Comments about ‘Utah Legislature: State retirement changes gain final approval’

This should be making headlines everywhere in the state but somehow they are keeping it quiet.

WHERE ARE THE RETIREMENT FUND MANAGERS ON THIS STORY?

There was no crisis. Just one more way the legislators are sticking it to the teachers.

Unfortunately they also took down the fire and police with it.

Sad day.

Interesting. Tea party members out to take a look at this. It appears to be just another act of progressivism. No cuts just increase the taxpayers burden.

The retirement fund overhaul should be vetoed. It is not necessary, and will result in a loss of talent and experience. No one will want to teach in Utah, or work for the state or a local government. Believe it or not, there are talented and dedicated public employees, who are working to make things better for everyone. What the legislature is doing is spitting in their face, and saying "don't waste your time working or teaching in Utah anymore."

Governor Herbert, please veto this bill.

Weren't the URS losses from the last recession recovered when the economy did? Well, the economy is recovering again, and the big losses in the URS are already being made up as the economy picks up. It's too bad so many legislators can't wait to use this excuse to attack teachers and other state workers. No matter what the excuse, the fact is that Utah's commitment to education, as measured by it's percentage of the overall state budget, has gone steadily down over the last 13 years. Nationwide the same percentage has been rising. Does Utah really want to buck the national trend and keep reducing the percentage of our budget that goes for education? What is more important?

$400,000,000 x 25 = $10,000,000,000 (ten billion). Yet the system is only down $6.5 billion. And 1 or 2 billion was already made up last year due to the stock market.

How does he get away with throwing out this exagerated numbers?

There's no change for current workers, other an a one year moritorium on "double dipping" after they leave. Doesn't seem like much of a change.

I don't think the number resumes for new state job openings will decrease based on a drop in state contribution from 16% to 10%.

I agree with the first comment - "Where are the retirement fund managers in this story?" Who was asleep at the switch in 2008?

The whole world was asleep. The Harvard foundation, for heck sakes, lost 30+ percent. If they weren't smart enough to out maneuver this thing, the rest of us had little chance...

Governor Herbert please sign this bill. Please don't listen to the liberal eggheads the likes of whom have already taken down states like California and New Jersey.

I can't wait to see the schools in the next few years, when there are no male teachers. What guy in his right mind would go into teaching with the decrease in benefits. That WAS one of the selling points. It is pretty dang hard to support a family on starting teacher pay, especially when it puts you in the poverty level if you are married and have any kids. As for the double dipping part, I get that, but can't they just say, that if you retire, then try to work again, you start over at starting teacher pay? Makes sense to me.

Your funny. Utah has the worst pay and now it has one of the worst retirements plans. Utah will be getting the people no one else will hire. Employees are an asset. You put money into it in order to get a good return. You don't put money into it and then get crap. It is your state. Ruin it if you want.

Well, please tell me how this saves 400 million dollars right away?

1.5 % 401K contribution is continued.

"double dipping" is not eliminated--just a change in terms.

Reduced retirement benefits will not be realized until new hires (after 7-1-2011) get to retirement age in 2036 or 2046.

By then, the retirement system and the economy will both have recovered.

Oh, but I forgot----these are short-sighted legislators we are dealing with. They just found a neat way to stick it to the state employees again.
CONGRATULATIONS!!!!

Currently the bill will be fine. Five years down the road it will be a disaster. But like all things in public employment/education, it will change. There will be a big shortage of police officers, educators etc. The legislature will have to pass some incentives to get people to work in the state.

Short sighted bills are the norm for our state. It keeps us on budget and passes the buck to the next guy. Long term solutions are never a priority.

There may be an explanation somewhere for one aspect of this brouhaha, but I haven't heard it. If a retired employee returns to work for a State agency, and receives the salary and benefits, the retired employee receives both his retirement and the salary and benefits. If the retired employee does not return to work for the State, he or she continues to receive the retirement benefit, and the agency pays the non-retired employee the same amount it would have paid the retired employee. Where is the savings?

Horrible bill. Please everyone vote every incumbent Republican including Herbert out. Please everyone do it. Send a message enough is enough.

Why is it that the legislators have not made the first move to cut their own salary and benefits, however nominal that might be? Now that would be thinking "outside the box", wouldn't it?

The legislature members aren't going to cut their own salaries, though most of them don't even need the legislative salary because many are in the upper tax bracket--you'll notice how quick that bill died.

What I want to know is if the fine senator from my district actually went out and asked any teachers and pubic safety officers how they felt about this bill or for their ideas on how to fix the system? I bet not. Sure they wouldn't say cut our salaries and increase our work years, but why not ask the people most affected for their side and input? Apparently we've lost representation somewhere along the way in politics regardless the party line.

The idea that you can retire and then re-hire and draw both wages and retirement has got to be one of the most ludicrous concepts that ever came from a government entity. No wonder people are attacking the tax collectors.

I think it is funny that everyone says the legislators aren't going to cut their pay. They did. David Litvack ran the bill this year. Only one representative in the House voted against it - Neil Hansen. They gave themselves a 10% pay cut this year and last. But it seems like no one knows that.

There are plenty of people who will want to become public employees right now because they don't have jobs. It might be a problem down the road, but the problem can be addressed when it is a problem. There are plenty of us in the private sector who would kill for any pension, even if we had to work 10 years for it.

SO I guess this means Utah will no longer be employing future teachers! That means my children will get an even worse education than they are now. Utah is already the worst funded education state and now future teachers will get little to no retirement benefits to compensate for their low wages. That means Utah will only get the teachers who can't find a job out of state which means they will be the worst teachers available.
So I am going to look for a new job and get out of this state since my children have no chance of getting a decent education here.