freeman2 wrote:Here is a discussion in my county (orange county) about the pension plans. http://losalamitos.patch.com/articles/o ... vernmentIf an orange county firefighter or sheriff's deputy does 20 years he retire at 60 percent at age 50; if he does 30 he can get 90%

The link is dead.

This is the 3@50. Some departments went to this. Some, like mine, are employee-managed (for the most part). However, this ignores a lot of factors. You note "(if someone) does 20 years he retire at 60 percent at age 50." That means they started at 30. That's a fairly low number of folks. Additionally, that's all taxable. You want to retire at 60% of your current salary? When you start seeing what they don't do with regard to inflation, trust me, it's not so great.

Beyond that, you can only do these jobs if you (at least somewhat) like them. Very few people would choose to dodge bullets or go into burning buildings for a living. And, please remember: Los Angeles County's top exports: 1) porn; 2) gang members. Don't believe me? Live there.

(By the way, my cousin's husband is high up in LA County Fire Department and my sister-in-law has about 18 years in with LAPD so I am have some first-hand knowledge about some of this stuff)

Actually, that is, at best, second-hand. First-hand would mean you, personally. As for cousin-in-law or sister-in-law, that's nice. I did the job for more than 20 years. My father was on for 30. My brother has been on for 7. My Dad helped develop the whole SWAT team concept. My brother's partner lost a leg in a shooting during which my brother killed the suspect. My son-in-law is a fireman. I know none of us took the job for the fat retirement.

LAPD has successfully lobbied for four tens and three 12 hour shifts (preferable for the officers if not exactly great for performance--kind of makes you wonder if it so hard why can they do 12 hour shifts).

LAPD is a horribly run department. You can call 911 and not speak to a human being for an hour. They won't send a unit to take a report. I could go on and on. I could write an essay about how bad the LAPD is run.

Let's talk "first-hand" knowledge. I've worked 16 hours in a radio car. After 10, I was dead (so to speak) and literally praying I would not have to get in a fight. That was at 25 years old. So, why would LAPD want that sort of schedule? Because it's better for the officers--as long as they don't have to do much but paperwork for the last two hours.

I've also worked 12/12 schedules--when I was in the service and during various emergency situations. After a few days, the weariness is evident on even the youngest and most fit. So, please, don't lecture us about how sweet it is.

As for fightfighters working that hard, well, they typically do ten 24 hour shifts every month. This enables them to put in a LOT of overtime. They have 20 days off a month so isnt' that hard to work an additional five days---you still have 15 days to recuperate.

Yet, not so many people choose to do it. Hmm, I wonder why? Maybe it's because you can't reason with a fire? Maybe it's because folks see what happens during "fire season" in SoCal and they thank God (or Mother Earth, or whoever/whatever they worship) that they don't have to do it. It is physically demanding and punishing.

On the flip side, I can tell you my cousin's husband is pretty beat up physically--his knees are shot. I don't see that being a police officer is all that physically demanding, but being in all those stressful situations can take quite a toll. Firefighters and police officers deserve reasonable pensions, but they just have gotten to be a bit much.

As determined by you? THAT is a bit much.

My real gripe is that pensions have been taken away in the private sector (I am sorry RJ-- I just completely disagree that accepting benefits obtained by unions but being otherwise anti-union is acceptable behavior)

I was a union shop steward while on the job. I'm not anti-union. I am anti-mandatory union. I am anti unions spending dues against members' wishes. I once asked the head of our union (who was a real-life Dirty Harry: if he didn't shoot it, he slept with it) why the union consistently supported liberal Democrats even though membership was probably 80% or higher conservative. His answer? "Even though they're anti-gun (cops aren't) and soft on crime, they support our union."

401K plans for private section employees are worth 1/10 or 1/20 of these pensions. It's not fair and I just don't how know you can expect private sector employees to keep paying for generous public employee pensions through their taxes when they are not getting those benefits themselves.

Then stop voting for Democrats!

Again, our fund was based on large employee contributions, employer contributions, then the fund was managed by an elected board that invested the money. Even in the recession, our fund is not in trouble. And, it is not a strain on the local government's budget.

Ray Jay wrote:There's general agreement that policemen and firemen deserve some sort of pension because of the gruelling / harzardous nature of their jobs. So here's a question, to what extent are these pensions actually going to real policemen and real firefighters? How many people in these departments are management or clerical and enjoying the pensions without actually having dangerous or physically challenging jobs?

There were different pension levels, determined by the work performed. Secretaries, meter maids, and other non-law enforcement personnel were part of the same retirement fund, but their compensation was calculated on a completely different scale. They still had to contribute to it, but they did not get nearly as much. My Mom fell into this category. Trust me, she's not rich, and not even able to eek out a decent retirement. She would have done well to have had a separate 401K in addition.

I would be surprised to find out that many departments have "generous" retirement plans for non-safety personnel.

Yes, Dr. Fate it is second-hand knowledge. But like it or not non-police and non-firemen are ultimately going to be the judge of what is fair with regard to public employee pensions. And regardless of how difficult it is to be a fireman or policeman, if private sector employees are not getting comparable benefits they won't be willing to pay taxes so that public employees can get better benefits. So in the future police and firemen will have to take drastic cuts in their benefits packages or benefit packages of your typical private sector employee must be raised. Public unions only get those benefits because of union success in the private sector; now that unions have been crushed in the private sector and benefits reduced the same will happen in the public sector.

freeman2 wrote:Yes, Dr. Fate it is second-hand knowledge. But like it or not non-police and non-firemen are ultimately going to be the judge of what is fair with regard to public employee pensions. And regardless of how difficult it is to be a fireman or policeman, if private sector employees are not getting comparable benefits they won't be willing to pay taxes so that public employees can get better benefits. So in the future police and firemen will have to take drastic cuts in their benefits packages or benefit packages of your typical private sector employee must be raised. Public unions only get those benefits because of union success in the private sector; now that unions have been crushed in the private sector and benefits reduced the same will happen in the public sector.

Again, you don't know what you're talking about.

I know we went many years with paltry raises. We even had one contract our union negotiated where we had 18 months with no paid overtime. That was sweet!

My brother's department has gone 7 years with no raise. Nice money, huh?

Do you belong to a private union?

Government workers are going to get a haircut. However, I think safety workers will be the last ones to get a big cut. You may not like it, but that's reality.

fate

Government workers are going to get a haircut. However, I think safety workers will be the last ones to get a big cut. You may not like it, but that's reality.

Fire police and teachers make up such a large portion of a cities, or states public employee base that its impossible to make significant operational cost savings without having a go at them. A lot of teachers, cops and firemen owe a year or two of employment to the stimulus package . Since there was no additional revenue raised after the stimulus money dried up ... employment in these sectors has been declining. (Hence the stalled unemployment rate even though private sector jobs have increased.)

You may think, Fate, that an "I'm all right Jack", attitude will prevail for cops and firemen. But the reality is that though they might not be the absolute first to walk the plank, they are on the plank and its not too long....

Stockton Cal., just declared bankruptcy. Before doing so they had laid off 40% of employees including a third of firemen and cops. Here's a few more examples of how its playing out for cops and firemen.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500202_162-20076790.html
http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/03/05/ ... ol-budget/
http://thedp.com/index.php/article/2012 ... _fire_risk

Meanwhile your prefered candidate for President said this:
Romney said of Obama, “he wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”

He doesn't seem to suggest that cops and firemen have special value.
I was also appalled at the way first responders who were injured during 9/11 were treated regarding their ongoing medical insurance needs.... I would have thought that their sacrifice deserved better treatment, and yet didn't they endure a long period before legislators were shamed into responding to their need?
I guess my point is that I'd be careful about assuming there is a special place in peoples hearts for "safety workers". There's too much evidence to the contrary.

By the way, you said this:

Very few people would choose to dodge bullets or go into burning buildings for a living.

Why is it that when open positions for fire fighting and police are advertised they are usually way over subscribed ? I'd be interested in your explanation....

rickyp wrote:fate

Government workers are going to get a haircut. However, I think safety workers will be the last ones to get a big cut. You may not like it, but that's reality.

Fire police and teachers make up such a large portion of a cities, or states public employee base that its impossible to make significant operational cost savings without having a go at them. A lot of teachers, cops and firemen owe a year or two of employment to the stimulus package . Since there was no additional revenue raised after the stimulus money dried up ... employment in these sectors has been declining. (Hence the stalled unemployment rate even though private sector jobs have increased.)

Horse manure.

I said "safety workers." Teachers are not in that category.

Furthermore, if the Stimulus is all that saved these jobs, they needed to go. States have overspent, just like municipalities, and it's not Oklahoma's job to bail out California, New York, or Illinois.

If you can show the massive layoffs of cops and firemen, you'll have a point. However, I know you can't. What local governments do instead of laying off is stop hiring. It is cheaper to pay overtime than to hire new employees (because overtime requires no fringe benefits or training).

You may think, Fate, that an "I'm all right Jack", attitude will prevail for cops and firemen. But the reality is that though they might not be the absolute first to walk the plank, they are on the plank and its not too long....

Again, feel free to ping me when the massive layoffs of safety workers happens.

Stockton Cal., just declared bankruptcy. Before doing so they had laid off 40% of employees including a third of firemen and cops. Here's a few more examples of how its playing out for cops and firemen.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500202_162-20076790.html

Your anecdotes are pathetic. A town of 1200 had a budget deficit of $185K? From your link:

Now, county sheriff's deputies must handle calls in Alto.

But that means response times that were less than 3 minutes from police are now up to 15 minutes from deputies spread thin over a 1,000 square mile county.

"When you're sitting there needing help, it's a lifetime," says Cherokee County Sheriff James Campbell, who's among those who think chopping the police department was a bad idea.

"In the last 24 hours," Campbell says, "we've answered 18 calls in the county; seven of them were in Alto."

In fact, Teague notes, Alto has been experiencing a crime spree, including an attempted bank robbery last month and a rash of burglaries.

Yup, it's anarchy.

Stockton speculated on getting the Raiders and did a LOT of stupid things, including jacking up taxes, which drove out many upper income folks.

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/03/05/ ... ol-budget/

From your Detroit link:

McNamara is also opposed to Austin’s plan to increase the number of companies that are closed on any given day. Austin is under pressure to cut overtime staff and stay within budget.

In other words, no firemen are losing their jobs.


http://thedp.com/index.php/article/2012 ... _fire_risk

Philadelphia:

When the Philadelphia Fire Department browns out an engine or ladder company, its staff instead goes to fill gaps in other companies for firefighters on leave. Three companies are browned out during the day, and three at night, Vozzelli said.

Although brownouts have been in use for decades, several recent fire incidents have called into question the safety of the practice under Philadelphia Mayor and 1979 Wharton graduate Michael Nutter.

***

According to Fire Department Executive Chief Richard Davison, browned-out companies’ firefighters originally went to the Fire Academy for training, and the department replaced missing personnel by calling in overtime workers.

The current use of “rolling brownouts” enables the department to send firefighters working their regular shifts to plug holes in other companies. This practice, known as backfilling or detailing, does not provide the firefighters with overtime pay.

In other words, in each of YOUR three examples, not one job was lost. The town of Alto, TX (pop. 1,200) put their entire department (2? 3?) on furlough. That's it.

Meanwhile your prefered candidate for President said this:
Romney said of Obama, “he wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”

Good job, that's almost as dishonest a representation as the Obama campaign. His point is that individual States are responsible for their own financial straits. We live in a republic--each individual State has its own budget and priorities. Tennessee should not be paying for firemen in Pennsylvania. What's so hard to understand about that?

He doesn't seem to suggest that cops and firemen have special value.

You don't seem to know the truth when it hits you between the eyes. That's just dishonest on your part.

Your 9/11 arguments are just so much more manure.

By the way, you said this:

Very few people would choose to dodge bullets or go into burning buildings for a living.

Why is it that when open positions for fire fighting and police are advertised they are usually way over subscribed ? I'd be interested in your explanation....

Part of the reason is because many people are wannabe, Paul Blartt-types. 300 lb. women cannot be firefighters. Guys who have extensive drug histories or domestic violence records can't be cops. That doesn't stop them from applying.

As for the rest of it, it would not matter what I said--you, you pompous know-nothing, who has likely never been in a fight that did not involve a keyboard, already have your mind made up.