Political & Elections

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

RE: UC executives complain $184,000/year pensions are too low

BigG · Guru

Generous fixed benefit pensions are a relic of the United States' former status as an economic superpower.

Those 401K's are going nowhere and the UC execs know it.

The S&P has been flat for a decade. How long does a trend have to continue to be considered "historical"? "Returns on capital invested in stocks has historically failed to keep up with inflation".

The UC execs just want to repeat the success of their private business counterparts who have been collecting big bucks for years to do a bad job.

Bitter? Yes. The Chinese rare earth market corner has resulted in layoffs at one of my customer's plants. It is not just the 6 to 8 jobs in the surrounding community lost for every manufacturing job lost. It is also that some of the workers were supporting two other generations of their family. Now Uncle Sammy has to step in with food stamps and such.

-- Edited by BigG on Thursday 30th of December 2010 05:46:39 AM

Bullet · Senior Member

I'd be curious to see just how many of these University Executives at such a fine institution as UC, renowned for its balanced political views on the issues of the day, we're supportive of keeping the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. You know, I'm sure they are very appreciative of the fact that as a Nation, the only way to ensure a just and fair society would be to make the wealthy pay their fair share.

Just once I would like to see that opinion poll. Always easy to ask the other guy to pay for your political and ethical stances.

Tom1944 · Senior Member

NJ has recently capped pensions. They maximum salary eligible is the social security max. Any wages above that will go into a 401K type plan. It is not retroactive to individuals covered by the pension prior to the law being passed.
California has very strong pension law so they most likely could not make changes retroactively.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

I think my "cousin" summed this up quite nicely last time I talked to her about this issue (she goes to UCI):

"Well they can just bite me."

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Considering the UC students are now dealing with their third...or is it their fourth tuition hike in just two years, do you think this might be met with some student dissent?

Wow.

soccerguy315 · Guru

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/29/MNDC1GUSCT.DTL&tsp=1

------------------------------

"We believe it is the University's legal, moral and ethical obligation" to increase the benefits, the executives wrote the Board of Regents in a Dec. 9 letter and position paper obtained by The Chronicle.

"Failure to do so will likely result in a costly and unsuccessful legal confrontation," they wrote, using capital letters to emphasize that they were writing "URGENTLY."

Their demand comes as UC is trying to eliminate a vast, $21.6 billion unfunded pension obligation by reducing benefits for future employees, raising the retirement age, requiring employees to pay more into UC's pension fund and boosting tuition.

The fatter executive retirement benefits the employees are seeking would add $5.5 million a year to the pension liability, UC has estimated, plus $51 million more to make the changes retroactive to 2007, as the executives are demanding.

The executives fashioned their demand as a direct challenge to UC President Mark Yudof, who opposes the increase.

"Forcing resolution in the courts will put 200 of the University's most senior, most visible current and former executives and faculty leaders in public contention with the President and the Board," they wrote.

-------------------------------