* is considering putting state workers and many teachers into SS.

[alcuno]

I'm a teacher in Illinois and I heard Judy on CNN say that * is considering putting many state workers and teachers (in a few states) who do not presently contribute to SS back into the system. We have a good plan where we can collect up to 80% of our last three years' pay upon retirement, but the contribution is steep ( I also have to pay for the health insurance of retired teachers in addition to Medicare.)

I currently have 9% of my pay go into the IL State Tchr Ret System and because of that I am ineligible to collect SS. I paid in my 40 quarters, but I'm still unable to collect.

Has anyone else heard anything about this? It seems like I'd be paying 15% and my school district would go bankrupt. Are all state employees in this situation?

[ananda]

1. What!!!

Damm and doubledammm.

I guess this will only affect new teachers, but still...

Sue

[Trillo]

2. related article this morning in LBN:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1291593

[alcuno]

5. Thank you. I'm forwarding it to the head of our teacher's union.

The burden on the school districts would be unsustainable.

[murielm99]

3. I don't think he can just do that arbitrarily.

* will have a fight on his hands from many unions.

We will need to take our cues from the nurses in California. It is time for a revolt.

[Walt Starr]

4. Yup, they're trying to rob from the people who have decent pension plans

to pay the rich for an ill conceived way to prop up the stock market in the short term. It's a Ponzi scheme.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[happyslug]

7. I remember in the early 1980s a Similar proposal regarding Civil Service

In the early 1980s it was proposed to "merge" the Federal Civil Service Pension into Social Security. Such a shift was viewed as keeping Social Security out of the Red starting in the 1980s (Instead the present 7% SS Tax was passed). This plan was doable only if the Letter Carrier pension plan was included in the shift. The problem with the merger was the Letter Carrier and Civil Service Pensions had always been true pension plans, you paid in with an agreement you would get a return. From the 1940s through the 1980s both the Letter carrier Pension plan and the Civil Service Pension plan put more into their pension plan than they would have had to if they were eligible for SS. Thus these pensions were solvent, while SS at the time was not. Thus the proposal to merge the Civil Service Pension plan into SS to bail out SS.

The problem was SS had NEVER been called a Pension plan. You had no legally enforceable right to SS (Other than in the SS act itself). You had no property interest in your SS. The SS you paid was a TAX, not payment into a fund. Thus Congress could (and can) abolish SS any time Congress wants to. The Federal Civil Service Pension HAD ALWAYS been a Pension plan and as such the people paying into the plan had a property interest in the Pension. Such Property Interests are protected by the US Constitution, the Federal Government could not take them without just compensation. Thus if the Federal Government pushed the Civil Service Pension plans into SS, the people who were entitled to that pension could sue the Federal Government for a return on their investment. As a property Interest the Courts would have found a Constitutionally protected property interest in the pension and ordered the Federal Government to pay back the pension payments to the Civil Service employees. The courts may have permitted the Federal Government to keep what the Civil Service Employees would have paid in SS taxes, but the amount over that level would have had to be returned to the employees (and in effect end the "gain" SS would have obtain with merging the Civil Service Pension with SS).

The same with the teacher's pension. You have a property interest in that pension. You paid more into it than you would have if it had been SS (7% compared to 9%). Now SS had its matching 7% employee share, which apparently you did not pay, but the same argument can be used regarding Teacher's Pensions. If the Teacher's pension would pay less than SS, not a problem you are switching from one payment stream to another, but if the pension payout would be LESS, you have a taking of property without compensation issue.

I always suspected that the forcing of Civil Service Pension into SS was a ploy to ease the opposition to the reforms of 1982 and the same can be said of merging teaching pensions into SS. Thus this may be a ploy to tie up opposition to SS "reform" by getting all of the teachers fighting on cross purposes on the issue (Remember many states underfund their Teacher's pension so some teachers would like their pensions transfered to SS because SS would be bigger, while other teachers will oppose the transfer for their States generously funded their pensions and being forced into SS would be a pay cut. Given this two situation you have the ready made conflict of confusion that Bush and Company may be banking on to get his "Reforms" through.

Remember Bush and Company believes SS is bad for workers, for workers can quit working at age 65. With the upcoming retirement of the Baby Boomers I suspect many of Bush and Company supporters look at such Senior Citizens as their next set of cheap labor if it was not for such Seniors' Social Security Checks.

My point here something is going on here that is more than forcing Teachers into SS, I suspect it is an attempt at confusion.

[screembloodymurder]

8. And the Federal employees?

How about Congress? Bastards!

[alarimer]

9. I think it is outrageous that they are not automatically in

Like everyone else. In this county (in Texas), teachers have to work extra jobs to pay into the SS system in order to collect when they are eliegible. I guess their retirement system is inadequate. I am a state employee and pay into the SS system. We also have a separte retirement that we pay into automoatically and a 401k that is optional.

[alcuno]

10. There's some deal between SS and my state.

When I lived in Arizona, I paid into both, but here it's just the one at 9%. As I said, I've already paid into SS in the past and did the 40 quarters. However, because of the deal, I CAN'T collect SS.