Close
Look at City Budget Proves ICE
Right on 55/25-55/27 Giveaway
by
James Eterno UFT Chapter Leader,
Jamaica High School
When
the punitive 2005 Contract was released, one of the main benefits
was supposed to be a 55-25 retirement incentive. The actual language
in Article 4C says that the pension legislation should be enacted "without
any cost to the city." To us that means that it should be
revenue neutral meaning the pension deal should not cost the
city anything or save the city any money. Now as the final bill
is working its way through the State Legislature and the City
released its budget proposal, it is clearer than ever how the
city wins while only a small fraction of UFT members gain anything
and many lose including all new hires.
In
the latest city budget on page E-117, there is a category called "55/25
Program Savings: Savings generated by increased retirements as
a result of the new age and experience retirement policy." For
fiscal year 2009 the city will be saving $43,100,000 because
of 55/25-55/27; for fiscal year 2010 that will jump to $68,600,000;
for fiscal year 2011 it spikes to $87,500,000 and for 2012 the
city will be saving $101,000,000.
The
city saves over 100 million dollars because current teachers
who want to take advantage of 55/25 will have to pay into the
system to fund their early retirement while new hires will be
required to pay pension contributions for their entire careers,
not just the first ten years. The added contributions amount
to a 1.85% pay cut for employees not yet hired and they won't
be able retire after 25 years of service at age 55 as the contract
says they should be able to; they will need 27 years. What did
we get in return for allowing the city to save this huge sum
of money with their de-facto new pension tier? School-wide merit
pay.
In
exchange for hundreds of millions in savings, couldn't the UFT
have at least won back those two staff punishment days in August
as days off so we can get a full summer vacation before we have
to take it on the chin every year?
Challenge
to our Unity readers: Please find something in this piece that
shows our numbers are wrong instead of launching the usual personal
attacks or saying we just complain. If you can show we are in
error, we will gladly retract the article.
Read
the comments and add your own at the ICEUFTblog.