Front Page  »  

Public retirees twice as rich?

October 17, 2011

Retirement benefits for state and local public workers are significantly higher than the package awaiting those in the private sector, a study tracing a 20-year trend suggests.

In an article for CalWatchdog, an independent investigative reporting group, Chriss Street said that for many retirees, “working as public servants literally turned into a gold mine.” Street is the former treasurer of Orange County.

The former official cited a study by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, “Comparing Wealth in Retirement: State-Local Versus Private Sector Workers.” The study demonstrates that spending more than half of one’s career as a state or local public employee translates into at least 18 percent more wealth at age 65.

That’s a bare minimum advantage, Street wrote: “Public-sector employees, since the peak of the stock markets in 2000, enjoyed the equivalent positive 10 percent yearly compounded investment return from defined benefit pensions — a total of a 235.8 percent increase.”

One of the biggest factors in that long-term growth was the predominance of the annual cost-of-living adjustment  enjoyed by virtually all public sector employees. The study concluded that public employees can expect at age 65 to be 77 to 86 percent richer than comparable private-sector workers — nearly twice as rich.

The report tracked more than 12,650 people in 7,600 households since 1992.


Loading...
Subjects:         
Related:


54 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

If it is any consolation, the children of public workers won’t get those public union pensions their parents got. Thanks to steely eyed websites and commentaries like uncoveredSLO and this bit of sensation, those benefits will go the way of the dodo. Of course, should the “children of the right” (Dracula, get it?) also have a brain and aspire to a career with benefits, they would be out of luck, as well. Since government retirees are pretty much excluded from it you free enterprisers could always suck up what is left of Social Security, AKA “welfare” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/06/AR2011030602926.html). But, of course, no self respecting government union hater will accept welfare, will they?


0

I have paid into Social Security since 1963. Are you telling me what I am receiving now is welfare? I don’t think so.


0

Actual welfare recipients probably receive more than I do.


0

Well we obviously can’t tax “job creators”. We government pensioners are too few to affect the big picture. There are so many on Social Security. That’s where the real money is. Sorry. Your turn in the barrel.


0

What is a “job creator?” Who is NOT being taxed? It is unclear to me what you are trying to say.


0

Not to be harsh, but I suppose it becomes “welfare-like” when the amount of SS you receive eclipses the amount you paid in (adjusted for inflation and interest, of course).


I hope you lead a long and merry life. But if it is long enough, you are going to be receiving above and beyond all the social security you paid in during your working life.


That, as I understand it, is the rub. And, of course it has nothing to do with you, or me, or my parents. Fact of the matter is we are living too long in relation to what we paid into Social Security.


0

And if I die tomorrow, that will be 48 yrs. worth of S.S. that I won’t be collecting.


0

Union’s have no place in the public sector and it is unions that we have to thank for this crap.


0

Apostrophes have no place in Unions.


0

And people with your mentallity really shouldn’t have a place here. P.S. Amen to your statement Cindy!!


0

Shouldn’t that be APOSTROPHE’S?


0

No actually, it shouldn’t.


0

loo


REALLY?


0

Chris Street has as much credibility as the stuff flowing out of the South County wastewater treatment plant.


Dont believe me? Check out teh Orange County Register


http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2010/03/05/judge-chriss-street-breached-duty-engaged-in-self-dealing/52767/


0

Take a minute to research the source of this piece . “CalWatchdog” is a product of the right-wing anti-government machine. The blog’s staff are made up of mega-prolific columnists for a variety of right wing blogs and newspapers. Ever hear of the Pacific Research Institute?


Bottom line? Keep the focus on where the problems really are. It’s not state or local government employees, or unions.


The money ‘problems’ we enjoy are the ‘trickle-down’ effects of criminal acts perpetrated by a combo of corrupted officials at the Federal level, under the influence of a large number of influential corporate, finance, and investment creeps.


“CalWatchdog” trumpets the wrong tune.


0

I think we’re all pretty clear on which side of the proverbial fence we all sit on; very few “converts” are to be gained by arguing for or against. When this happens, there is usually only one result. The smart are truly prepared for it (as best they can); the others will hopefully learn a valuable life-lesson.


0

As “sensationalized” as the headline is, it is not true for ALL government workers, as well as it is not true for ALL private sector workers. Part of the real problem isn’t that the government workers have gotten a truly much better deal (they do have a very good deal, for sure) but the linked article also highlights how much private sector workers have suffered due to the elimination of defined benefit pension is favor of 401k s as well as IRAs. Those who either had a pension and had it converted to a 401k or simply went for the 401k to start with has seen the values of those 401k s reduced in value due to the manipulation of Wall Street for the benefit of the top 1%, at the cost of those not in that position. My main gripe with the article however is the lack of distinction of exactly which government employees are getting these maximum benefits. Perhaps a little more reporting would find that the bulk of government workers in the lower field positions, those who were the worker bees in the various offices most likely do not have the same “nearly 2 to 1” ratio of wealth of those who were in positions of management and supervisory positions. When we pay a city manager over 200 to 300 hundred thousand dollars a year, do you really expect that their retirement is NOT going to be a very high amount? Our last city manager that retired is the single highest payed retiree in San Luis Obsipo’s city history, at least until the current manager retires. If there is going to be outrage at the pensions and retirements of government workers, let’s define who is getting what so the anger can be directed at those who honestly deserve it, not those who do not.


0

Sure it’s sensationalized, that’s what news papers (and sites) do, and will continue to do.


However, while on the surface your points sound valid, one could also argue that all the “lower field positions” in the private sector are not analyzed because they often have ZERO retirement. Heck, many have zero jobs.


Numbers can be argued all day long, but look around… many government sector employees have yet to feel “the ax” that is no doubt coming. The private sector has been feeling it for some time now, no matter how often the news or politicians tell us we’re back from the brink…


0

Umm here is the PROBLEM with your simplifing of this. You suggest that the pensions are better than the 401k and didn’t take a hit. HELLO!! CalPers is going broke but the taxpayer STILL has to keep paying the Gov. employee their pension that they will get no matter what. And why is CapPers going broke? They were invested in Wall St. like EVERYONE else. It isn’t as simple as you imply.


0

Each household, ideally, should be comprised of one public sector wage earner (for the long term wealth), and one private sector wage earner (because we all “know” that the private sector pays better).


0

Granted things have changed in many civil service jobs, however the case was that Gov jobs didn’t pay that great typically but were secure as opposed to the private sector. Kinda like the difference between a person the playing high risk stock market which had potentially incredible returns or a person investing in humble earnings to make sure there was some resemblance of security in the future.


0

Yea remember the Firefighters wife whining about no cost of living increase in article here a couple weeks ago. I bet that (well actually know) public employees probably have more cost of living increases over their work years than the private sector. Then we have the Firefighter and police type whining that making around a 100k a year isn’t enough and that their compenstation (med. and retirement) isn’t enough. When do we the VOTING public say ENOUGH!!


0

No Surprise Here


0
1 2 3