You think the 2011 bill was passed because the unions wanted it
You think Whitmann's pension scheme legislation was passed because the unions wanted it?
OT: Working virtual, where to live on the East Coast
- Thread starter DJ Spanky
- Start date
You think Whitmann's pension scheme legislation was passed because the unions wanted it?
It is not done while you work. It is a selection made at retirment
You may be talking about an annuity product they can buy if they want it. That is funded entirely by the employee
Yep, meant deduction not paycheck
Wasn’t minimal but didn’t break the bank either
IN PERS and TPAS you have about 6 options. You can leave a spouse 100%,75% 50% or 25% There is a different reduction to all those selections
It is not the pension you cannot contribute more to cover a spouse. It is a reduction in the monthly pension amount
As I said my pension was reduced by $1400
I’m aware of that
I thought it was for healthcare
We had a discussion about it over a few (many) beers at an FSU tailgate and my memory is clearly spotty
I’ll ask him again on 12/29, whilst consuming multiple beverages in the town where the mouse resides
You can cover your spouse while you are employed, and the premium is based on that. You pay a percentage of the premium. So of course, the premium is higher for family coverage than single coverage
Here is a fact sheet on the pensions
You would want to read the section on the 5 tiers to see how they are calculated
You would want to read the section on the 5 tiers to see how they are calculated
The more choices the merrier, but I'd wager a 15 year almost 100% term certain would beat a 25% spousal remainder payment under almost any circumstance.
The pension actuaries claim the pension reduction is based on and equal to what insurance would cost to cover a spouse for their lifetime based on both parties ages
Some people do not take the reduction and buy insurance. I wanted a more secure process for my wife
At least that union that footed their own bills much better than lazy Trenton unions. NJEA and state gov unions are the worst.
What does that mean? in my experience, police and firefighter unions have been very successful in pressing for benefits for themselves. (I'm not saying that's a bad thing.) In what sense did they "foot their own bills?"
Funny how you didn't mention when the Gov of NJ stood up at a union press conference and pledged to fight for a good contract for them.
Fight who? The Gov is supposed to lead the other side of the negotiation table. LOL!!! Welcome to Trenton.
I don't think that's true for both tiers of the federal pension. If you stared before 1986, you were under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). I'm not sure about the calculation, but I know people that retired with that and they generally got 85% of their salary as long as they worked until age 62. A very good pension, but they didn't pay into social security and they can't collect it.
However, the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) is much worse. You get 1% x number of years of service x average of your high three. So if you worked 20 years and made $100,000, you would get a measly $20,000 a year. You do pay in to SS and can collect it. You can't collect anything before age 57 and deduct 5% per year prior to age 62. You also have to pay for health insurance.
My brother and neighbor both receive the federal pension
A State worker contributes 7.5% of their pay to receive either 1/55 or 1/60
A federal employee contributes 1% of their pay and receives 1.1 percent times number of years of their salary plus they contribute 4% of their salary and get a 6% match in an investment account
Add to that the federal salary for the same job such as engineers accounting etc makes about 15% more than NJ government employees and the federal pension is better
Last edited:
At one time, the federal pension was based on the employee's "high-5" -- the five years in which he/she received the most compensation. This was an issue for my father as he considered retirement, because two of his five years were during World War II. I recall that was changed in about 1970 to the "high-3." I distinctly remember that the federal civil service began to be subject to social security on January 1, 1984.
Last edited:
Is that like how my tax dollars go to fund Florida, especially when there's a hurricane, and the minute we have a hurricane they can't afford any relief?
Just be sure to not come crying when no one in FL can afford property insurance
Not my concern man
I’m going to the panhandle
Tallahassee vicinity
Faith, family & football
Still a few years out, but the plans are in motion. You coming to visit ?
Not arguing on this glorious day my friend
Merry Christmas to you and your family, and best wishes for a happy & healthy new year !!
It’s a mix of Hunterdon / Warren / Sussex
Let ‘em keep thinkin it Proud
Keeps the population down:)
I notice that people that use “freedom of speech” only like it if it is of their opinion.
As I stated to a previous poster, I have no interest in engaging in arguementative conversations on this special day
To that end, I wish you and your family a very merry Christmas, and a happy & healthy 2023 !!
I was already there. And yes, south Florida for me only so I won’t be back lol.
North Florida is full of southerners and South Florida is full of northerners. Pick your poison.
I wasn't sure how the new state pension works. I'm guessing this is for employees that started after 2011?
In any case, if you have two employees, one federal and one state and they each have a high of $100,000, 20 years of service, retire at 62, and live until they're 82, then the federal employee would net $420,000 and the state employee would net $577,000.
It is true that federal employees get a 6% match into their Thrift Savings Plan which works like a 401K, so that makes a big difference. State employees don't get any kind of match?
No match on the savings plan that is equivalent to a 401k for those in the State pension.
It is also only recently that federal employees even made any contributions to their pension. Until recently it was funded entirely by the employer
My brother and my neighbor both have over a million dollars in the thrift savings portion of the federal retirement plan in addition to receiving 44% of their salary
Hardly anyone retires with 20 years. They go to 25 years at a minimum
The federal pension comes with a yearly COLA. The State pension does not have a COLA currently and most likely will not see one for years.
Higher up in this thread, there was a discussion of whether people are fleeing New Jersey. Judging from this piece, based on Census data, New Jersey isn't losing population any faster than any other state in the Northeast. The state that is being clobbered is . . . Pennsylvania. https://www.inquirer.com/news/penns...nnsylvania-new-jersey-2021-2022-20221228.html
Today's WSJ has an op ed that cites Census Bureau stats from July '21 to July '22. Those show Pa. -39,957 and New Jersey -64,231. Biggest gainer per capita was South Carolina.
If those are the only data the OpEd reported then I’m disappointed in their work. NJ’s births exceeded deaths and there was also inbound migration to partially offset outbound migration.
The data in the editorial (it's not an op-ed) surprised me because the numbers are so different from the numbers reported in the Inquirer for total population change. Surely there haven't many enough childbirths in New Jersey to offset such a large net migration! So I looked at the census bureau web site. I don't see anything that's directly on point, so I have e-mailed the census bureau. I will report what they say.
They have a narrative to report, and the fact that for the last century plus, immigrants and young folks want to live in northeast and old people want to live in the sun belt won't get in the way of that.
And boomers really love the sun belt, lol. Well at least some of them, bc others are buying 750k+ plus homes in 55+ communities in NJ. Those prices sure indicate a lot of non-WSJ narrative facts.
Your first sentence got me confused. I think you mean “in the article” as I believe it’s more news than opinion.
