Comment: We’ll be writing soon about this pending pension legislation. One thing for sure is that it shouldn’t be called “comprehensive.” Maybe “comprehensive given court rulings” would be fair.

Read Article

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Andrew Szakmary
Based on previous court rulings it will almost certainly be found unconstitutional, because it changes terms for existing employees who became members of a pension system on their first day of employment (thereby directly violating the plain language of the pension protection clause). The state could probably achieve something similar by not giving raises to employees, but that would have to include all employees, not just those who are tier 1 pension system members, and it would thus lead to huge staffing problems. I suspect the state is already having problems recruiting new employees under tier 2 and not giving raises – ever – could only make… Read more »
nixit

A salary freeze would not have to include all employees. A Tier 2 employee should have a higher salary than his Tier 1 equivalent as their retirement benefit is smaller. Just create 2 salary schedules: freeze Tier 1 and let Tier 2 have its normal increases, thereby having no impact on attracting new employees. No age discrimination as Tier 1 contains folks in their 20’s. In fact, a Tier 2 employee should file a discrimination suit for doing the same job as a Tier 1 employee for lower pay.

wpDiscuz