October 09, 2008
Re-thinking government pension benefits
Plummeting tax revenues and increasing pension costs are sparking calls from Buffalo to Scarsdale to redesign public pensions for future employees.
Anticipating a push for pension reform, Randi Weingarten, president of the United Federation of Teachers, told the Times that "it would be wrong to ask workers who average pensions of $19,000 a year to be sacrificed" as a way of balancing the New York City budget.
But in a New York Post op-ed, the Empire Center's E.J. McMahon notes the state Constitution ensures that membership in a retirement system cannot be "diminished or impaired" -- which effectively means no current employee or retiree can be asked to sacrifice anything. Moreover, McMahon points out, "pensions for most career city employees are a lot higher than $19,000 a year."
A Buffalo News editorial warns it's only a matter of time until the state goes bust.
A cash-strapped state, tied as it is to the fortunes and follies of Wall Street, needs to create a less generous system, one that calls upon public employees to contribute, in most cases, more while they work--and to draw, in some cases, less in their well-earned retirement.
It notes the city of Buffalo pension contributions in one year tripled, from $5.2 million to $15.6 million.
In 2006...the city's contribution to the fund was $22.4 million. That's half again what it paid for trash collection that year and nearly five times what it paid for all culture and recreation services.
At least one state legislator, Assemblywoman Amy Paulin, a Scarsdale Democrat, agrees New York can no longer afford the status quo.
Paulin did not propose cutting pensions for public employees now on the job, but said the state could cut spending by establishing a new tier in the retirement system with less generous benefits.
On Wednesday, state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli announced he is stripping pension credits of four more Long Island attorneys. DiNapoli contends they provided legal services as independent contractors and thus are not eligible for government pensions. (Newsday story, here.)
« Previous |
Main
| Next »
|
