The question I have is this…if new employees are funneled into a defined contribution plan..how will effect those of us still in the pension plan in years to come? It would seem that the pot of money would shrink and that would put a burden on taxpayers or the State would slash benefits.

what about the drop????

Well, one good thing is, the return on your money will be better in the investment fund than it is the the old retirement system. Just like Social Security – if we could have invested that money ourselves, we could have averaged 9%, instead of the 2% gained in the old plan. Those politicians need to treat our law enforcement people as the heroes they are and not change their benefits! Is it worth you going out every day and risking your life and knowing that the stress will shorten your life? I still haven’t seen any cuts in the politicians retirement plans! You politicians need to include yourself in these cuts! None of you should be vested unless you serve at least 4 years and you should be on a graduated scale, too, depending on the amount of time you spend in an elected position. In fact, the Founding Fathers did not intend for political positions to be careers, so, based on their philosophy, there should be no retirement benefits for politicians. That’s one of the problems, some of you make careers out of politics and make millions, on the side, instead of serving the people and going back to your home and working like the rest of us!

That will be an actuarial issue. There is language in the bill for underfunding issues. Hopefully, the decrease in future liabilities will offset the future funding for those still in the plan. The annual contributions, by statute, are supposed to reflect the actuarial requirements.

As proposed, it does not change, but I suspect a drop in the interest rates will be coming.

WTF are these people thinking?

Well, a 2 or 3% contribution is better than a 5% contribution but the point is that any contribution opens the door to increasing the contribution % in the future. And let’s face it, for most of us, any contribution would be a hardship at our income levels…

We need to continue to fight this and not be appeased simply because this proposal is better than the Governor’s!

That is Correct!

“We can only guess that this language gives the legislature the right of “eminent domain” over your previously promised benefits, and therefore can change them as they see fit in the name of “state interest”.

Do I interpret your guess correctly as saying the state has the ability to reduce the amount of my pension check, post retirement, from say 4G to 3G a month based on the needs of the state? Your opinion as to whether or not these benefits I earned are modifiable by the state at their whim?

“…the Founding Fathers did not intend for political positions to be careers, so, based on their philosophy, there should be no retirement benefits for politicians. That’s one of the problems, some of you make careers out of politics and make millions, on the side, instead of serving the people and going back to your home and working like the rest of us!”

Very good points John, well said.

NO, I don’t think that verbiage gives the legislature the right to change benefits to those already collecting them. I do, however, have to guess that acting in the “state’s interest” opens doors to changes for those that are not yet retired.

NO! I don’t think the verbiage gives the legislators the right to change the benefits of those retired and collecting benefits. I do have to guess that acting in the great good of “state interests” might open doors for changes to those not yet collecting.

This will cause so much animosity in the future, working side by side with someone who does not have the same benefits as another person, just because they got hired a year or two earlier.

The overtime/leave exclusion is a killer. Hope that one goes away!

DROP will be history for sure

“Way back” in the good old days, employees contributed a portion of their salary towards their pension. As time went on, employers picked up more and more of that contribution, as a way to increase “take home pay” without actually increasing salaries. And it was good.
Last year, Miami-Dade County chose to reduce our “take home pay” by having everyone contribute 5% of their salary towards health insurance premiums, without actually reducing salaries. It wasn’t great, but it was better than a 5% salary reduction which would have impacted life insurance, social security and pension values.
And now the state wants to reduce our take-home pay yet again; AND reduce our pension values.
Just one question: When everyone’s take-home pay is eaten away by these “reductions” and everyone’s pension is reduced by these “adjustments”…. Who will havve enough money to contribute to the FOOD STAMP program we are all going to need to eat during our longer life-expectancy?

They will get over it.
About 20 years ago, the pay plan was changed and new employees were hired at step ONE instead of the old step FIVE, and had to contribute 20% towards their health insurance. All done to save money for the County and to save jobs for the unions. All the unions agreed to that change.
We all got along. Nobody hated anyone.
It just took those folks 4 years longer to reach their maximum salary step. The good ones got promoted. The average ones got their annual step and their annual COLA and considered themselves lucky. We had some difficulty hiring new people at such low salaries, but eventually we found people who were willing to take the pay cuts to work in public service.
Years later, when money wasn’t so tight, those provisions were renegotiated, and things went back to the old way. And life went on.

HOw about we drop the pension for all politicians and make them contribute 5%…now that is something I could go for.

State Correctional Officers make 30% less than County Officers in the same grade. There is nothing like putting your life on the line to be placed on welfare due to budget cuts. The writing is on the wall “privitization is comming soon”.

I could not agree more. Give them 3% now and it will be 5% in a few years. That’s how they will work. State employees have not had a raise in about 7 years and now they want to take money away from them!!!!! I know of one veteran Florida State TRooper whose patrol zone sometimes encompasses 6 counties by himself. He is a 20 year veteran and makes 40K a year raising a family. We need to make our voices heard in TALLAHASSEE!!!!

So how is Rick Scott going to pull Florida out of the foreclosure mess? Cut state workers 5% and no raises for 7 years, others cut 5% for medical and 5% for FRS=10%. Who will be able to afford a home?Scott dont want know bullet train money,too. Them workers can buy homes. I guess he wants everyone to rent because no one can afford a house. I predict next year he will be $5 billion short again, He needs to find ways to get Florida going and buying homes again.He needs to increase the revenues.Because you can only cut so much.

No, SB 1130 has NO affect on DROP at this point. Scott’s proposal would eliminate it, Ring’s does not. The legislature will fight that one out over the next several months.

According to Rings proposal, you can DROP at 30.

Presumably both. All employees will contribute, but NEW employees will only have the Investment Plan option. Those remaining in the Pension will contribute to it.

Until a proposal is made, it is hard to tell. Last year’s proposal was to lower the interest rate for everyone, even if they were already in the DROP. As the details emerge, we will try and keep you posted. Under the right circumstances, it could well be. I would urge you to be careful presuming you have a written contract. An offer for employment, and acceptance of that offer, may not mean it is binding in terms. The DROP language has always been very clear that there is no promise of a job for any length of time, and you employer can terminate you at any time.

Rings bill does not change DROP. The grapevine is saying a proposal might come out that will lower the interest rate.

Your pension is based on your high five years, so only those would count under any circumstances. As I read it, overtime will not be used in the high five if the proposal passes. If you were to move to the investment plan before new legislation passes, you would get to count overtime in your high five.

First off, it ain’t broke so quit trying to fix it!! This is very similiar to what happened to social security. There is a big vat of cash sitting there waiting for us to retire and greedy politicians want to get their hands on it. This is one of the top four pension progams in the country. Why is it so vital that it be “fixed” when it ain’t broke!!!

I am considering going into teaching after 20 years in financial services. The pension was important because the pay is so low. I don’t need high pay and I am most concerned with creating a sound retirement. The 401k approach is fine because I don’t trust the promises made from a govt entity that are to come to fruition 25 years down the road(defined benefit). a 401k is defined contribution and you will have what you accumulate. Hopefully they will have index funds although considering the lobbyist for Wall Street, I doubt it. I digress.

While I like the 401k for my contribution, I bemoan the loss of a pension contribution. Clearly they need to match the 401k or put in a nondiscretionary contribution from the employer since they are no longer providing a defined benefit pension. My guess is that will be like 5% of pay. Defined benefit pensions cost the employer, on average, 8% of pay. So, it is obvious they are trying to lower the state contribution.

However, these changes are enough for me to consider foregoing teaching and remaining in the private sector with a)better pay and b)better 401k match over the same period of time. That is a loss to education in my view.

dont count on getting better returns. look at the FICOR plan for substitute teachers. Transamerica has their funds in there. All active funds. All suck.

If they would scrap the current investment management philosophy for the multi-billion FRS fund and, instead, put the money into a similar asset mix using only DFA institutional index funds, not only would expenses go down, but returns would go up because you wouldn’t have any nonsense investments that lose millions, manager error, stock picking mistakes, failure to diversify, self-dealing, conflicts-of-interest, and the list goes on. These people are fiduciaries. Why the heck they are actively managing this money is beyond me.

Is it the high five or the average of the last five?

Police, Fire, Educators… we all need to stick together on this throughout the whole push to attack public servants. They are trying to chip away everything we work our whole lives for piece by piece. Please take note of anyone who is proposing or voicing their support for bills like this, we have to vote them out. They are destroying our state.

Does this Bill adress the eliminatione, reduction, or change the conditions of the DROP?

JOHN MILIZIANO

FRS has done an exceptional job of managing the money they are entrusted with. As well as, or better than most fiduciaries in the nation. These are legislative issues, NOT FRS issues!

High Five

No it does not.

Does HB 1130 include “smoothing” instead of using “high 5′s” for existing employees?

No smoothing, High 5 without overtime!

There are certainly changes that could be made that would have an impact on your lump sum. Most of the current changes would have little or no affect, as the major changes on in the future, it would allow the current value to remain, and only impact the future. If they were to “smooth” the AFC, it could/would be disastrous.

#1 You would get past credit. There are exceptions, but in all liklihood you are good if you come back.

#2 No changes from SB 1130

Senators, Congressmen & the Governor are all participants in FRS and are affected just like everyone else in FRS is.

They are!

Politicians are NOT exempting themselves, they are FRS members and are cut like all other members. There is even a bill proposed that CUTS only Elected Officials!

Not yet!

My crystal ball says the significant cuts will be for FUTURE employees. Getting out of DROP could be a challenge.

My crystal ball says the significant changes will be for new employees. Getting out of DROP is not easy!

What Bill would that be? I’d like to look it up.

What I would like to know . . . . is why all the ATTACKS on the FRS? Is there a way the legislators can get their GREEDY hands on the FRS pot of funds by eliminating or SEVERELY LIMITING the EXISTING BENEFITS? ? ?

There will be “UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES of “fixing” the FRS . . . there will be a stampede of pending RETIREES before June 30, 2011 . . . . thereby, losing MANY EXPERIENCED and HARD-WORKING employees. Additionally, it will be more difficult to retain and hire new employees to replace all of that “LOST EXPERIENCE”.

So public employees will now subsidize the budget shortfalls . . . what will they “attack’ next year?

SB 290, by Fasano. Cuts the EOC from 3% credit to 2%!

Understood. Thank the ball for me.

Give up my sick leave time! Iss this idiot insane as well?

You know, I have no problem with having to contribute to a pension plan because we should contribute, what I do have a problem with is that Senetors and Congressmen and women continue to receive thier salaries as an elected official for life and receive medical benefits also after they have left office. I am 62 years old and cannot remember ever voting for this. This as I understand it was put in by the same people who are receiving it out elected officials. If we really want to be fare and if we are really trying to find ways to make changes and balance our budget. If we are asking the American people to make sacrifices, then this is an issue that needs to be addressed. The rest of us when we leave a job do not continue to receive a paycheck and we certainly to not continue to get medical benefits.

I’m not too savvy on all the retirement terms, but does”The other most notable change is the proposal does away with the use of any and all overtime pay, unused leave or “any other form of compensation beyond the base hourly or annual salary” (lines 386-393).” mean that we will not get paid for unused sick days??

Anyone know if and how we can watch the meeting scheduled for tomorrow morning in Tallahassee regarding this Bill?

What is HIS? Health Insurance?

Please refer to this link:

https://www.rol.frs.state.fl.us/forms/eoc.pdf

Elected Officers, including Senators and Representitives are members of FRS and have the same basic benefits and conditions as you. I think you were given faulty information in regard to their “salaries for life”. We hear than one a lot!

You might get paid for them, but you won’t be able to use them for the calculaton of your Average Final Compensation after July 1, IF the bill is approved.

I would like some clarity in regard to the unused leave not being calculated into the AFC. Is it only going to be the unused leave accumulated after July 1, 2011 or will it be all unused leave before that date as well.

It is the Health Insurance Subsidy. The amount you receive after retirement is currently based on your years of service. You currently receive $5 for every year of service up to $150 per month. They have been trying to take this away for quite some time.

Probably not many.

The Florida retirement system is ranked 2nd in the U.S. as the most solid financially. It has 126 billion in reserves. Retirees only get 40% of their pay at retirement. Members of the Florida retirement system were told initially that to compensate for their low pay and low pay out, they would not have to pay into the retirement. Other states pay out 75% and more to their retirees. How can they state that is “an important state interest when the system is not broken! The system is solid. They claim they will save 2.8 billion over 2 years. 126 billion in the coiffers and they want to bankrupt their constituents who are already struggling. There are over 600,000 people a part of the FRS. I guess it doesn’t matter if they eat or have some where to sleep. People think that retirees from the FRS are rolling in the cash. NOT!!! 40% Have you tried living off of 40% of your current pay. High risk personnel have to work 25 years to get 40% Others have to work 30 years to even qualify for the 40% Some people after 30-45 years of dedicated service to the state of Florida will now be told, we don’t care what you were promised when you signed on to the retirement system. They don’t care that people have worked most of their life thinking they would get something. They don’t even want to grandfather in the people who have already committed their service. They say that we need to follow the business model. If the business model is so good, why are so many people retiring from the business world looking for a job because they can not afford to live on their retirement. I guess the millionnaires and billionaires can’t see the real people from their ivory towers. But then why should they, they;ve got there’s.

I am an adjunct faculty member at a college that contributes to the FRS for me. Will I be affected by the changes since I am part-time? I have 14 years in the system now.

If you are a member of FRS, you will be affected!

How many people does it take to recall the governor? There are 650,000 active FRS members plus 305,000 current retirees. Thats almost 1 million people who I bet would gladly sign a recall petition. Lets get started!

And how many schools do you know that don’t want to replace these 60 – 70 year-olds with young energetic blood that is a lot cheaper! And when the teacher reform replaces the current way teachers are evaluated (and appreciated for their experience, wisdom and maturity) how many do you think will still be in the ranks?

Balancing a budget defficit created by giving wealthy people and businesses a tax break does not constitute “an important state interest.” FRS liabilities are less than 1% of the entire state budget and the program is making money hand over foot to the tune of being currently 100% funded. Tell me one other state that can make that claim. HANDS OFF LEGISLATURES!

Ya Know,
I would make an assumption that all State employees like me are substantially underpaid to begin with. I earn approximately 27% less than what an average government / State employee with my experience and credentials earn when compared to all other States. I earn 39% less than my private sector peers. I understand this is neither an exaggeration nor an anomaly among us typical State employees. The funds spent by the State of Florida on my behalf for pension and insurance benefits help to offset this inequity. I also thought there was a level of job security, but now I understand differently. I guess I’m lucky to at least have a job.

By not providing a cost of living raise for the past 5 years and an ever increasing employee cost of health insurance, co-payments, gasoline, yada yada, the State has already in effect cut the salaries of thousands of employees like me. Imposing a 2% or 5% salary contribution to our pensions effectively reduces our salaries by a like amount. Did I forget to mention that when compared to the entire USA, Florida ranks pretty low on the pole in regards to the overall cost to the taxpayer, yet generally ranks pretty high on the services delivered. Lest we forget, State employees are also Florida tax payers and voters.

It will not be difficult for people similar to me to move into the private sector as I suspect will happen once our economy picks up a bit more. I think it’s called a brain drain. I suppose this will create private sector jobs at many times the cost to do the same job now done by us in-house folks. I know there must be a mathematical calculation that demonstrates how this saves the State money. There are so many others who are not as vocationally mobile as I who have invested their livelihood in the hope of a modest retirement once promised but now being bargained away. There is a pervasive fear amongst us public servants that we may become jobless as heralded by the cavalier decrees of our leadership in an attempt to create jobs and decrease the size of government. I will continue to do my job to the very best of my ability and will do my utmost to safe guard the States treasure, as will all of us, despite the hardship and uncertainties presented by our new leadership.

Governor Scott and Senator Ring, if you care to adjust our pensions to be in line with the private sector then how about a 39% raise to go along with those fries?

The state of Florida is trying to do away with public education one way or another. I already can’t reitre until I am 65 because of the insurance. I usually work 12 hours a day to attempt to do my job now. If a Democrat is proposing this, what are the Republicans proposing.

come on people. something has to be done. the state is broke. let’s do something to stabilize and secure the retirement instead of take, take ,take until there is nothing left. By the way my spouse works for the government. Reform is needed.

We can sit here and Blog until our fingers are raw. What needs to happen is all of the unions need to get there members together and have peaceful protest to let these new politicans know that we are not going to sit around and take the nonsense that they want to hand out. We need to get load but stay with in the lines of the law. I personaly work with people who voted for this new batch of legislators. Every day I remind them of what a mistake they have made. Lets work together as a whole and if removing them from office is our only optoin lets move foward.

While we may face a budget deficit (3.5 bil is 5% of the total budget), I don’t think I would say the state is “broke”. Why does anything have to be done to secure a retirement plan that is already very secure? Why does balancing the budget fall on the backs of education, prisons, and FRS members?

Some of what you say maybe an issue. The part about Wall Street circling doesn’t quite make it, as the money is already with Wall Street, it will simply move from FRS’ account to yours, and probably be less of it. While it is certainly possible to do well, it will take a lot of discipline and prudence, instead of the experience of FRS, who happens to be exceptionally good at it.

OK so it looks like a done deal . . . some % of our gross salary will be taken as our contribution. What I haven’t seen yet is whether or not we will have any input as to where our % contributions are invested. It just doesn’t seem right that they make you contribute and you wouldn’t at least get to pick from a menu of choices for how YOUR money gets invested.

The investment options withing the Investment Program, as well as their performance on the homepage of MyFRS.com, or at the following link:

http://www.myfrs.com/portal/server.pt/community/investment_funds/221

I am with you on this! Representitives receive 100% of their saalary after 1 year of service, family members included in medical benefits, and children of reps do not have to pay back student loans? Why is this?

I am with you on this! Representitives receive 100% of their saalary after 1 year of service, family members included in medical benefits, and children of reps do not have to pay back student loans? Why is this?

They DO NOT GET 100%of their salary after 1 year of service. The are members of FRS just like all other state employees. They get 3% per year of their AFC similar to Special Risk members, and can retire at 62 or with 30 years just like Regular members. I don’t know where the 100% comes from. Please refer to the Elected Officers Class info at:

https://www.rol.frs.state.fl.us/forms/eoc.pdf

Any evidience to support the 9% claim?

Last year FRS posted a 14% ROI

Please view our previous post “Change Ahead” (http://frsoptions.info/florida-retirement-system-pension-plan/frs-change-ahead). The Annual returns are posted there. FRS has averaged over 9% per year, even including the “Panic of 2008″! Without 2008, the number jumps to close to 11%.

They are not “Sprecial Risk”. They get 3%, but all other aspects mirror “Regular Risk”. I suspect it is an inducement to get people to want the job, just like any other pension offer. Legislators in general, probably don’t do it for the pay! Scott didn’t spend $70 mil for the $150k salary, must be the Pension Benefits.

Is anyone aware if there will be one of us at the meeting this morning in Tallahassee to report back to the rest of us?

Welcome to Change

I have a question about DROP. Currently vested employees are allowed to enter DROP at age 62 or 30 years of service. Will this be changed?

I have a question about DROP. Currently vested employees are allowed to enter DROP at age 62 or 30 years of service. Will this be changed?

I guess the truth hurt yesterday. I didn’t get posted………….

I guess the truth hurt yesterday. I didn’t get posted………….

Not according to SB1130. The Governors proposal would eliminate it entirely.

Not according to SB1130. The Governors proposal would eliminate it entirely.

If it was purely political, abusive, or had language fouls, that might be possible (Even if you and I both believe you are correct). As you can see, it is becoming a full time job going through these, so it might have been overlooked. Try it again, and we’ll see.

If it was purely political, abusive, or had language fouls, that might be possible (Even if you and I both believe you are correct). As you can see, it is becoming a full time job going through these, so it might have been overlooked. Try it again, and we’ll see.

will people in DROP be required to pay contributions into retirement fund?

Since the Traditional plan would be eliminated as of July 1, 2011, how does raising the retirement age for people hired after this date work as far as DROP? In the Investment Plan members are not allowed to participate in DROP, so how can the Retirement age be raised when they are not eligible to participate?

No.

A darn good question!

When will the vote be on this BILL ?

31 years teaching, now retired, and I am scared to death that Rick and his little minions are going to take away a huge chunk of my pitiful pension and supplements. New people in FRS will be even worse off. This has got to stop! Take back Florida from these people. Join the “Awake the State” Facebook group and participate in emailing/calling legislators and joining rallies on March 8th.

This is along the lines of what LC asked. If all new hires as of July 1, 2011 will be enrolled in the Investment Plan, who exactly does the new retirement age apply to and in what context?

The session starts in 3 weeks, and runs for 2 months. I could be any time in that period. There will most likely be some back and forth, and then it goes to the house. Could be the end of April before we know how it shakes out.

The new retirement age will be for all employees hired after June 30. They will not reach “normal” retirement age until age 65 (60 for special risk).

I still can’t figure out how the new retirement ages effect those hired as of July 1, 2011 since they’ll all be enrolled in the Ivestment plan anyway. Anybody have any ideas?

As I read it, that is the earliest date you can retire and receive your retirement benefit from FRS. You are entitled to all of it in the Investment Plan, but you can not begin to collect your benefit until you reach that age. Similar to the minimum age you need to collect Social Security. If you retire at age 60, you won’t be able to collect your benefits until age 65.

I’m not sure about this UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, I read where Scott made a statement he doesn’t care if it causes people to quit. People are already retiring, that had intended to stay a little longer so the down trend has started. As of those left the public can kiss service good by unless they also are considering seriously cutting work load, case load, or whatever to the bone as well.

I read that statement too. I can only guess that public employment is viewed by Mr. Scott as a one way street. You should be dedicated, loyal, and hardworking, and in return, the highest ranking officer in the state could care less if you work or not???????

Good luck with that.

Your highest 5 years are averaged so 6 years of overtime means one does not count.

Does your employer allow you to “cash out” vacation time…mine allowed up to 80 hours per year, also I could convert sick 2 for 1 up to 80 hours per year.

Lots of comments about sick time payouts being counted as compensation – my employer did not include sick but did include vacation time.up to 960 hours.

Unfortunately, the general public is very misinformed or as in many cases just plain stupid and gullible. With regards to fire depts.. in order to do our jobs effectively and safely there has to be enough people to do it effectively and safely!! It’s a proven fact that inadequate personnel at fire scenes increases the risks of injury or worse as well as increase the risk of property loss. Thus the need for OT to fill positions. It is also a fact that the cost to replace the OT positions with full time personnel ( to eliminate the OT )to ensure effective and safe performance would DOUBLE the cost to the tax payer, of which we are. It seems that the political elite and their cronies and Wall Street succeeded in screwing the country and now need an escape goat as well as a place to fund their next heist!!!
BUT The fact still remains my fellow tax payers, If we do not let them know we are pissed and I mean let them know LOUD and CLEAR, then we have no one to blame but ourselves. So Write to them, Email them, Call them!!!!! ACT< ACT<ACT

This spring when a large percent of Special Risk employee with 23 yrs or more go into the Investment Plan will FRS offer annuities at the end of your retirement so, they can still hold onto your funds to help out the current Pension Plan ?

If you retire after July 1, 2011 will you get any of your unused leave time counted in your final compensation?

If you are special risk, please consider waiting until you have 25 years in BEFORE moving to the investment plan. Each of the last 5 years contributes about 20-25% MORE to your plan. Your lump sum is about half at 20 years as it will be at 25!

It is too early to know. One plan takes it away, the other leaves it alone.

Can you tell me which plan takes it away and which one leaves it alone?

Rings proposal takes away vacation pay, unused leave, or any other form of compensation beyond the base hourly or annual salary” (lines 386-393). The governor can not introduce his recommendations as a bill, so only Ring’s is truly on the table.

Are there going to be any changes to the four options you can select to collect your pension. We plan on taking option number 3 which allows your survivor to collect the same pension (at a reduced rate) as the retiree. Will this still be an option should we decide to retire after July 1, 2011?

Most likely, we have not seen any proposals to change the pension collections options.

I would like to express my thanks for this place to go to ask questions and make comments on these important topics. You have been an enormous help and I really appreciate it!

We’re glad we can help! Thanks for reading and contributing!

John Curtis, you can’t count on making a return in the investment plan. Losses are more common. Wall Street being unregulated, another crash will occur and wipe out everyone’s investments again. It is a fool’s game to play the stock market with your retirement. The managers of the pension plan do quite well with their managing the investments in the plan. We should not try to fool ourselves and others by thinking we can manage investments as well as they do. If we could, then we would be making big bucks on Wall Street, now wouldn’t we, John Curtis.

Ron, while I can respect your opinion, there are plenty of people who do really well in “investment plans”. As long was one diversifies and has a little discipline, what the market takes away, the market generally returns. Look at FRS, it is back to where it was before the financial panic, in less than 18 months. One could argue that investing in a good, diversified portfolio of stocks, is really a good way to build wealth over time.

After researching this on Google, these are the facts. Of the 12 southeast states, Florida will be the the only one that will not have a state defined pension plan after July 1, 2011. The annual service credit for Florida teachers is 1.6 percent, pathetic. The lowest in the southeast. Yes, the other states require state employees to contribute towards their pensions, but their average final compensation is much higher for their teachers. For example, annual service credit for Georgia teaches is 2.0 percent, Alabama 2.0125 percent, and for South Carolina 1.82 percent. Yes, their teachers contribute 5 percent to their pensions, but after 30 years of service their teacher retirements puts ours to shame. Why would a new teacher or a teacher with a few years of experience want to stay or start a teaching career here if SB 1130 becomes law? I wouldn’t. Where’s the incentive to stay? If I’m going to have to contribute two, three, or five percent of my income to my retirement plan, I’m going to go where it will benefit me the most. Florida, get ready for the teacher exodus.

I thought the spouse got the same rate but the rate was reduced at the time you made your option to go with 3. Did I miss something will my wife recieve the same payout we will be getting as long as I am alive or will they reduce that rate after I die?

It depends which option you choose. The default option is 1, highest benefit, no survivor benefit. Here are the four options:

Members must select one of the following four benefit options at retirement:
Option 1 — Member receives a benefit for life with no continuing survivor benefit at death.
Option 2 — Member receives a reduced benefit for life. If member dies anytime within 10 years after
retiring, the beneficiary will receive the benefit for the remainder of the 10-year period from
the member’s retirement date or DROP begin date. No survivor benefits are paid if the
member dies 10 or more years after his/her effective retirement date.
Option 3 — Member receives a reduced benefit for life. Upon the member’s death, the joint annuitant, if
living, will receive the same benefit for the remainder of his or her life. A joint annuitant
who is under age 25 and is the member’s child or other dependent for whom the member
has guardianship will receive the member’s option one benefit, but only until age 25, or, if
disabled, until he or she is no longer disabled.
Option 4 — Member receives a reduced benefit for life. Upon the death of either the member or the
joint annuitant, the survivor will receive a lifetime benefit equal to two-thirds of the benefit
the member was receiving when both were living. A joint annuitant who is under age 25
and is the member’s child or other dependent for whom the member has guardianship will
receive the member’s option one benefit, but only until age 25, or, if disabled, until he or
she is no longer disabled.

As it stands, Rings bill ONLY changes the dates and years for those hired after June 30, there has been no amendment to the bill – he wrote it that way from the start. Everyone in FRS as of June 30 gets grandfathered in with no changes except employee contributions.

Due to the legal wording, could you answer or explain the following from SB1128:
– Does Section 1 of the bill regarding ending DB plans include municipal Fire & Police local law plans plans that are part of 175/185?
- If so, does the municipality have any choice as to keeping their pension plan or not?
- Could you also explain or summarize Section 5, subsection 4, part (a)?
Thanks.

Section 1 has to do with eliminating the Pension (Defined Benefit) Plan for all new employees hired after July 1. All new employees would be in a Defined Contribution plan. I don’t believe the municipality would have a choice if the proposal were to pass both houses. Section 5.4.(a) has to do with the elimination of overtime and unused leave time in calculating the average final compensation, and any salary reductions like deferred comp. or allowable annuities are still considered compensation going forward.

There has been a “Strike-all” amendment filed on 1128, so the bill will be thrown to the committee, possibly for radical changes, so don’t get to involved in it until we see the final outcome.

Thank you!

Any further explanation on the deferred comp. part? Are they proposing that whatever I’ve saved on my own in deferred comp would be part of my overall compensation, or are they refering to another type of deffered comp?

What “s a “strike all” amendment?

I believe it means there are NO CHANGES to the status of deferred comp.

A “strike-all” means the bill is referred back to the committee to be re-worked. They could change nothing, a part, or all of it. In the meantime, it is like the bill never existed. We will have to wait and see how the committee re-works it.

Can you tell us what lines on the bill we can find this?

I’m sorry, lines for which? 1128 or 1130. The lines for 1130 are in the test of the post on this page?

I am specifically asking about SB 1130. In the text starting THE NORMAL RETIREMENT AGE…I do not see any line numbers. I am specifically asking for the line numbers for ‘regular member’.

I apologize for not including the line numbers. I will go back and amend that. The specific lines are 2062-2074. Underlined items are additions, strike-throughs are deletions. You will not line 2067. “Age 62, or for persons enrolled on or after July 1, 2011, age 65″. The above language describes normal retirment date, and the lines following 2067 to on to discuss Special risk members.

The vesting for the Investment Plan is only 1 year, and that is for employer contributions. If there are employee contributions, they are vested immediately. You can roll your benefit to an IRA 90 days after leaving FRS employment. If you choose to leave the money with the FRS Investment Plan after you stop service, you can not get a retirement benefit until you meet the minimum retirement age or years of service.

The other most notable change is the proposal does away with the use of any and all overtime pay, unused leave or “any other form of compensation beyond the base hourly or annual salary” (lines 386-393).

If teachers salaries pre the “Race to the Top” grant are performance based, will the performance pay fall under the “base” salary. Not likely based upon the language I’m reading.

BTW, I have yet to hear a single news source characterize the “contributions” as a cut in pay. We have got to get the word out to the public that we haven’t gotten a raise (or even a step increase in my district) in FOUR years. Now, you want to cut my pay 5% to boot.

This is simply a broken promise and my advise to anyone with less than 8 years in the system is to go find a private sector job. Ask your school secretary for a free lunch form, if you have 3 kids and typically less than 15 years of service, your kids most likely qualify for a free/reduced lunch. How pathetic.

I suspect you will find that performance based bonuses are a part of the base pay. One could argue the contribution, while cutting the amount of your take home check, goes into an account that is yours, and therefor not a cut, but a reallocation of pay.

That said, it seems hard for anyone to argue that “overtime” is compensation that is earned, so is hard to understand why it would not be used in calculating AFC

First off, the amount that your employer pays into FRS is based on your income, but it is NOT paid into an account on your behalf. It is paid in to a general FRS Pension fund. At retirement you receive a benefit that is based on your last 5, but has nothing to do with the contributions paid in. That is the difference between a “defined benefit plan” and a “defined contribution plan”. In the Investment Plan, which is a defined contribution plan, your retirement benefit is wholly determined by what goes INTO the plan in the form of contributions, and what those monies earn on YOUR investments. That is a long way of saying all of those contributions on your overtime have little or nothing to do with anything, as they go into the general fund and contributions aren’t a factor in your benefit in a Pension. That would change in an Investment Plan, and then you question has a whole different perspective. Then ALL monies in go to YOUR plan, and you get credit for 100% of the contributions that go into YOUR plan.

That is how I read it, but even then it ends after July 1.

Is there anymore comment about removing the 3% COLA retirees receive?

No.

Thanks for providing this service! I’m planning to retire next June under the pension plan… that said, will I be required to enter the investment option July 1 and what will happen to my current pension plan? Will it be frozen at current calculations? And with the language in 1130 it looks like I won’t be eligible to get back my money I put into the investment plan for 12 months. What say you? Thanks!

As things are now, you can stay in the Pension plan, so your contributions would go to fund your pension – NOT the Investment plan unless you choose to move to it.

At this point, the 3% Cola is still in. Scott can not propose a bill, but approve or veto. The session starts next week, so we shall see.