| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/23 |
| 2010/8/23-9/7 [Industry/Jobs] UID:53935 Activity:high |
8/23 Job opportunity at the US District Court, Northern District of CA:
Courtroom Technology Specialist
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/tch/1914895472.html
--erikred
\_ $54k/yr! Damn those overpaid civil servants!
\_ it's really about 70k-80k yr if you factor in things like
planned vacations, ease of work, no doctors bills for ulcers,
9-6 work day, 5 day work week.
\_ Plus no layoff.
\_ you're kidding, right?
\_ Layoffs in public sector have been much lower than private.
In private you get fired, not furloughed.
\_ Layoffs in public sector have been much lower than
private. In private you get fired, not furloughed.
\_ really? what if you're an unionized pilot/stew/maint
\_ What if you're not? I agree with the guy above.
Lots of people should be terminated and should
be glad they were furloughed instead.
\_ Bullshit
\_ Want to post some facts to back that up?
\_ you're the one who made the claim.
\_ http://blogs.sacbee.com/the_state_worker/100817%20Job%20loss%20chart.JPG
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/BudgetSummary/BS_SCH6.pdf
Also, being laid off from the State
requires 120 days notice and layoffs
are determined by seniority and not value.
\_ Salary looks about right for the requirements. I know someone
\_ So the State, which employs 300k out of
20M, has had 40k layoffs, this is 13%. The
public sector has had 1.2M out of 20M,
this is about 6%. Thanks for the data.
\_ You are misreading the data.
The 40K layoffs is for State
and local workers both. There
are about 1.8M government
workers when you add in the State
workers in the second chart.
(Source: http://www2.census.gov/govs/apes/09locca.txt
The second chart shows that there are
30K more State workers than in 2006
and only 10K less than the maximum.
Do your math again and get back
to me.
\_ Looks like 4% and 6% then, still not
"much lower."
\_ I think you will want to
recheck your math. 40K/1.8M
is not 4%.
\_ Salary looks about righe for the requirements. I know someone
with a very similar job who makes about $50K. Difference
being she's not a civil servant with all of the benefits
attached.
\_ So of course, the free market is the best way to set
compensation. Because of the magic of the invisible hand,
the most competent people are necessarily in the
highest-paying jobs. Unless they're civil servants, in
which case they're obviously incompetent, overcompensated
pariahs sucking taxpayers dry. Right. -tom
\_ Says Tom, who will rake in $100K/year (in today's
dollars) with free health care for the rest of his life at
around age 60. So you think this Bell city manager deserved
to make $800K/year and retire on $600K/year? He was
overcompensated and did suck the taxpayers dry. I am
dollars) with free health care for the rest of his life
at around age 60. So you think this Bell city manager
deserved to make $800K/year and retire on $600K/year? He
was overcompensated and did suck the taxpayers dry. I am
not sure if he was incompetent, but I do know that if
the position was advertised at that salary he probably
wouldn't have gotten the job despite his UCB undergrad
degree. You can make the same argument for the CEO of any
large company (incompetent and overpaid) _except_ it is not
at the taxpayer expense.
degree. You can make the same argument for the CEO of
any large company (incompetent and overpaid) _except_ it
is not at the taxpayer expense.
Check out the salaries for employees of the City of LA:
http://controller.lacity.org/ssLINK/LACITYP_011307
A "Senior clerk typist" makes $56K, a "Refuse
collector truck operator" makes $64K, a "Maintenance
Laborer" makes $49K, a "Motor Sweeper Operator" makes
$70K. These people do not pay for Social Security or health
http://controller.lacity.org/ssLINK/LACITYP_011307 A
"Senior clerk typist" makes $56K, a "Refuse collector
truck operator" makes $64K, a "Maintenance Laborer"
makes $49K, a "Motor Sweeper Operator" makes $70K. These
people do not pay for Social Security or health
insurance out of these salaries and many of them take
home more money than listed because of perks like
overtime. Now, granted, some positions are underpaid -
like many of the accountants. However, the average pay for
a secretary (senior clerk typist) in LA is only $48K and I
am guessing that her job is more stressful, less secure,
and receives fewer benefits. To wit:
like many of the accountants. However, the average pay
for a secretary (senior clerk typist) in LA is only $48K
and I am guessing that her job is more stressful, less
secure, and receives fewer benefits. To wit:
Disney's job posting for a secretary asks for:
"Ability and willingness to work long hours as needed."
"Ability to be proactive, resourceful, flexible and to
manage a heavy workload."
"Ability to maintain professionalism under pressure."
Pay: $40-60K with an average of $52K
Warner Bros wants:
"Detail oriented with the ability to work well and
maintain professionalism under pressure."
"Must be able to work at a face pace with accuracy."
"Must be able to work under constant deadlines."
Pay: Not listed, but probably about the same
Somehow I am seeing a trend here. Being that my girlfriend
works in entertainment, she will attest that they will
work you to death if possible. A government secretary
(which my sister was for years before going to get her RN)
does whatever work she can and goes home at 5pm.
Sometimes there wasn't enough to do (because she was so
efficient and because they are overstaffed) that her boss
sent her home early. It's one reason she started going
to nursing school while still working full-time: she was
able to get her work done even though she worked only
three days per week. So I wouldn't say that all
government employees are incompetent, but they certainly
set the staffing levels as if they are and yet I've asked
LA (in writing) to fix a mistake on my property tax bill
for 3 years in a row now and when I call I am told:
"Can you call back later? I'm busy right now." WTF?
Take down my number and call me back when you have time.
So, yeah, getting the job done isn't a priority for
some people.
Tom will ask: So why doesn't everyone get a government job
if they are so great? Well, because there is very
Somehow I am seeing a trend here. Being that my
girlfriend works in entertainment, she will attest that
they will work you to death if possible. A government
secretary (which my sister was for years before going to
get her RN) does whatever work she can and goes home at
5pm. Sometimes there wasn't enough to do (because she
was so efficient and because they are overstaffed) that
her boss sent her home early. It's one reason she
started going to nursing school while still working
full-time: she was able to get her work done even though
she worked only three days per week. So I wouldn't say
that all government employees are incompetent, but they
certainly set the staffing levels as if they are and yet
I've asked LA (in writing) to fix a mistake on my
property tax bill for 3 years in a row now and when I
call I am told: "Can you call back later? I'm busy right
now." WTF? Take down my number and call me back when
you have time. So, yeah, getting the job done isn't a
priority for some people.
Tom will ask: So why doesn't everyone get a government
job if they are so great? Well, because there is very
little turnover and once people land a job they stay
there for decades. I also believe that most people don't
really realize what kind of salaries can be made
working for the government. They think it's like it
used to be where everyone pulls down $45K. I can tell
you my sister and I were both shocked when she asked to
get into my company when we had an opening for a senior
secretary and the salary advertised was a _LOT_ less than
she made for the government (like more than 20% less). I
was like "You make _HOW MUCH_?" and she was like "They pay
_THAT LITTLE_? I'll stay put."
really realize what kind of salaries can be made working
for the government. They think it's like it used to be
where everyone pulls down $45K. I can tell you my sister
and I were both shocked when she asked to get into my
company when we had an opening for a senior secretary
and the salary advertised was a _LOT_ less than she made
for the government (like more than 20% less). I was like
"You make _HOW MUCH_?" and she was like "They pay _THAT
LITTLE_? I'll stay put. In other 10 years I'll have free
health care for life." She's 4 years away now (she can
retire at 50) and then she'll collect her "retirement"
while she goes to work full-time as an RN. By then
she'll be making probably $200K/year between the two
salaries and getting free health care on the taxpayer's
dime, too. Then she can retire on her $5K/month
government retirement plus she'll have paid into Social
Security and collect that, too. Sweet! Am I jealous?
Hell yes! Do not anger me, I am dim! Would I have done
that had I known people could take advantage of the
system by double dipping? Maybe so! I think the system
is broken when a person can be a secretary for 25 years
at average salary (or above), switch careers to the
private sector, and then collect two retirements from
the government plus free health care on top of whatever
they manage to save.
\_ 1/10 for content, 0/10 for length.
\_ Working at the UC and taking N contracting jobs is
very standard.
\_ I am a Director at a Silicon Valley company and I make
about 2X what someone in a comparable job makes at the
UC. My wife had a similar experience with HUD and Citi.
As I said before, low skill jobs are higher paying in
the public sector and high skill and management jobs
pay better in the private sector. It is pretty obvious
why this is, if you would pull your head out of your ass.
It would pretty embarassing if a school janitor had to
draw food stamps to make ends meet. Secretaries do not
retire at 25 years, you are full of crap.
\_ You are correct that high-level management jobs pay
more in the private sector. I think a military
general is an example of an underpaid government job.
President Obama is another. However, most government
employees would not be high-level managers in
the private sector. Most government employees are
paper pushers who are overpaid. The fact that
there are a few underpaid positions doesn't change
that fact. Anyone can retire as long as they are
age 50 and have 10 years of service although
there are ways to retire earlier and some plans
make you wait until age 60. Why should a janitor
with the government make more than a janitor in the
private sector?
\_ It is not true that anyone can retire from
Federal service at age 50 with 10 years of
service, where did you get this idea? I checked
what my wife would make if she worked for HUD
for 25 years and got promoted to the top of her
pay and one grade up (GS-14). It would have been
$32k/yr at age 62, which was 25% of what her salary
would be at the time. So 25% of your base salary is
overpaid? Janitors in the private sector are
underpaid but since we use the free market to
set labor values there, that is just the way it
is. Everyone working for the government should
be paid a living wage, imho.
\_ I am not quoting federal retirement. I am
not sure what that is. I am talking about
State and local government.
"The state's current pension system allows
firefighters, Highway Patrol officers, and
peace officers to retire as young as 50
years old and earn 3% of their final
salaries for every year worked. Other
state safety employees may retire at age
55 with a 2.5% multiplier and
miscellaneous employees may retire at age
55 with a 2% multiplier or at age 63 with
a 2.5% multiplier."
(Source: http://tinyurl.com/2db96kp
You can also "buy" years. Other tricks
here: http://tinyurl.com/2ahy8vh
Reform is required. I don't get 401k
matches based on my highest 3 earning years.
Pensions should not be calculated in that
manner either.
Janitors in the private sector are not
"underpaid." They are paid market wages.
Public sector janitors are overpaid. The
government should not pay more than the
private sector. Otherwise, my tax dollars
are wasted. Contract it out. This isn't a
welfare state.
\_ Janitor salaries in the private sector are
artifically depressed by use of
undocumented workers. You can't do that
in the public sector.
\_ Contract it out.
\_ It's no more appropriate for
public entities to be using
undocumented workers through a
contractor than it is for them
to be paying them directly.
\_ I didn't say to use undocumented
workers. I said contract it
out and pay market rate
instead of the inflated
salaries we pay now.
\_ As I said, "market rate" is
artificially depressed by the
use of undocumented workers.
\_ Let's assume this is true.
Surely you are not implying
that all janitors are
undocumented.
\_ no, I'm stating that
the market for janitors
is not free, and thus
"market rate" is
meaningless.
\_ It's not meaningless
if you want to hire a
janitor.
\_ "This isn't a welfare state." We
disagree, that it all. You think that
"the market" determines all value and
I do not. Should we abolish child
labor laws, too?
\_ Safety employees are not "anyone," get
your facts straight.
\_ Safety employees have it better, but
it is still possible for anyone to
retire at age 50 if they buy some
airtime, especially if they buy it
early in their careers. It's not
too hard to do once you go out
and get another job after "retiring."
\_ I don't want a 55 year old cop trying
to wrestle bad guys to the ground, I
fine with them getting a good
retirement at 55 or even 50 after
25 years of service. If you think
being a cop is so great, you should
go be one, I am sure they would
take you. Hardly anyone is willing
to do the job, even with the so-called
overinflated salaries and benefits
you complain about.
\_ the thing about this that I don't like is gov employees who are
utterly convinced that their benefits aren't a part of their salary
and "industry makes more money" just based on pure | paycheck |.
\_ I'm a govt. employee, and I'm well-aware that my benefits are
part of my salary. It's why my salary is lower than market. I'm
willing to make the trade-off for the security, and I don't
grumble about it. Mind you, I'm also not going to ever become
a startup millionaire, so there you go.
\_ 1988: "Mama, I'm gonna move to hollywood and become a star!1!"
\_ I wonder if in 20 years they'll have reality tv shows about
people moving to silivalley and bringing their software
concepts to the world. "If i could dream dot com."
\_ You know, if the TLC and Bravo can make shows about
\_ You know, if TLC and Bravo can make shows about
those idiots flipping houses in Hollywood, I don't see
why a reality show about 70 hour weeks at a Start-up
wouldn't fly. It's not like there's not enough drama
among geeks.
\_ There would have to be the 6 month 120 episode
prequel series to explain all the in jokes.
\_ Aren't they common culture now?
\_ No, but nerds think so because they are so
insular and closed-cultured.
\_ Would the movie "Office Space" do the trick?
\_ So, you want to do a "The Real Office Space?"
something that is apart from ... The Office
and Office Space and 9 to 5; just saying the
jokes people will get are pretty common and all
boil down to dilbert strips. Funny for a couple
of hours maybe; (office space is still a cult
movie). but not for 2 seasons+.
\_ re: univ perks, one of the nice perks is that you can
actually take classes as an employee. Think about the monetary
compensation for that, how much is it per unit post degree to
take a class at 1. as UC and 2. The Top UC? That example just
came to me, I'm sure there are other perks like that.
Oh right another: free gym membership is another have you
seen how much a monthly gym costs? Granted it's not 24 hour
fitness, but still....
Yes I know it still costs for univ employees but there is
a discount.
\_ Courses are still very expensive for staff. RSF is
$420/year for staff, that's not a discount for what you're
getting.
\_ I would pay much more to get the chance to check out
hot teenage undergrads in spandex tights.
\_ A big perk often not mentioned is a car allowance. A lot of
government employees get them: up to $550/month or more.
There are others which are not counted as "salary" including
housing allowance and other subsidies. Some of these can be
very significant (up to 50% of total pay.)
\_ And all of those are also available to private sector
employees. If you think government jobs are so great, go
get one. Oh, forgot, you're too incompetent.
\_ My Company Benefits are BIGGER than yours!
\_ I think we take from this that not all priv sector jobs
are the same vs the uniformity of the .gov benefits.
\_ Yeah I'm really enjoying my car and housing allowance.
Oh, wait.
\_ I would have gotten one if I had known what a scam was
being perpetuated. I was living in the past. I didn't
realize what "New Government" was all about! No point
is getting one now, though, b/c the public is going to
end your gravy train soon enough. Public labor is very
scared and upset by the prospects of this eventuality
now that the taxpayers have caught on. You should be!
"The deal used to be that civil servants were paid less
than private sector workers in exchange for an
understanding that they had job security for life.
But we politicians, pushed by our friends in labor,
gradually expanded pay and benefits to private-sector
levels while keeping the job protections and layering
on incredibly generous retirement packages that pay
ex-workers almost as much as current workers."
--Willie Brown
\_ how do you know when Willie Brown is lying? His lips are
moving.
\_ You're going to say this about anyone who disagrees
with you. Better from a SF liberal Democrat with a
history of supporting labor than a Republican you will
dismiss out of hand. At some point you need to
get your head out of the sand.
\_ No, I'm going to say that about Willie Brown, who
has been well-known as a self-satisfied, self-
promoting scumbag for a long time. Also, elitist;
he declared that "all those clerks pushing papers
and pencils" couldn't move into his beautiful
new City Hall. And he had his limo driver take
him 3 blocks from CIty Hall for a photo op on
Bike to Work Day.
\_ I think that this is true for City of SF jobs, but not
true in general.
\_ priv sector people who hate pub sector jobs so much go fix it
CA Voter initiative the pub jobs away. Ha ha. |
| 5/23 |
|
| sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/tch/1914895472.html best of craigslist Avoid scams and fraud by dealing locally! Beware any deal involving Western Union, Moneygram, wire transfer, cashier check, money order, shipping, escrow, or any promise of transaction protection/certification/guarantee. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Date August 23, 2010 Position Title: Courtroom Technology Specialist Location: San Francisco, CA Class Level: CL 27/01 - CL 27/61 Salary: $54,372 - $88,349, DOE Closing Date: Priority cut-off 9/03/2010 or Until Filled The United States District Court of Northern California is looking for a Courtroom Technology Specialist to join our IT team. We offer interesting, creative challenges and a very independent self-motivated working environment in our Civic Center office. The position will be assigned to the IT Department and will report to the Office Automation Administrator. Attention to detail, the ability to follow instructions and take initiative are vital in this position. Your ability to submit an accurate and qualified application will be a major factor in securing this position. POSITION OVERVIEW The incumbent is responsible for maintenance, training, product research and recommendations on three categories of equipment, software and systems: 1)Audio/video systems and services, including courtroom sound (computerized PA system) streaming audio and video, video/electronic evidence presentation equipment, projectors and video conferencing equipment (from simple webcams to advanced ISDN video teleconferencing via Polycom and similar equipment): Courtroom technology equipment is made by following manufacturers: Bi-Amp, Crestron, Sennheiser, Kramer, Behringer, and Black Box. Familiarity with this, or similar equipment is desirable, but not essential. Hardware and software, wired and wireless synchronizing and data management, conversion and technical management with the carriers (Verizon, AT&T). QUALIFICATIONS To qualify for this position, the candidate must have at least three years of relevant experience with standard computer (Windows) support, as well as Audio/Video field experience, mobile phone and/or PDA devices, and emerging technologies like iPhones & iPads. The ability to independently troubleshoot devices at the hardware level, eg, serial or hardware device level interfaces, is necessary. The successful candidate must be able to independently adapt with creative solutions on short notice. Knowledge of video conferencing applications is required. Experience in design of audio visual systems and experience with audio systems software such as Polycom Conference Composer is highly desirable. Please note that this position does not involve radio/television broadcasting equipment and systems. Thorough knowledge of theories, principles, practices and techniques of computer hardware and software, office automation, data communications and standard troubleshooting techniques is required. Ability to analyze, evaluate and determine IT needs and planning to implement systems to meet those needs. Ability to train non-technical personnel in technical techniques and processes, and to develop documentation to support both end-users and technical staff. Ability to gain knowledge of the functions and processes of the court. DESIRED SKILLS and EXPERIENCE: + Networking/VPN + Data and application security + Previous court or legal environment experience. Although no familiarity with the law or court business required, applicant will be expected to adapt and learn quickly how to work in this unique and challenging environment. INFORMATION FOR APPLICANTS The United States District Court requires employees to adhere to a code of conduct which is available upon request. All new hires are subject to mandatory direct deposit of federal wages. Due to the volume of applications anticipated, the court will only communicate with those candidates selected for interview. The court is not authorized to reimburse travel expenses for interviews or relocations. Applicants who are not citizens of the United States of America should call 415-522-4609 to verify eligibility to work for the United States District Court. This position is subject to a FBI fingerprint check and background investigation. Employment will be provisional and contingent upon the satisfactory completion of the required background investigation. To apply, submit a cover letter, resume, include a list of 10 of your related skills (and how you would rate your ability in each one), plus three professional references. |
| www2.census.gov/govs/apes/09locca.txt Data users who create their own estimates from these tables should cite the US Census Bureau as thesource of the original data only. |
| controller.lacity.org/ssLINK/LACITYP_011307 W{_<OPOxz9I1N }8WLa^gi+zC'SYGD,Ue|$*/ j #t/%#FJa6<-09=-F&0-4 c2ckfS('r|UlAo/J; BI\H3EU(OwCcr9GD<3 70\1#{zn =7g}t| vboxE_>jA gzAgze8Gfc$s 3|qCR<{0a{4c<R9L(|? L=H4%Ef\3Rz9 )r)pPqJpT0(S^3MHQN1CHQVUFUSU2UURVFZJP<dh1dhdhRdhThdhdh} 3<}:*X^s:9. EYIVAViNVIOV GVqGV4t2L iZi5iZiiZ%iZeZ)9iZ=iZiZR"M ZBkCBJBsM}c% )4{c'V%KJAQ=,Z; di uSZ PCFt(>mT}u j,E# OPuXm1N=,H0'"@X0jM 6y5PmW0_duC8I0uZPHK$XW0slVOmN9qv|<z5qfGr/m'aF jm@F $ J$7Oo; LO&tJi"O=0y0pp$X4&8 Kh^0Nb\qZ3QLR(ULS 5#R%J^2G9<QIh SHUpLRpQ akRSxJZe VYU*Ihep$ Z VEB+$JPJIh%$"xZ p% IhR$BJ Z! yK%lkCfw/iMoppmzyvoiG hA s{^X ^uI@K* C &>Us QrYC)Z/isZP6evaYfqQ/mRJ4 eMMOC Vi%s9CSZ rl7ftCa ( /Im77i=4AzDjb; x Ol8H(@/y6>}IjDC({Q*q#I@XJww_xe&|)PzC_2Jq|:y{d =08rDgNDRp3WdGCdxVSH0ta:Y2y$bUh7q2tg>q1N A s{O66:$ .. iL DbR" QI)GbK1)(PLpLD BUIDTHb6EMLSk+KsSY5-KS$5jZaBDM@M8LCM(EMk,l9ViR+OXC9TrSTQJ 'TJQhu. |
| tinyurl.com/2db96kp -> reason.org/news/show/california-needs-to-stop-defin announced that it has filed two pension and retiree health-care reform initiatives with the California Attorney General's office. The measures would alter the formulas used to calculate state and local government employee defined-benefit pensions for future employees, offering a lower "tier" of benefits to these employees and thus reducing pension costs to state and local agencies. "With more than $200 billion in retirement debts and skyrocketing costs crowding out the investments we need in education, health care, transportation, public safety and the environment, it is time for a statewide solution to our retirement benefits crisis," said CFFR president Marcia Fritz. "By requiring all new non-safety public employees at all levels of government to work until their Social Security retirement age for full benefits and ending the politicians' raids and abuses of public pension funds, California public agencies can offer secure retirement benefits that are fair for taxpayers and their employees." The measure would only apply to new government employees because the courts have ruled that pension benefits are protected by the state constitution and cannot be reduced. The only difference between the two versions of the measure is contained in a provision that would allow agencies to increase benefits for new workers. One would require a 3/4 vote of the Legislature to modify the benefit restrictions for state or University of California employees, and a 2/3 vote of the public to modify those of local government employees. The other would require a 2/3 vote of the Legislature to modify the benefit restrictions for state or University of California employees, and a simple majority vote of the public to modify those of local government employees. The state's current pension system allows firefighters, Highway Patrol officers, and peace officers to retire as young as 50 years old and earn 3% of their final salaries for every year worked. Other state safety employees may retire at age 55 with a 25% multiplier and miscellaneous employees may retire at age 55 with a 2% multiplier or at age 63 with a 25% multiplier. Under the "New Public Employees Benefits Reform Act," existing employees would continue to receive these benefits but those hired on or after the July 1, 2011, effective date would receive pension benefits as follows: * Police officers and firefighters could receive full benefits of 23% times the number of years worked with a minimum retirement age of 58. Those workers that do not participate in the Social Security system would receive a 165% multiplier, and those that do would receive a 125% multiplier. CFFR estimates that the measure would save more than $1 billion in the first year after implementation, and $500 billion over a 30-year period, as more employees are incorporated into the new lower benefit tiers. While this would certainly represent a big improvement over the current system, it is still merely tinkering with the existing pension system when the system cries out for a complete overhaul. In 1991, the state closed its existing pension plan ("Tier I") to new miscellaneous (non-safety) state workers and required them to participate in a less generous plan ("Tier II") in order to reduce state pension costs. But in 1999, the Legislature passed SB 400, which increased pensions by as much as 50%, reopened the Tier I plan to all employees, and retroactively increased state employees' benefits. What is to prevent something like this from happening again if the CFFR measure passes? The CFFR initiative does provide some measure of protection in the form of the requirement that voters approve changes to local government benefits and the supermajority requirement for the Legislature to increase benefits for state employees, but this may be of little comfort when one considers the power and influence of the government employees' labor unions and the influence they have over the Legislature; in that 1999 pension increase vote, the measure was approved 70-7 in the Assembly and 39-0 in the Senate, so even the stricter supermajority requirements of the initiative would not have prevented those unwise benefit increases and unsustainable costs from going into effect. The initiative would also preserve the unpredictable and volatile nature of the required government contributions to the system. This is an inherent feature of all defined-benefit pension systems. When the pension fund's investments perform poorly, the state must make up the difference by making greater contributions to the system. This usually coincides with general economic downturn, meaning that just as the state is suffering from lower revenues, and thus more difficult budget decisions, it must make bigger contributions to the pension system at the time when it can least afford to do so. Under a 401-style defined-contribution plan, by contrast, the state contributes an agreed upon percentage of an employee's salary (plus, perhaps, an additional matching contribution up to a certain level) to his or her retirement account each year and the employee, not the government, has the freedom and responsibility to manage his or her retirement investments. Thus, under a defined-contribution plan, there is no such thing as an unfunded liability. There is also no need to try to make economic projections and actuarial assumptions decades into the future concerning everything from the average expected annual return of pension fund investments, to the average inflation rate, to how long people will live, to how early people will retire, to the average annual salary increases for various classes of employees. These assumptions can too easily prove to be unrealistic or inaccurate, whether by nefarious attempts to fudge the numbers to make the pension system look more well-funded than it really is, by negligence, or simply due to unexpected economic events and outcomes. The CFFR initiative deserves serious consideration for the fact that it would represent an improvement over the status quo, but if the state is to truly effectively tackle the structural problems and sustainability of its pension system, it must learn the lesson of the private sector and switch to a defined-contribution plan that offers compensation comparable to that received by private-sector workers. Needs More RAM Another drug raid gone bad Radley Balko (8/31) Reason Saves Cleveland With Drew Carey The Decline of a Once Great City Reason Saves Cleveland With Drew Carey Fix the Schools 2010 The Reason Foundation. |
| tinyurl.com/2ahy8vh -> www.ehow.com/how_6214367_spike-calpers-pension-benefits.html Pension Plans more How to Spike Your CalPERS Pension Benefits By Josephine Wallace, eHow Member I want to do this! hu/foxumon User-Submitted Article In light of the financial problems in all sectors of government, CalPERS pension benefits have become a focal point of criticism. One of the most controversial topics in CalPERS pensions is pension spiking, where an employee gets a huge increase in the final year of public service. There are some misconceptions with regards to pension spiking, so its helpful to understand how to spike a CalPERS Pension. Also, none of those who spiked their pension did anything illegal. The rules established by the California state legislature allowed them to do so. Difficulty: Moderately Challenging Instructions Things You'll Need: * A job at a public employer with CalPERS or with CalPERS reciprocity. Although laws prevent CalPERS from paying benefits based on salaries beyond $240,000, anything below that is fair game. In a normal career, a person would get promoted based upon merit to a higher level position and increase his salary that way. Another way is to go into a different career to make a lot more money. For example, a social worker might want to become an engineer in order to increase her salary, which would increase her CalPERS pension. Because pension benefits are based upon the final one or three years of compensation, it allows a person to not be penalized by being a late career changer. The abuse comes when someone gets promoted to executive management on the basis of political kickbacks just to reward him with a bigger pension. Look in the resources section for more information on how to do this. After training is complete, apply for transfers to jobs in the new career. Law enforcement is a great option, since they have the generous 3% @ 50 plan which is not available to nearly all non-safety employees. Overtime wages do not count in CalPERS pension benefits. Someone who works a lot of overtime will end up with the same CalPERS pension as somebody who has no overtime. Of course, this assumes both persons have the same job classification and wages. Airtime is the purchase of extra years of service credit into the CalPERS system. A worker in her early 20s with a low salary job can purchase five years of service credit for very little money. As the years go by and the salary rises higher due to promotions, the purchase of CalPERS service credit becomes much more expensive. When a worker reaches 40 years of age, it's usually cost prohibitive to purchase airtime. Nevertheless, an older worker could transfer an IRA account or old 401k to CalPERS to make this purchase. It's even possible to do an in-service withdrawal of a 457 retirement account at your employer to pay for the CalPERS airtime. Retirement account money transferred to CalPERS remain tax deferred, which means there is no tax to be paid until retirement. When contemplating the purchase of CalPERS airtime, make sure you account for benefits such as COLAs that may be a lot more expensive with a private sector annuity. In most cases, young workers underpay the cost of airtime significantly. CalPERS has a booklet and website for those considering this purchase. If you can't get promoted from within, it may be possible to spike your pension by working elsewhere as long as they have CalPERS. This is pretty common method of spiking the highest one or three year salary used in computing the CalPERS monthly benefit. With CalPERS reciprocity, a public employer under a different retirement system can give the worker a higher salary, which will be used to spike the CalPERS pension. CalPERS has a book on reciprocity if you're interested in more information about it. This won't make a huge difference in the CalPERS pension, but they will increase it by a little bit. Pay from vacation or sick leave count, but not if they're cashed out as a lump sum. Tips & Warnings * Office politics and government politics can go a long way in getting your CalPERS pension spiked. |