Posted on 04/26/2006 8:49:09 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
... the move does not address the state fire department's troubling high vacancy rate among top manager positions – 34 out of 151 division chief positions – that some fear could weaken response and jeopardize safety as the fire season begins.
---
plugging holes yet signficant gaps remain..
Of course, Gavin Newsom, Mayor SF had this thrifty idea of turning Firemen into COPS during an emergency, in order to fill his own gap in San Francisco... Turning firemen into cops. Like, uh, during the usual riots in SF?
Will hoses be outlawed next?
"....stem from the same lucrative labor contract that gives rank-and-file firefighters more pay than supervisors, making the top jobs hard to fill."
This is not hard to find in the private sector where hourly staffing cut backs have been off set by very high level of overtime.
If you know any I&M guys in AT&T they can support this notion.
"The Schwarzenegger administration yesterday closed a pension loophole that would have allowed some state firefighters to retire with pensions higher than their final salaries."
Conspicuously absent is the name of the individual wrote the loophole into law to begin with...
Gastric Nuance, uh, I mean Gavin Newsome needs a good hosing down ,, at least twice a day.
What a pitiful example of 'gubamint' runamuck SF has become.
Firefighters are a proper government expense, but here is another example of how government spending goes haywire even when the category of expense is valid.
$100,000/yr salaries for jobs that require nothing more than a high-school diploma. Pensions that are 90%+ of final salary. Retirement at 50.
This is ridiculous. My SS + Pension won't even total 40% of salary. If I want to eat in rtirement, I'm expected to actually SAVE SOME OF MY OWN SALARY. Apparently California public-safety employees can spend every dime they make and count on the State paying them their full salary for the rest of their lives.
I know Gray Davis was bought off, and Brown in the 70's did the same, but this is ridiculous. Obviously, California politicians cannot be trusted to safeguard the public purse. In California, we have the initiative process. I wish it could be used to nullify these union contracts and force all future compensation packages to be approved in a general election.
"Gastric Nuance?"
lol. Hadn't heard that one. It's fitting.
He is kind of a cross between al gore and john kerry.. so it was either
Gastric Nuisance or Gastric Nuance..
he easily outsmarms both of them, imo. ;-)
Not totally sure, but that statement is probably unwise........
The problem is they don't hire enough full time people to save insurance costs and end up paying tons of overtime during fireseasons.
When the retirements are figure based on the actual amount payed to the "only high school trained" rescue personell it comes out higher than the listed salary because of the overtimne.
The retirement is adjusted accordingly because its what they were getting paid. Not the fault of the firemen.
Firefighter salaries top out at $50,000 a year in Houston. Entry level is under $35,000.
I guess California firefighters are a lot better.
Las Vegas firefighters must be just as good.
Dufus, are you saying the pension is 90%+ of some lower base salary and not their actual earnings ? Where did it say that in the article ? Or are you referencing some other source ?
Other sources I checked reiterated that Firefighters, Police and other public-safety pensioners retire with 3% of salary for every year of service and can retire at 50. If they started at 20, then that is 90% of salary.
The comparison to the 40% that my SS + Pension will pay is still valid. My figures are based on my base salary as well -- bonuses, overtime, etc. don't count toward my pension or SS either.
The bottom line is that these people are overpaid, don't need to save for retirement themselves, and still can retire at 50 with the equivalent of 90% of their working salary. That's a gravy train.
ROFL!
Probably. But "gap" (gender, wage, poverty economics) is such the "rage" to use in newspaper articles these days...
It's true! lol.
When Gavin had to "rescind" the marriage licenses of those he "wedded" at City Hall, two women I knew through someone else, were horrified. Simplify horrified that evil rightwingers would do such a thing to ole' Gavin -- "just to make him look bad".
When they burped out with that one, the room cleared, instantly.
BTW social security was not meant to be your total retirement income. If you don't have more than that its gonna be tough.
I didn't say the firefighters were scoundrels. I said the politicians that were supposed to be watching the public purse are scoundrels.
You are correct that SS is not supposed to be a sole retirement income. Neither is a pension. If you want a decent retirement, you are expected to save beyond those two programs. Save 20% of your gross if you want to retire with 100% of your old salary. And work for 40 years rather than 30.
My point is that the firefighters' pension is so generous -- at taxpayer expense -- that they DO NOT have to do any saving of their own. They can live off their ENTIRE paycheck and don't need to save a dime, and still have the same retirement standard of living as somebody else earning 20% more.
Its not a situation that the taxpayer pays all the retirement. In fact the interest earned on the employees contribution most likely covers alot of it if the fund is managed right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.