This blog is maintained for the sole purpose of allowing the people of Peru and those interested in the cities of the Illinois Valley to express their views.
“It doesn’t take a majority to win, just a tireless minority that will keep starting brush fires in the mind and hearts of their fellow men.” Samuel Adams
I have a public pension through the state of Illinois that I paid my share into and was not given carte blanche. But I do have a problem with the double and triple dippers of public pension plans. In Peru we had a former police chief who had taxpayers paying him a pension well into 6 figures. If a person is fortunate to be in a public pension plan one pension is enough and it should have a dollar amount less than 6 figures.
I think most residents have an issue with double dipping into public pension plans by city officials. This article references a retired polic chief moving into administration. Would he be elibible for a second pension?
Peru and perhaps other cities have another issue. Our Police and Fire Chief occupy double positions and perhaps someone in administration can tell us whether they will be eligible for 2 pensions or is the second position strictly a salaried without any pension association.
12:10 Pension rules are different in every State. Pension rules are also different from pension to pension. A retired teacher is not eligible for social security as a result of their job in teaching.
The former police chief may have had different pensions at different levels this would be a much isolated case. Your city would only be eligible for the amount of the pension he had vested in your local police force. He may have six figures with the combined amount from working at 3 different public places for a total of 40 years.
Your question is ?. What if a police chief retires and goes into administration. Well, if he qualifies for a police pension at 20 years and is the retired qualified age than he is eligible for a pension. The amount of his pension is based on his wages/yrs of service. He or she goes to work in a city administration he would have to be treated like any other employee, they would have to be vested with a number of years. And this retirement salary based on the last 4 years of the wages and the number of service years.
Police and Fire pensions are private pension funds with the obligation of your city. Other city jobs are probably IMRF and that fund is collectively with many others in the state and has hundreds of thousands of employees. Both are separate funds with different rules. You could have someone collecting two taxpayer pension. Because they worked two separate jobs with two separated pensions.
2:29, that isn't what the bill says, it is trying to stop a person collecting a pension through the city from collecting another one through the city from a different fund. If your collecting an IMRF pension, you cannot work in any IMRF entity be it Township, school administration position or janitor etc. otherwise you can lose a bundle. Just because let's say you retired as police chief and want to be administrator this bill will stop it, the reason is because tax payers foot the bill on both .
I'm tired of people passing on the falsehood that teachers are not eligible for Social Security Benefits. They most certainly could be if they paid in to the system. They or should I say their Union Representation, voluntarily opted out of the Social Security retirement system because they don't want to pay in. The Military has a pension AND Social Security benefits because they PAY IN. They also have another voluntary system similar to a 401K that they can PAY IN to get benefits.
Bottom line - the TEACHERS don't want to PAY IN and then they P&M about not getting the benefit. Heck - most Illinois Teachers don't even PAY IN to their own retirement fund - having bamboozled the taxpayers in to funding both the employer match AND the individual contribution. Cry me a river teachers!
Let's get the facts right. If a person meets the annual paid in minimum social security taxable wages per year and they will qualify for a percentage of social security. They can not get the full benefit amount unless they meet the minimum yearly social security wage for I believe 30 years of work. This is called the windfall elimination process. Also teachers do pay into Medicare. I myself paid into social security for 27 years and TRS and I lost 35% of the amount I should get from social security. My gripe is why do some public employees get more than one government pension? How much does a person need to live and enjoy life when they retire at 66? One pension, one social security, and most important personal savings should be enough to live a comfortable retirement at an appropriate retirement age. Finally all public education teachers must pay into TRS and the only exception are some administrators whose retirement share is paid by their school through the approval of the local districts school board.
People need to fund more of their own retirement. Pensions are going away. Everyone needs to put away 10% of their income from their first job and never touch it until they retire. If everybody did that - there would be no problem with retirement and everyone would retire early as a millionaire. But no - people spend every dime they get on crap and then complain because "the government" isn't giving them more money when they retire. The Baby Boomers are the worst! They want everything for free.
Here is the actual information from the Social Security Administration:
"We use your total yearly earnings to figure your Social Security credits. The amount needed for a credit in 2016 is $1,260. You can earn a maximum of four credits for any year. The amount needed to earn one credit increases automatically each year when average wages increase. You must earn a certain number of credits to qualify for Social Security benefits. The number of credits you need depends on your age when you apply and the type of benefit application. No one needs more than 40 credits for any Social Security benefit."
"The Windfall Elimination Provision can affect how we calculate your retirement or disability benefit. If you work for an employer who doesn’t withhold Social Security taxes from your salary, such as a government agency or an employer in another country, any pension you get from that work can reduce your Social Security benefits. This provision can affect you when you earn a pension from an employer who didn’t withhold Social Security taxes and you qualify for Social Security retirement or disability benefits from work in other jobs for which you did pay taxes."
So the simple solution for the teachers is to start paying in to the Social Security system for their teaching work - LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, including most federal and military employs. Stop being greedy. Pay your fair share and you will get your benefit.
2:16 PM, April 21, 2016 - are you actually telling people that work in the Education Industry to stop being greedy? Ha! Ha! Let me know how that works.
Standing by for the "Its for the Children" rant...........
12 comments:
I have a public pension through the state of Illinois that I paid my share into and was not given carte blanche. But I do have a problem with the double and triple dippers of public pension plans. In Peru we had a former police chief who had taxpayers paying him a pension well into 6 figures. If a person is fortunate to be in a public pension plan one pension is enough and it should have a dollar amount less than 6 figures.
11:10 AM
I think most residents have an issue with double dipping into public pension plans by city officials. This article references a retired polic chief moving into administration. Would he be elibible for a second pension?
Peru and perhaps other cities have another issue. Our Police and Fire Chief occupy double positions and perhaps someone in administration can tell us whether they will be eligible for 2 pensions or is the second position strictly a salaried without any pension association.
12:10 Pension rules are different in every State. Pension rules are also different from pension to pension. A retired teacher is not eligible for social security as a result of their job in teaching.
The former police chief may have had different pensions at different levels this would be a much isolated case. Your city would only be eligible for the amount of the pension he had vested in your local police force. He may have six figures with the combined amount from working at 3 different public places for a total of 40 years.
Your question is ?. What if a police chief retires and goes into administration. Well, if he qualifies for a police pension at 20 years and is the retired qualified age than he is eligible for a pension. The amount of his pension is based on his wages/yrs of service. He or she goes to work in a city administration he would have to be treated like any other employee, they would have to be vested with a number of years. And this retirement salary based on the last 4 years of the wages and the number of service years.
Police and Fire pensions are private pension funds with the obligation of your city. Other city jobs are probably IMRF and that fund is collectively with many others in the state and has hundreds of thousands of employees. Both are separate funds with different rules. You could have someone collecting two taxpayer pension. Because they worked two separate jobs with two separated pensions.
2:29, that isn't what the bill says, it is trying to stop a person collecting a pension through the city from collecting another one through the city from a different fund. If your collecting an IMRF pension, you cannot work in any IMRF entity be it Township, school administration position or janitor etc. otherwise you can lose a bundle. Just because let's say you retired as police chief and want to be administrator this bill will stop it, the reason is because tax payers foot the bill on both .
Mautino will be collecting a six figure pension even after they force him to resign.
I'm tired of people passing on the falsehood that teachers are not eligible for Social Security Benefits. They most certainly could be if they paid in to the system. They or should I say their Union Representation, voluntarily opted out of the Social Security retirement system because they don't want to pay in. The Military has a pension AND Social Security benefits because they PAY IN. They also have another voluntary system similar to a 401K that they can PAY IN to get benefits.
Bottom line - the TEACHERS don't want to PAY IN and then they P&M about not getting the benefit. Heck - most Illinois Teachers don't even PAY IN to their own retirement fund - having bamboozled the taxpayers in to funding both the employer match AND the individual contribution. Cry me a river teachers!
Let's get the facts right. If a person meets the annual paid in minimum social security taxable wages per year and they will qualify for a percentage of social security. They can not get the full benefit amount unless they meet the minimum yearly social security wage for I believe 30 years of work. This is called the windfall elimination process. Also teachers do pay into Medicare. I myself paid into social security for 27 years and TRS and I lost 35% of the amount I should get from social security. My gripe is why do some public employees get more than one government pension? How much does a person need to live and enjoy life when they retire at 66? One pension, one social security, and most important personal savings should be enough to live a comfortable retirement at an appropriate retirement age. Finally all public education teachers must pay into TRS and the only exception are some administrators whose retirement share is paid by their school through the approval of the local districts school board.
People need to fund more of their own retirement. Pensions are going away. Everyone needs to put away 10% of their income from their first job and never touch it until they retire. If everybody did that - there would be no problem with retirement and everyone would retire early as a millionaire. But no - people spend every dime they get on crap and then complain because "the government" isn't giving them more money when they retire. The Baby Boomers are the worst! They want everything for free.
Here is the actual information from the Social Security Administration:
"We use your total yearly earnings to figure your Social Security credits. The amount needed for a credit in 2016 is $1,260. You can earn a maximum of four credits for any year. The amount needed to earn one credit increases automatically each year when average wages increase. You must earn a certain number of credits to qualify for Social Security benefits. The number of credits you need depends on your age when you apply and the type of benefit application. No one needs more than 40 credits for any Social Security benefit."
"The Windfall Elimination Provision can affect how we calculate your retirement or disability benefit. If you work for an employer who doesn’t withhold Social Security taxes from your salary, such as a government agency or an employer in another country, any pension you get from that work can reduce your Social Security benefits. This provision can affect you when you earn a pension from an employer who didn’t withhold Social Security taxes and you qualify for Social Security retirement or disability benefits from work in other jobs for which you did pay taxes."
So the simple solution for the teachers is to start paying in to the Social Security system for their teaching work - LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, including most federal and military employs. Stop being greedy. Pay your fair share and you will get your benefit.
uh oh! bernie's double, triple and quadruple dipping might hopefully be stopped!
2:16 PM, April 21, 2016 - are you actually telling people that work in the Education Industry to stop being greedy? Ha! Ha! Let me know how that works.
Standing by for the "Its for the Children" rant...........
We need to take the government out of education. Schools should be privatized and subsidized.
Post a Comment