With the grim state of the city budget a hot topic these days, questions are being raised about how long we can continue to sustain the heavy financial burden that comes from the city's pension system for municipal retirees. Last year the city paid out a total of 9% of its budget ($5.6 billion total) for its pensions and analysts project that percentage is only expected to rise. Former NYPD officer and current State Senator Martin Golden told the Post, "Everything's got to be explored...The bottom line is everything's on the table."
What Mayor Bloomberg and Governor Paterson would specifically like on the table is the "20-and-out" retirement plan for municipal workers. Bloomberg said, "Right now, we are paying full retirement benefits to people in their 40s. As people are living longer, we simply can't afford to do it forever." The more than 10,000 retired cops under the age of 50 represent 25% of the city's police-pension liability.
Some of the pension reforms the mayor and governor would like to see include:
- The minimum amount of service required for retirement raised from 20 to 25
- A minimum retirement age of 50
- 5% of their salaries contributing to their pension fund
- City workers paying more for health benefits
When Bloomberg suggested pension reform during the recent unveiling of his grim budget, labor unions sounded like they were ready to butt heads over any proposals. PBA President Patrick Lynch is already questioning assertions that cops and firemen live longer than other city workers saying it "defies logic" and that such a claim is only being made as an "attempt to cheapen pension benefits for future police officers."
And while on a pension kick today, the Post also points out that one of the largest pensions currently being dished out by the state is for public librarians—only doctors and attorneys are collecting more.





How about we just get rid of full benefits for people who retire before they're 65? Or do cops just get too cranky if they work that long?
this is why you are a dope if you vote for bloomberg.
don't let a billionaire who can't relate to the average person (or even care about him) decide on what kind of benefits and pensions he/she gets.
my dad used to work for a NJ authority (state employee, state benefits, etc, but it's funding was actually independent): he "retired" after 20 years and while he gets full health benefits and partial pension, it doesn't fully kick in until he reaches the retirement age of 65. i think that's actually a decent system - it doesn't say f you, it just says that we're not going to take care of you until you need to be taken care of.
otherwise you get someone who works for 20 years, retires in his early forties, and then gets a pension for twice as long as he worked? no, sorry. i'll pay them when they are retirement age to thank them for their service.
Great idea, except that both the NYPD and FDNY have been (prominently) touting the 20-and-out deal in many of their advertisements all around the city. You can't make a huge deal about a job benefit and then pull it out from under all the people who subsequently joined up.
Any changes would apply to new employees only, as it would establish NYCERS (NYC Employee Retirement System) Tier 5.
I work for the city and even I think 20 and out is ridiculous. The city can't afford it.
tier iv employees like myself were offered a 55/20 retirement plan this past summer. if we have more than 10 years in we go back to contributing to our plan and are allowed to retire at 55 years of age and 20 years of service without any reduction to our pension payouts.
so basically the city gets to invest our money we're kicking in from now until we retire and they never have to pay us for the level of pay we would have earned if we chose to continue working for 23, 25 or more years; the city earns and saves money by asking us to leave before our 63rd birthdays.
as for reversing this what has begun - - ouch. i mean really now, how fair is it to screw with people's lives like that. putting in the extra cash each paycheck, bringing home less to retire early, making plans for a second career... and then be told we have to work eight more years that we didn't want to work for...
i agree with the 4 points proposed
and wtf...LIBRARIANS????
These civil servants have the best racket going. (Mostly easy) work for 20 years - collect a great pension and then start a 2nd career. Usually that 2nd career is in another state, so they don't even pay taxes to NY any longer.
a retired city worker that takes on another city or state job after retiring can not collect a pension from the first job while they're working the second job. there's no double dipping allowed.
furthermore, the retirement system is not a free ride and it benefits the state and city. the city and state invest the money workers contribute to their pensions.
the 55/20 opt out plans that were recently rolled out have workers investing more money into the retirement system. the city and state is essentially saving money by having its most senior and most paid workers leave before they reach the top of their expected pay schedules and it gets to collect revenues from the additional pension contributions.
furthermore, the political arm of the united federation of teachers will block any encroachment upon these newly created 55/20 pensions and they got the bucks to do it.
Wow, very underwhelming proposals for changing a system that desperately needs to be revamped. I never knew the NYPD and FDNY could act like such tough guys yet expect to live like entitled French workers.
I respect and honor the sacrifices and dangers they face, but career choice is in fact based on their personal decisions, which should not entitle them to such hideous handouts financed by taxpayers.
this is why I want my old civil service job back.
I blew it. never look a gift horse in the mouth.
I worked for the State and the City so I'm doubly the loser. shocker!
The article is based on a faulty premise - the City pays for the pensions. The City only pays our salaries, not our pensions. Our pensions are paid from an investment fund that earns interest and pays out retirees. It's funded by salary contributions of active members and the City while the member is active, so as long as there are employees on the payroll, it's always being funded.
This article is nonsense. They have trouble getting qualified candidates to take this crappy job with the dangerous conditions, low pay and unhealthy life style in order to cash out at twenty years. Then, you find a job in the private sector because you can't live for long solely on the pension. How about if all the haters who think we have such a sweet deal, take the test and put their own fat azzes into harm's way.
Meanwhile, Bloomturd finances and pays for the new Atlantic yards, Shea and Yankee stadiums with taxpayer money (which he doesn't have).
In addition our fearless mayor stated earlier this month that we need the best and brightest for Wall st, so they should get a bonus (a reward on top of a huge salary) no matter how poorly they perform...
BUT
Cops should have their measly pension cut despite 20 years of risking their lives for the people of this city to make it safer from rapists, murderers, drug dealers, etc. Yes, that makes sense.
Perhaps the people that think that cops are mean, evil, money-stealing brutes should volunteer their time as an auxiliary cop and walk around in a police uniform on Sutter and Stone Ave in Brooklyn and well see how fast your opinion changes.
How many of those NYPD retirements were disability retirements? An "accidental disability retirement"
pays a *NONTAXABLE* pension of 3/4ths of a retired cop's salary.
State Senator Marty Golden of Brooklyn retired on such a disability pension. And he appears to be much better physical condition than many of his less financially advantaged constituents.
why do librarians get "20 and out" pensions
Just for the record, FDNY-EMS has always had "25 and out", we never got the 20. And we pay 9.25% of each check into the pension fund. That's money I could use to pay my rent.
This has only become a problem because the city has mismanaged the funds. The Times ran a series of articles with the following titles:
1) Public Pension Plans Face Billions in Shortages
2) Panel Plans to Make Cities Reveal More on Pensions
3) New York Gets Sobering Look at Its Pensions
And the Post ran this one:
CITY PENSIONS' $1B LONG-SHOT GAMBLE RISKY BETS IN PLUMMETING STOCK MARKET
Basically the story of non-standard accounting with a heavy reliance on the never-ending stock expansion and when it all fell apart, the city managers ran to invest in risky hedge funds and paid enormous fees to do it. WTF - now lets blame the pensioneers when our Ponzi accounting scheme falls apart like San Diego.
Wait 'til they turn 65 then give them an aluminum can crusher and a Metrocard and kick 'em out the door.
You people are absolutely ridiculous. These man and women literally place their lives on the line every day; and in a firemens case.. several times a day. Yearly averages for deaths are 150 - 165 police and 90-106 firemen. These are on duty averages. These people are rewarded with such nice retirement plans for 20 years of service protecting YOU. And this is the thanks they get. you sycophantic people should be ashamed; just try and think of the life and property that are saved / preserved every day by police and firemen, to ask of them another 5 years of service is a literal assault on their lives. Never bite the hand that feeds you, i this case its the hand that saves you. Who will be left to save our lives when such service goes unrewarded.
Are police and firemen the only ones that deserve such a cushy pension? Because they may be the only ones that get them. Everybody else has nothing to look forward to except ruined 401k plans, a Social Security check for nothing if you live long enough, and pensions that went away with all the bankruptcies and collapses. You can imagine the fear, anger, and disillusionment out there.
P.S. What I commented above? I was kidding.