What about the private sector worker who gets no pension at all. Also, he loses his health insurance if he retires before age 65 (Medicare)? Many, many union workers retire early (at age 50, 53 etc.). They continue to get health insurance from the employer or union until they reach Medicare age.
The private sector worker had to save and invest his own money to prepare for the lifestyle he desired after retirement. He determined what it would take and made it happen. If he is burdened with extra taxes (so the government can pay the union pensions) it's the same thing as "cutting his pension". Why is it fair for one and not the other?
I interviewed a Chicago Public School teacher who was attending a hearing in Springfield, IL about their pensions. That teacher’s solution was very simple and immediate: Raise taxes. Raise taxes high and raise them now. Raise them without the voters’ consent by court decree if need be. (Not understanding that that isn’t legal...I hope she wasn’t a civics teacher). When asked about what she would do about people who are on fixed incomes and can’t afford the kind of tax increases needed to erase that deficit, her answer was equally as specific and immediate: “They they just hafta move. Give me my money”.
Also included in her commentary was, “I worked like a SLAVE for 40 years...”
Oh, that’s right...SLAVES had 14 paid holidays a year, every weekend off, heavily subsidized health care coverage, paid vacations, pensions.....