See this link
"Many Chicago residents may not realize is that their school
district also has been paying $130 million a year to cover
most of the pension contributions required of the teachers,
a practice known as a “pickup,” which became a flash point
last year in the collective bargaining battle in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin’s public workers have agreed to make their own
contributions, as a concession."
What part of "pension contributions required [by law] of the
teachers" do you not understand?
If the law had been teachers get a fully-paid for pension
without having to contribute, there would be no argument.
That is not the law. There are two issues ultimately here:
1. Teachers are supposed to be contributing to their
retirement, and the general public is under the impression
that this is the case.
2. The state does not have enough money to cover obligations
that it never agreed to. It is wrong to force our children
to pay for some corrupt, back-room deal that was made
without public knowledge.
You need to contribute to your own retirement, and stop
asking taxpayers, who have struggled for years in a bad
economy, to pay for it. The public is tired of the union bs,
the lack of accountability, the poor performance in the
schools, and now this nonsense.
On 11/29/12, Elaine wrote:
>> You say you have paid into your pension in three out
>> of four districts? What about the fourth? Is Mandy
>> down at Walmart picking up your pension now? Must be
>> nice getting free retirement.
> One can either be paid at the front end or back end.
> Teachers are paid at.... This isn't free retirement but
> deferred compensation.
> My husband (with less degrees than I) makes all his
> money at the front end. Nice big paycheck that he saves
> money from for his retirement. He negotiates pay raises
> every year in his yearly review...i.e paid at the front
> We on the other hand got often got our pay raises often
> as deferred compensation rolled into our
> retirement...i.e paid at the backend. This freed up
> LOTS of money for the state to spend on other things.
> What is so difficult to understand about this
> concept...we are NOT getting FREE money. We signed our
> contracts with the state for these benefits and agreed
> to wait out some of them until we retired. That is not
> free money.
> If someone owed you money and started paying it later
> but wanted to renign because now they feel like your
> owed money is just "free" you too would
> mighty upset. And if you were older, unable to start
> over again saving and counting on that money because
> they swore up and down you'd get it you be beyond
Posts on this thread, including this one