Harpers War on Pensions

[GrooveTunes]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/05/10/stephen_harpers_war_on_pensions_walkom.html

[flamingfingers]

Harper won't stop until everyone except his corporatist friends and the politicians are beaten down to 3rd world status with the old folks dropping dead over their sewing machines in sweat shops.

[steven lloyd]

*removed*

[Blast]

From the Toronto Star a Liberal mouthpiece.

Misleading headline and story. The government is attempting to get Public Service defined benefit pensions (which are gold plated) under control as well as PS sick leave benefits (to a long term disability benefit)

Who announced he would use public pensions to fund the building of infrastructure?

Trudeau.

Would you trust him, a rich drama teacher?

[GrooveTunes]

From the Toronto Star a Liberal mouthpiece.

Misleading headline and story. The government is attempting to get Public Service defined benefit pensions (which are gold plated) under control as well as PS sick leave benefits (to a long term disability benefit)

Who announced he would use public pensions to fund the building of infrastructure?

Trudeau.

Would you trust him, a rich drama teacher?

Please explain gold plated pensions.

[Blast]

Gold plated as it is a government pension, not a private company that could go out of business leaving the employee contributor or retiree without a pension. The government pension is guaranteed and funded from revenue from taxes and the PS employees contributions. It is also indexed every year as is OAS and CPP, same formula.

Government employees at every level (civic, provincial, federal), MP's, the military are the recipients of DB pensions. Most company's are DC pension, if there is a pension.

http://www.myretirementpaycheck.org/ret ... plans.aspx

About Defined Benefit (DB) Plans

A defined benefit plan identifies the specific benefit that will be payable to you at retirement. Your basic retirement benefit is usually based on a formula that takes into account factors like the number of years a participant works for the employer (years of service) and the participant's salary. Your retirement benefit is generally provided in the form of regular payments over your lifetime beginning at what the plan calls "normal retirement age," which is typically age 65. This stream of periodic payments is generally known as a pension or sometimes called an annuity.

About Defined Contribution (DC) Plans

A defined contribution plan specifies how much money will go into a retirement plan today. The amount typically is either a percentage of an employee's salary or a specific dollar amount. Then, those funds often are invested in mutual funds available inside the retirement plan. The amount you have at retirement depends on how much your employer contributes to the plan, how much you as the employee save in the plan, how long you leave those funds invested, and how well your investments perform inside the plan.

More and more employers are replacing defined benefit plans with defined contribution plans, primarily due to the expense and long-term obligations associated with running a defined benefit plan. If you have a defined benefit plan through your employer, be sure to regularly let your employer know that you really appreciate your retirement plan; it’s a benefit well worth keeping.

[GrooveTunes]

Well you missed the plan that the Harper CONS are working on now. This is what government workers are going to be faced with in the next round of negotiations. The shared risk includes present and retired members.

Introduction

This submission is by a group of Canada Post Corporation retirees who became aware of a “New Pension
Scheme to be Proposed” through an article in the
Ottawa Citizen
,
April 24, 2014, by
Julian
Beltrame
,
which states:
“The announcement for a so
-
called target
-
benefit plan, or shared
-
risk plan would apply to
Crown corporations and federally
-
regulated workers is being sold as a proposal for ‘affordable and
sustainable’ life time pensions.”
A copy of the Department of Fina
nce news release entitled “Harper
Government Begins Consultation on a potential Target Benefit Pension Plan framework,” dated April 24,
2014, as well as “Frequently Asked Questions on proposed Target Benefit Plan (TBP) framework” and
“Pension Innovation fo
r Canadians: The Target Benefit Plan Consultation Pap
er Department of Finance
Canada,
April 2014
”
marked ‘Confidential
–
Not for Distribution’ was later obtained from the
Department of Finance
web
site.[/url]

[Blast]

The government is moving in the same direction as private industry. Less DB, and more DC. It saves money for the taxpayer.

If you are retired it does not affect your pension. Only new hires.

The union puts all sorts of scarey stuff.

Who in Canada goes on strike? Almost every strike is Public Service or related corporations at all levels of government. Every try to fire a Public Servant?

[Dawggss]

As much as I appreciate the differences between DB and DC pensions - and the trust workers place in these devices, from Day 1 of their contributions through pay cheque deductions - I find it interesting that the conversation inevitably turns to the claim that public employees get categorized as 'unfireable' (is that a word?).
(There is no doubt DB or DC is an issue, and there are pros/cons to both. I do hope changes and modifications to styles can occur for the benefit of all parties!)
(BTW - I often encounter people who believe (incorrectly) the phrase 'gold plated pension' references a gift to retirees... Wish this misconception were ended as DB pension recipients contributed to these pensions every paydate, and have their ability to contribute to Personal RSP plans severely limited regarding contribution levels their entire working careers. It's NOT a gift - it is the result joint contributions - and an alternative to total personal control for pension funds.)

It is interesting a key argument raised by anti-Union or anti-public service people is this claim of "have you ever tried to fire ...".
I guess what I am suggesting is that a firing occurs when an employee acts inappropriately, illegally or commits a grievous offense of some type. Grounds for dismissal (certainly legal minds can enlighten us) are stringent, and not frivolous - for any number of reasons. These grounds are there for ALL categories of employees - however it is true the added support of a union backing does help employees threatened with termination, in some - not all situations.
Is this a 'bad thing' or a 'good thing'?

Is this perfect? No. Is it better to have termination easier? From whose point of view?
What does this have to do with pensions?

So an employer wants to fire an employee - for whatever reason - should there be a difference between a union or a non-Union employee? Logic says No - the word on the street however says there is a difference! There is a view that union members are privileged. Ever wonder why?

Why are arguments based on the ability (not justification) to fire an employee?
Is this truly a valid reason to question DB public pensions? To extoll DC pensions?
Perhaps more concern on the 'hiring' of said employee would alienate these concerns - and lessen the envy over 'firings'.

[flamingfingers]

Dawggss wrote:

BTW - I often encounter people who believe (incorrectly) the phrase 'gold plated pension' references a gift to retirees... Wish this misconception were ended as DB pension recipients contributed to these pensions every paydate, and have their ability to contribute to Personal RSP plans severely limited regarding contribution levels their entire working careers. It's NOT a gift - it is the result joint contributions - and an alternative to total personal control for pension funds.)

Yet anti-unionists are adamant that not only pensions but sick leave are benevolent gifts to their employees. They do not understand that employees have chosen to accept a lower pay percent in order to contribute to these benefits.

So an employer wants to fire an employee - for whatever reason - should there be a difference between a union or a non-Union employee? Logic says No - the word on the street however says there is a difference! There is a view that union members are privileged. Ever wonder why?

A union cannot prevent the firing of an employee FOR CAUSE. What a union does is to make sure that proper steps are followed and the firing of an employee is not at the whim of a power-tripping psychopathic employer (and there are lots of them out there!) Another reason that people feel that 'you cannot fire a union employee' is due to management being lazy or incompetent to the point of not following the steps for progressive discipline that would justify termination of that employee.

[GrooveTunes]

The government is moving in the same direction as private industry. Less DB, and more DC. It saves money for the taxpayer.

If you are retired it does not affect your pension. Only new hires.

The union puts all sorts of scarey stuff.

Who in Canada goes on strike? Almost every strike is Public Service or related corporations at all levels of government. Every try to fire a Public Servant?

So you omit the new Target Benefit plan being discussed by the CONS as we speak. So the first line of your post is wrong.

A letter to all Canada Post employees in July 2014 from Canada Post states....Please note that being retired is NOT a guarantee that your pension benefits WILL NEVER CHANGE. So the second line of your post is wrong..again.

The letter is from Canada Post, not the union. So your third line is also wrong...again.

[maryjane48]

If you are retired it does not affect your pension. Only new hires

i wish it affected former union members who trash the same union they belonged to :)

[logicalview]

i wish it affected former union members who trash the same union they belonged to :)

Who are you referring to? Would you rather everyone be mindless automatons without an opinion? Everyone always agreeing with everything their union tells them to? That sounds like a dictatorship to me.

[Blast]

Groove Tunes:

The letter is from Canada Post, not the union.

Please note that being retired is NOT a guarantee that your pension benefits WILL NEVER CHANGE.

Redact the addressee, scan the letter, and post here.

"Please note that being retired is NOT a guarantee that your pension benefits WILL NEVER CHANGE." This is a quote from the letter, or are you interpreting?

[GreyGoose]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/05/10/stephen_harpers_war_on_pensions_walkom.html

Matuzzi (sp) has a 275k yearly pension. Yes you read that right.

More than ANY MEMBER of any local, provincial or federal goobermint in Canada.

FRIKKEN unreal!