Last-minute windfall pops up in retiree health care account

"Pops up" are you kidding me? After maligning the state employees for months and saying they need to give and give and give they are finding monies they did not know about????? Funny how an article about how state employees are not overpaid, monies found in funds no one in the Malloy administration knew about come into light once concessions have been agreed to (not voted on). This should be a warning to state emmployess to vote no on the concessions. You give them an inch they will take a mile. These givebacks will continue each and every time elected officials need to fund another one of their pet projects.

Isn't it amazing that during the last governor's administration, all during the campaign and budget battle the state was in serious debt. Once the taxes were passed and the Democrats got what they wanted, we now have a huge surplus.

Don't worry, all the taxes will go into effect on July 1st and I guarantee you what little cuts state workers got will all be restored. Fear not state workers you won't have to head to the gym in order to solve the budget crisis. You'll soon get your free prescriptions, and free emergency room visits back. Private sector taxpayers will still pay dearly as we always do.

I wonder who's behind the curtain at the controls of all the number crunching. My bet is that it's the one and only Bill Cibes, still the most dangerous man in Connecticut.

Maybe I'm wrong....but doesn't that bill apply to the children of illegal immigrants...who really had "no choice" but to go along with their parents choices?
I'd like see an illegal immigrant's child become a taxpaying productive citizen!
HOWEVER I believe that an illegal immigrant should become a (tax paying)citizen BEFORE their child could attend a State University at the in-state tuition price!Of course then
the reason for this bill in the first place would be eliminated.
This would also prevent the problem of illegal immigrants currently living in other states coming to Connecticut
for their kids education!

Malloy and his adminisration need to stop trying to solve long term,complex issues impulsively.
These isuues need to be addressed in an organized, well thought out fashion, allowing for the interim steps necssary for success.

To Keith Phaneuf I am with Jim what does this chart show.? Is this monthly expenditures,cummulative expenditures or what is it. Also the colors are reversed.Please explain, as with this chart the article makes no sense.I would expect you to do better than this.

That is good news. It means that the state had been ripped off by insurers for years. State employees and retirees are apparently not the problem. Good thing cuz I think they are voting down the bogus package "offered" to them.

Well……..I have a high school diploma. I am a State employee. I make a very generous wage. I have very generous health insurance benefits. I have a very generous pension. I get paid sick leave. Three Personal Leave days where I get a days pay for not going to work that day (just because I don’t feel like working). I receive longevity checks (just because I didn’t quit or die this year). Multiple sick days can be built up. Multiple vacation days can be saved and added to my retirement. I get numerous holidays every year. I get paid funeral days. Paid “sickness in the family” days. I get a paid “excessive break” while on duty……and much, much more.

I come into contact (through my job) with people doing the exact same work as me but they work in the private sector. These people have very poor wages compared to me. These people have expensive and poor health care benefits. These people have no pension plan (their on their own). These people want to be State employees. They frequently ask me if I can somehow “get them in”.

For me to sit here with a high school diploma and who has worked very hard for 31 years to complain about what money I make and the benefits I receive would be an outrage.

Helen, If I was Tier I, like you, my disposition would also be cheery, but missing Tier I by 2 pay periods, I'm jealous and continuly kicking myself in the butt. Tier II was the first time the unions had a hand in crafting a pension, so what they did was lousy. Lets say your 3 highest averages $60K, with 31 years in, that is 62% of your pay or a monthly check of $3100. When you figure in no more deductions for Social Security, Medicare and union dues, you're getting about 70% of your net pay. Once Social Security kicks in, you have virtually 100% pay replacement, without having to get out of bed. Now as for Tier II, highest 3 averaging $60K, 31 years, that's 41.25% of your pay for a monthly check of $2050. It's $3100 versus $2050. There's also a bias in Tier II, making it more generous to the higher earners. As our pay stalls for this entire decade, it will also mean accumulating a pension at a slower pace. I predict more concessions in '15, as sebac did not negoiate that the state would honor the full term of the possible new agreement. A new source of funding for the state are the concessions. As an early Tier II, 60 year old, I see this as a crummy deal for me.

Tom, wasn't Art Vandelay the name George use as am alias in Sienfeld? This guy who's posting obviously is not who he's says he is!
Helen glad your a happy camper, I would be to if I were you too. Your concessions aren't too bad. I have a college degree and can tell you I probably don't make as much as you. I also won't get a pension, When I was hired I had one option and that was a 401k plan , last year was told I was lied to(along with others). There was some talk about allowing those of us miss led (lied to) being able to pay into the pension fund to the tune of 75,000. I don't even have that much in my 401k to which I contribute into! I was told I would double my money by age 75. I probably wouldn't breakeven with the new pension contribution guidelines. It's a complicate situation, obviously I didn't buy into it. My point here is that it's not the tier1 employees that are gonna feel the most pain from these cuts, it's the rest of us.
FYI for those out there who believe we all get free drugs, not all us get free prescription or free health INS. I have copays and a list if medications which are covered for the lower copay, one for name brands(higher copay) and those that aren't covered.

@MH: I can understand how you would see this as a crummy deal, but you have to remember a few things.

First, Tier I employees have contributed between 2% and 5% of their salary toward retirement. Many of them are also ineligible for Social Security.

Tier II has never had to contribute anything to their pension unless they are Hazardous Duty, and I believe that most, if not all, Tier II are eligible for SS (correct me if I am wrong on this). This was the trade-off for Tier II: a lower pension calculation but no contributions required.

Those in the private sector: when you went looking for jobs did you apply for a state job? The reason why many of us did was not because of the salaries, it was for the benefits. The average salary is distorted because of those who are making outrages salaries such as those who work at UCONN. Yes I agree there are some who make too much money. I don't!!
There are jobs out in the public sector that have great benefits, look at those in the finacial fields. My sister works for Bank of America, she make a great salary, gets stock options, health benefits( pays the same into it as I do) vacation and PTOs. She got laid off and got a great severance package, then she was rehired. She is a loan processor so she not some Executive big wig.
I was encourage by my father to always look for a job with good benefits, especially health ins. That's what I did. Again people on the private sector did you look for jobs with great pay for the immediate gratification or did you look ahead and plan for your future. Do you feel teachers should get less pay because they get the summer off, or do want them to get a fair salary? Or may be they should only get their get health benefits for 9 months because that all they work in a year.
I'm SICK of the private sector complaining about state workers and their benefits. We all had a choice when choosing our career paths. There was a time noone wanted a cival service job, that's why these benefits were established, it was't for the great salaries the state )except to people like Jim Calhoun and the like). Now the private sector is crying unfair. Should I get laid off I will be looking for a job with good benefits just as I have in the past ( a contractual agreement). I suggest you do the same. But in the mean time I'm fighting for what I was promised in a contract.

ToMichaelThoughts: I gave a Tier I example and a Tier II example. What it shows is that the 2% pension premium is well worth it's value, affording Tier I members to retire early and retire securely. In the end the vast majority of Tier I employees picked up an additional 6% bonus of their 3 highest. Conditions are quickly worsening for Tier II members, where I predict delays in their retirements with still a smaller payout. The older Tier II employees do not have enough time left to make up for the continued and proposed financial reversals, especially with flat paychecks for the entire decade, and a quickening of the inflation rate. As for the younger employee, at least time is on their side, if they need to change course. Tier I retirees are having a party, and Tier II is to pick up the tab, and that well fits into our trickle-up economy, wealth going from the poorer to the wealthier. There is no rule forbidding Tier I employees to join in on the 3% health insurance deduction to help shore up their health insurance. The Tier I plan with the 5% pension deduction generally wasn't worth it. Yes, there used to be a time when retired state employees didn't draw on Social Security benefits, but the state joined the Social Security system in 1957, so that's not an issue anymore. In the example I gave Helen, (a.k.a. CSEA's Bob Rinker?) would you rather be in a plan with a 2% deduction and receive $3100 monthly, or a free plan receiving $2050? The 2% is a deduction well spent. Tier II will not be free too much longer as the Tier II employee will be forced to support the Tier I retiree. I predict that dealing with the break point will be of minor benefit to the lower paid employee, as the state will drag it's heels on it, like they drag their heels on OJE. I think that the 55+ year old state employee is being sold down the river, and there are no reasons for this group to vote to pass this. Can you think of 1 reason why I should vote for this?

It's not in the genes, it was choosing a job with benefits. They were out there and still are, maybe harder to find but they're out there. I made a choice and it was for benefits, mainly healthcare. Back 1991-96 I worked in a Dr's office, salaries were minimal but had decent benefits and had profit sharing. In 5 years I had earned 25,000 for retirement when I left ; the practice still has it, many do perhaps not as lucrative. Did I make the right decision leaving and going to college and working for the state I thought so. I wanted a job I love with great benefits and job security, salary wasn't the main focus in my decision. My point is the public sector could have made the same decision, so I wish they would stop blaming us for the states finacial woes. They didn't want to work for the state.
As I understand it to get a pension now I would have to buy into it for 75,000. no joke. I can almost double that "investment" when I reach 75 yrd old. Sounds like a good idea but I will be gambling that I will live that long. The chances are the state will benefiit from this investment more than I would have. There's a good chance there will no pension by the time I retire anyway. I'll keep my 401k "a bird in the hand" sort of thing. And I'm not complaining about this either, I just want the public to know that not all state employees will be getting a huge pension, or any for that matter. As I said in the beginning I choose this job mainly to enjoy what I do, healthcare and some of the other perks.

Oh, MH, Thanx for the God Bless. I can always use an extra one.

@MH: As I said before, I understand how you could see this as a crummy deal. I was just trying to point out that Tier II has its advantages, although I think that you are right that Tier I is likely a preferable system for most employees. The problem, of course, is that Tier IIa (and now Tier III) are both even less attractive than Tier II. I can understand why a long-serving, older Tier II employee would have strong reservations about voting for the plan.

@Opticat: If you do not have a pension, then I cannot see how you are Tier II. Tier II is a pension tier. If you have a 401K, then you are likely an Alternative Retirement Plan member. The situation of ARP members is an entirely different discussion altogether (too much to put in this comment).

@Art: I do think that I get it, and I did not think I was "complaining."

I tried to make it clear that I understand that there are many private sector workers who are suffering. My brother lost a good job in construction, had to declare bankruptcy, and now is making much less driving a truck delivering magazines. For people who have (or might lose) their jobs, yes, the state employees' position seems great.

But not all workers are in this position. Just as an example, around 20% of private sector workers still participate in a defined contribution retirement plan (www.bls.gov/opub/perspectives/issue3.pdf). I guess what I am trying to say is that you cannot lump all private sector employees together, just as you cannot lump all state employees together. I think there are state employees who are giving up something with this deal. This does not mean they should not give it up, but I think it is unfair of you to belittle what they are giving up by calling it nothing.

@DonG: I admit that I made a mistake in my explanation.

My reading is that the chart is the projected savings for this fiscal year in the entire budget. The light green is the non-retiree-health care portion, while the dark green is the retiree health care portion of the savings. I am not sure exactly why there is no July, but I would guess that the comptroller projects savings each month after the beginning of the fiscal year (7/1).

So, the graph does not represent retiree health care spending versus savings, but represents overall savings beyond the budgeted spending.

The graph was not as clear as I thought, but after looking more closely, I think that it is clear now. I hope my explanation helps.