. But having a new and a slowly fading out old one is still a lot better than the umpteen retirement plans the State of Illinois has to manage. I just noticed that their is even a General Assembly Retirement System. What a joke.
sealhall74 wrote:I don't have a clue why Illinois teachers think they need their own special retirement system. They have high school teachers covered under TRS. University teachers under SURS. F'ing ridiculous IMO. Once again, I direct your attention to South Dakota. All public servants covered under their SDRS. The federal government switched over to a new plan back in 1987. They only have that single plan for all new hires. Yes they have to maintain the old one as well. But having a new and a slowly fading out old one is still a lot better than the umpteen retirement plans the State of Illinois has to manage. I just noticed that their is even a General Assembly Retirement System. What a joke.
That is kinda dumb. You'd think it'd be better (and probably more efficient) to have just a State of Illinois Retirement System for all public employees.
Scott Lawson - Board Admin
Western Illinois University Alum/Fan/Employee
Member of the Marching Leathernecks - 1996-2000
It is too bad, but, Illinois has brought this on themselves. Too many governor's sent to prison for their actions, too much over the years of pouring money into a number of rat holes in the NE corner, high taxes, interest groups running the show. We, the people of Illinois, have let this develop. It really is sad.
Scott Lawson - Board Admin
