• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

~1 in 3 SJ cops/firemen have $100k+/year pension

mike23w

mike23w

Giggity
Joined
May 3, 2004
Location
snuɐɹn ɟo sbuıɹ
Moto(s)
generic costco brand
San Jose's $100,000 pension club is rapidly growing

San Jose's pension costs have more than tripled ... outpacing the 20 percent growth in city revenues
Click to expand...

Nearly 1 in 3 retired San Jose police officers and firefighters now receive annual pensions of $100,000 or more
Click to expand...

The maximum amount a pensioner who worked 30 years can initially receive is 90 percent of pay for cops and firefighters

a guaranteed pension and automatic 3 percent annual cost-of-living raises that exceed the inflation rate
Click to expand...


some former city employees who retired a few years ago are now paid more than they were on the job, while remaining workers have taken 10 percent salary cuts to help pay the pension tab.

Rob Davis, who retired as police chief a year ago, collects San Jose's biggest pension, an annual benefit of $221,488 a year.

Former firefighter union president Randy Sekany's $129,223 pension,... now tops the $124,326.. he made in 2007 as a fire captain
Click to expand...

crazy.
 
They put themselves out there and deal with the bullshit and fuckwits of society day after day. IMHO, they earned that money.
 
Volcomism said:
They put themselves out there and deal with the bullshit and fuckwits of society day after day. IMHO, they earned that money.
Click to expand...

True, but I'm nearly certain you could find qualified people willing to deal with the same thing and for less pay. Something is keeping the law of supply and demand from working properly, and the taxpayers get a screwing because of it.
 
That's why when the Koch heads go after them they call them city govt employees. The attacks don't sound as good when you say cops and firemen.
 
Phaedrus said:
True, but I'm nearly certain you could find qualified people willing to deal with the same thing and for less pay. Something is keeping the law of supply and demand from working properly, and the taxpayers get a screwing because of it.
Click to expand...

So what do you suggest? Let's push those with 25+ years experience to retire early, just to make way for new-recruits?
 
Phaedrus said:
True, but I'm nearly certain you could find qualified people willing to deal with the same thing and for less pay. Something is keeping the law of supply and demand from working properly, and the taxpayers get a screwing because of it.
Click to expand...

:wtf


Firefighters and Police?


Ill pay my taxes thanx.

Pension reform is a mandatory conversation IMO. Talk of cheaper is better is disrespectful.
 
i think people are confused.

this isn't $100k/year or more for working cops/fire fighters.

this is $100k/year or more for people that aren't doing any work at all - that is crazy.
 
OP states Police and Firefighters.

Stats show some Brass getting big bucks.

Pension reform yes.

Cheaper FFs LEOs based on supply and demand is a sick kinda joke really.
 
Agent Orange said:
You think Heather Fong deserves to be paid $250K a year for the rest of her life?
Click to expand...

I'm not commenting or going after anyone in particular. I think Firefighters and Police Officers put themselves in dangerous situations each day for OUR safety. I believe WE are in no position to criticise how much WE think they deserve.


mike23w said:
i think people are confused.
this isn't $100k/year or more for working cops/fire fighters.
this is $100k/year or more for people that aren't doing any work at all - that is crazy.
Click to expand...

I think after 30+ years of service of putting up with the bullshit, greedy, whinging society of ours, they DEFINITELY earned 100k/yr after retirement.
 
Last edited:
Phaedrus said:
True, but I'm nearly certain you could find qualified people willing to deal with the same thing and for less pay. Something is keeping the law of supply and demand from working properly, and the taxpayers get a screwing because of it.
Click to expand...

I will just say that while you could find willing people to do it, we have a very very hard time finding willing people who are qualified to handle the responsibilities and clear the backgrounds required. Pay people less, or lower benefits, and you will get less qualified personnel. Sure, right now, you'll get some people -- but in 10 years, you won't. No one wants that. No one.

I will say this, from my personal opinion:
I work for a lower salary (than a private person would get to incur the risk, training costs and wide variety of skills I have for this job) to get a good retirement. That said, making more than you did when you retired is fucking crazy. I get it, with the cost of living increase, but it's still crazy and unsustainable.

The reality is without a solvent city, no one will get anything -- including pensioners, citizens who need police services, or current employees. I'm open to changes, but will still require and fight for better-than-average retirements. Most cities, police departments and cops/firemen, feel this way. We, as unions, WANT our cities to remain solvent and negotiate our contracts to sustain that.

That, or give me $200k/yr and make me buy my own retirement. I'm fine with either.
 
Volcomism said:
I think after 30+ years of service of putting up with the bullshit, greedy, whinging society of ours, they DEFINITELY earned 100k/yr after retirement.
Click to expand...

Regardless of appropriateness, there's an elephant in the room being ignored. What if these rates are literally beyond the economic carrying capacity of the area they represent?
 
mike23w said:
what's the upper limit for how much they should get in retirement?
is there an upper limit?
Click to expand...

You have minor differences in each city. In general, right now, the most you can get is 90% of your last year (or usually the last 3 years averaged out for a number) salary -- if you have worked 30 years or more and if you are 50 or 55 years or older. The reason why the difference is some cities do single highest year, some do 30 years of service at the age of 50, some do 55. My city is 90% after 30 years of service, but cannot collect retirement until age 55. In my case, I will have worked 34 years in law enforcement by the time I reach 55. In some cities or counties, the employees have negotiated a cost of living increase every 3-5 years or whatever. In most cities there is no cost of living increase (at least in my experience). In my city, there is not. I will make the same the day I retire, as the day I die. No increase, regardless what happens with inflation or cost of living. I'm not complaining either, just saying...

In many cities, the employee themselve pays their pension out of their paycheck (9% of our paycheck), in other cities the city picks up that cost as a negotiated benefit, and in other cities (like mine) the employee pays a portion and the city pays a portion. Such as, 3% of my paycheck disappears to go to the pension system before I even see it. The city picks up the remaining 6%.

As another example, another local department that I was looking at transfering to required me to pay the entire 9%, as well as other things that I currently do not pay. It would have been an $1800/mo paycut when all was said and done (plus the department I was going to transfer to had a lower salary to begin with). That just gives you an idea of the variance as to who pays what, and where the money comes from.

morthrane said:
Regardless of appropriateness, there's an elephant in the room being ignored. What if these rates are literally beyond the economic carrying capacity of the area they represent?
Click to expand...

If the rates are beyond what a city or state can literally pay -- then things need to be adjusted. I obviously still think that law enforcement/fire should get better-than-average and more guaranteed retirements, due to the nature of our service -- but, if it simply can't be paid then it does nobody any good to keep it in place. All it will do is make sure that NO ONE gets paid.
 
Last edited:
mike23w said:
what's the upper limit for how much they should get in retirement?
is there an upper limit?
Click to expand...


A reasonable question that needs to be part of the dialogue.

How bout 75% of yearly salary at time of retirement. Maximum cap of 80K today's dollars with inflation based COLA's yearly. This is for LEOs FFs.

All other public servants are subject to modifications up to and including a complete restructuring and cash out lump sum program.


:confused
 
Volcomism said:
They put themselves out there and deal with the bullshit and fuckwits of society day after day. IMHO, they earned that money.
Click to expand...
And soldiers don't? BTW, they make much less and their pensions are much less.
 
:rolleyes Sounds like another media spin campaign by the mayor and San Jose officials. Starting salary for most SJPD and SCCSO is in the $70k range. Eventually, some of them get into six figures but it takes quite a few years. When there are shots fired in some gang infested neighborhood, we typically run the other way (or we don't go to those neighborhoods in the first place) but the job of the police officer is to run towards the danger, towards the gangs and murderers and other criminals. They do this for a starting salary in the $70k range and a pension after 30 years of getting injured, beat up and sometimes shot or stabbed in the line of duty. These days police officers have a tremendous personal liability for doing their job and practically need a law degree to keep up with all the stuff they must do in order to make their case stick in court. I have no problem with them making $100k and after 30 years of service, retiring with a pension.

btw, San Jose PD has around 1,000 officers for a population of nearly 1 million people so they are grossly understaffed which means their jobs are even more dangerous due to lack of back-up officers.
 
antarius, my question is:
how much pension is too much for a typical patrol officer that has retired?

i'm trying to understand how you determine the pension ceiling; or maybe there is no ceiling (although i would strongly argue this last point if that is your position).

is $100k/year pension too high?
$200k/year?
$500k/year?
$1M/year?
$2M/year?
$5M/year?

volc's statement is that cops/firemen should be paid in retirement for the bullshit they endure.

my question is what is the max they should be paid in retirement for enduring bullshit?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top