For those who may not know, COPE is the political fund of the UFT and NYSUT. Contributions are strictly optional.
I've been chapter leader for eight years now, and each and every one of those years I've received some package or other from UFT urging me to do a COPE drive. In fact, a few years back, I decided to take them up on it. So I invited a Queens rep over to a meeting, but the rep texted me after the meeting had begun asking me what time to show. I was left to largely improvise a meeting, but that was OK because, as usual, these were pretty lively times and we all had much to discuss.
I was interested in supporting leadership at that time because it was hanging tough against Cuomo's insistence we rate teachers on junk science. And when the rep showed up, he said, after we'd gone years with no contract, "Don't worry, Michael Mulgrew is very smart. You'll get your contract, because Bloomberg can't get evaluation without it." Despite that proclamation, virtually every sentient NY City teacher remembers ending up with an evaluation system devised by Reformy John King and no contract. My members still ask me to bring the rep back so they can throw stuff at him. And by the end of that meeting, only one UFT delegate and I had signed up for COPE.
I continued to pay because I felt it gave me marginal cred with leadership, which for reasons I can't fathom, criticized bloggers from time to time. But I didn't see the point in inviting anyone else until very recently, when I heard UFT Political Director Paul Egan speak of the NY constitutional convention vote, coming next November. You probably know that NY State, unlike New Jersey and Illinois, has to pay its share of pension contributions by law. You probably also know that the states I just mentioned, since they don't have to, tend not to pay their share.
This is problematic for those of us who envision a retirement in which we don't have to check prices of canned cat food before purchasing it for lunch. Of course, there are valid arguments against paying into COPE. For one, NYC high schools have absolutely no voice nor vote in NYSUT. For another, COPE has supported some questionable politicians, from Serphin Maltese, who broke two Catholic school unions, to George Pataki, who answered our support by vetoing improvements in the Taylor Law, to teacher-basher Andrew Cuomo, to the execrable Fernando Cabrera.
This notwithstanding, there are powerful forces looking to open a Constitutional Convention, and Egan is not exaggerating when he says they are after our pensions. Upstate teacher Maria May recently sent me this paper describing Reclaim NY, a group that claims to be impartial, but only meets that standard if you believe Fox News is "fair and balanced."
This group is headed by hedge fund manager Robert Mercer, who supports all sorts of right-wing causes, including Breitbart Media, Ted Cruz, and everybody's best buddy Donald Trump (or "the presidential election," as Unity leadership calls him). Reclaim NY is the very definition of an astroturf group, being 100% financed by Mercer's Family Foundation.
Reclaim NY is very much against taxes, and is suing school districts to try to expose what it deems to be overspending. They seem to have a very reformy outlook, strongly supporting charter schools, religious schools, and our good pal Betsy DeVos. They support a national constitutional convention so it's not a big leap to assume they will support a state one as well. Imagine how much more money New York could devote to charter schools, religious schools, and tax breaks for zillionaires if it simply didn't pay the pensions it's promised NY State teachers.
This is a very real threat, and not just for senior teachers. Our pensions are already under attack by national reformies, and folks like Mercer would probably like nothing better than to do away with them utterly. Right now, the only solid entity I know that's fighting this is our union and AFL-CIO. That's why I went before my staff and made my own pitch for COPE this year, and that's why I signed up another 80-plus members.
I would not be able to sleep at night if I weren't doing my bit to fight Mercer and like-minded reformies. While some of my friends disagree, I will continue to push COPE for now. Hey, if we win in November, maybe we can reconsider. But a country controlled by Donald Trump and his thugs is a very dangerous place for working people. While I frequently disagree with union leadership, this is one area in which I don't want their hands tied.
To them, I say fight this vigorously. Too frequently I see UFT leadership fall down when no one pushes them. They can't afford to do that now. We need to not only support them in this, but also to monitor their actions and progress.
Showing posts with label pensions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pensions. Show all posts
Monday, July 03, 2017
Wednesday, June 21, 2017
Do Pensions Cheat Teachers?
You'd think so, if you read this article in the Daily News, written by folks in reformy Bellwether Education Partners. Personally, I'm suspicious when reformies start looking out for us. Why are the same people who brought us junk science ratings, charters, and all sorts of other nonsense suddenly so interested in our welfare?
The argument is, essentially, that most teachers don't stay long enough to get vested, and that even those who do, may not make it:
I don't suppose anyone thinks ten years equals a good pension, so I'm not sure why that's a revelation. A problem with the second sentence is that is it's simply not true. Teachers can get their contributions back plus interest even if they aren't vested. Once people make assertions that are blatantly untrue, I find it hard to trust them at all. But that's just me.
A better argument is that they lose out on employer contributions. You retain them only if you stay longer, and you could argue that's inequitable. You could also argue, however, that healthy people pay too much for health insurance because they fail to get sick. That's what the Trumpies seem to be saying. In fact, you could make similar arguments against Social Security. Not everyone receives it, and in fact you DON'T get contributions back if you're unwise enough to say, die before you're eligible for payment.I suppose that could become a Trumpie argument for privatization.
On the other hand, you could argue that this system is designed to reward longevity. Is that a bad thing? It's hard for me to see why. You would hope that, with time, teachers acquire wisdom. You would also hope that, with said wisdom, teachers could enrich the lives of our children. Or you could ignore longevity altogether and worry more about how much money someone who quickly gives up teaching takes to the next gig.
The article seems to prefer defined contribution plans, like 401K, to defined benefit plans, like ours. Of course, even the inventor of the 401K plan says it was not designed to replace pensions. Companies favor them because they're off the hook for long-term benefits. But clearly people who receive defined benefits are better off than those who do not. You'll forgive me if I worry more about such people than, say, the Walmart family.
The superiority of defined benefits applies even to recipients of Tier 6, which sucks compared to Tier 4. Do we want to encourage a gig economy, where people wake up, clean up after horses, drive for Uber, drop off their passengers, and then go to barista jobs to make mochachino for people who work for Bellwether? Do we want to rely on TFAs just passing through on their way to real careers? Or do we want dedicated educators teaching our kids?
In fact, if new teachers want to save more money, they have the option of contributing to TDA. Right now there's a fixed option that would give them 7%. That's 7% more of a guarantee than they'd get with a 401K, under which they could actually lose money. If they want to take more risk, there are a variety of funds they could choose.
Many new teachers do not give a second thought to saving money. I'd argue that forcing them to put away 6% of their pay, as they do in Tier 6, is doing them a service. Young people tend not to be focused on the long-term. In September I had to pretty much bully a young teacher into signing up for health benefits by persuading her she was not, in fact, Supergirl. The only reason I'm in TDA is because a former chapter leader urged me to start at 5%. He told me I wouldn't notice the difference. I didn't, and upped my contributions as I could afford them. I'm grateful for that.
I'm pretty tired of reading idiotic studies suggesting that teachers don't improve after two years, implying we should therefore replace experienced teachers with newbies. I'm also tired of business owners trying to give the lowest common denominator to working people. I started this job working for $14,000 a year, and that year I turned down an offer of a higher paying job driving a FedEx truck. The first day I taught, a grizzled old vet told me to get out while I could and get a job in Long Island. I decided right then and there that I never wanted to be like that guy, and I'm happy to say that over thirty years later I'm not.
I love this job. I love the kids I teach and it's my honor and privilege to serve them. I could retire tomorrow if that weren't true, and the day that it isn't, I will do just that. But hell, I'm thankful I have a defined benefit plan. I'm very happy that if something were to happen to me after I retired, I can make sure my wife is taken care of. I do have money in TFA, and I've saved as much as I could. But I'm glad I don't have to depend on it.
As for Bellwether, if they're so concerned about teachers, I suggest they take a stand against the junk science ratings that freak us out on such a regular basis. I suggest they take a position against private and charter schools that undermine public education. I suggest, since they're so concerned about quality education, that they push to emulate Finland, where all teachers are unionized and the rich people have to send their kids to public schools just as the poor people do.
And I respectfully suggest, when that happens, education will improve. You'll see better teaching conditions for teachers, and therefore better learning conditions for students. As a direct result, the number of short-term teachers will decrease significantly. Then Bellwether won't need to worry so much about those who don't make pension.
I'm always available for consultation, if they're interested.
The argument is, essentially, that most teachers don't stay long enough to get vested, and that even those who do, may not make it:
Even if a New York teacher does stay for 10 years, qualifying for some pension does not guarantee it will be a good pension. In New York, a young teacher must stay 24 years before her pension will finally be worth at least her own contributions into the plan plus interest.
I don't suppose anyone thinks ten years equals a good pension, so I'm not sure why that's a revelation. A problem with the second sentence is that is it's simply not true. Teachers can get their contributions back plus interest even if they aren't vested. Once people make assertions that are blatantly untrue, I find it hard to trust them at all. But that's just me.
A better argument is that they lose out on employer contributions. You retain them only if you stay longer, and you could argue that's inequitable. You could also argue, however, that healthy people pay too much for health insurance because they fail to get sick. That's what the Trumpies seem to be saying. In fact, you could make similar arguments against Social Security. Not everyone receives it, and in fact you DON'T get contributions back if you're unwise enough to say, die before you're eligible for payment.I suppose that could become a Trumpie argument for privatization.
On the other hand, you could argue that this system is designed to reward longevity. Is that a bad thing? It's hard for me to see why. You would hope that, with time, teachers acquire wisdom. You would also hope that, with said wisdom, teachers could enrich the lives of our children. Or you could ignore longevity altogether and worry more about how much money someone who quickly gives up teaching takes to the next gig.
The article seems to prefer defined contribution plans, like 401K, to defined benefit plans, like ours. Of course, even the inventor of the 401K plan says it was not designed to replace pensions. Companies favor them because they're off the hook for long-term benefits. But clearly people who receive defined benefits are better off than those who do not. You'll forgive me if I worry more about such people than, say, the Walmart family.
The superiority of defined benefits applies even to recipients of Tier 6, which sucks compared to Tier 4. Do we want to encourage a gig economy, where people wake up, clean up after horses, drive for Uber, drop off their passengers, and then go to barista jobs to make mochachino for people who work for Bellwether? Do we want to rely on TFAs just passing through on their way to real careers? Or do we want dedicated educators teaching our kids?
In fact, if new teachers want to save more money, they have the option of contributing to TDA. Right now there's a fixed option that would give them 7%. That's 7% more of a guarantee than they'd get with a 401K, under which they could actually lose money. If they want to take more risk, there are a variety of funds they could choose.
Many new teachers do not give a second thought to saving money. I'd argue that forcing them to put away 6% of their pay, as they do in Tier 6, is doing them a service. Young people tend not to be focused on the long-term. In September I had to pretty much bully a young teacher into signing up for health benefits by persuading her she was not, in fact, Supergirl. The only reason I'm in TDA is because a former chapter leader urged me to start at 5%. He told me I wouldn't notice the difference. I didn't, and upped my contributions as I could afford them. I'm grateful for that.
I'm pretty tired of reading idiotic studies suggesting that teachers don't improve after two years, implying we should therefore replace experienced teachers with newbies. I'm also tired of business owners trying to give the lowest common denominator to working people. I started this job working for $14,000 a year, and that year I turned down an offer of a higher paying job driving a FedEx truck. The first day I taught, a grizzled old vet told me to get out while I could and get a job in Long Island. I decided right then and there that I never wanted to be like that guy, and I'm happy to say that over thirty years later I'm not.
I love this job. I love the kids I teach and it's my honor and privilege to serve them. I could retire tomorrow if that weren't true, and the day that it isn't, I will do just that. But hell, I'm thankful I have a defined benefit plan. I'm very happy that if something were to happen to me after I retired, I can make sure my wife is taken care of. I do have money in TFA, and I've saved as much as I could. But I'm glad I don't have to depend on it.
As for Bellwether, if they're so concerned about teachers, I suggest they take a stand against the junk science ratings that freak us out on such a regular basis. I suggest they take a position against private and charter schools that undermine public education. I suggest, since they're so concerned about quality education, that they push to emulate Finland, where all teachers are unionized and the rich people have to send their kids to public schools just as the poor people do.
And I respectfully suggest, when that happens, education will improve. You'll see better teaching conditions for teachers, and therefore better learning conditions for students. As a direct result, the number of short-term teachers will decrease significantly. Then Bellwether won't need to worry so much about those who don't make pension.
I'm always available for consultation, if they're interested.
Friday, June 16, 2017
Getting the Song and Dance at the UFT Pension Consult
I’ve been getting feedback of late about end-year pension consults. I can’t do much about it, not only because have I nothing to do with them, but also because I'm far from an expert on pension. Numbers are not really my forte. But three people who attended a UFT pension workshop together just reported about their consultations, and all three seemed to wonder over different things. One had a particularly tough experience.
My friend couldn’t get an appointment at UFT Queens for a retirement consult, so she went to Manhattan. She found a coupon, paid $35 for parking and a little more for a roundtrip EZ pass fee. When she got to her destination, the UFT rep went on the computer, and it took her at least five minutes to figure out what my friend would make if she retired in 2020. That’s unusual, since it’s an average, and then a multiple of 2% per year. I don’t like to brag, but I'm a high school graduate and could have figured that pretty quickly.
She then asked how much she’d make if she were to retire now. The woman took another five minutes, and then came up with a figure that clashed with the one my friend had calculated at the UFT retirement workshop. My friend, as instructed, asked the UFT employee to check her W2s. The pension person requested her 2017 returns. This is unusual, as few people I know do their tax returns before the year actually ends. (Maybe Donald Trump, but everyone knows rules don't apply to kings.)
It then took the woman another five minutes to flip through the returns and determine that 2017 was not, in fact, a year for which my friend would have one. Instead of looking through five years of returns, as my friend was asked in a letter, the rep looked only at the 2016 returns and came up with a figure that way. This was problematic because my friend could have made more money other years. In fact, my friend says 2013, 14, and 15 were her best years.
When my friend asked about medical expenses, the woman told her they would be exactly the same. This is unusual, because retirees no longer get prescriptions via UFT Welfare Fund. They to tend to, therefore, incur higher costs. Perhaps the UFT employee didn’t know that. Oddly, I do.
My friend then told the rep that she had gone for a workshop at Queens UFT, attended by 150 people, and that the information she was giving contradicted what she had heard at the workshop. The rep contended the information at the workshop was incorrect. My friend then asked if there was any more information she could give, and the rep said no. The rep claimed said she was correct, and that someone in Queens told 150 people the wrong thing.
My friend then stood up, and said, “Thank you. This consultation is now over.” The rep said, “Look at you. You’re standing up. You have an attitude.” My friend then went outside. The rep followed her and gave her version of the meeting to everyone who happened to be in the waiting room, making certain all present knew about my friend's attitude.
My friend asked the rep to please stop announcing the results of this meeting to everyone in the room, and requested a supervisor. Eventually she got a name. At the appointed floor, someone came out and said a person, not the supervisor, was expecting her. The rep had evidently given her a heads-up. My friend got to give her version of the story to this person. The person apologized for the inconvenience and offered a consultation with someone she described as the top person. My friend asked if they would cover her parking the next time and was told they don't do that.
I'm sorry she has to go again. But I don't blame her for having an attitude. Everyone has an attitude. The best thing to do, as far as I'm concerned, is to adjust it to suit the situation.
My friend couldn’t get an appointment at UFT Queens for a retirement consult, so she went to Manhattan. She found a coupon, paid $35 for parking and a little more for a roundtrip EZ pass fee. When she got to her destination, the UFT rep went on the computer, and it took her at least five minutes to figure out what my friend would make if she retired in 2020. That’s unusual, since it’s an average, and then a multiple of 2% per year. I don’t like to brag, but I'm a high school graduate and could have figured that pretty quickly.
She then asked how much she’d make if she were to retire now. The woman took another five minutes, and then came up with a figure that clashed with the one my friend had calculated at the UFT retirement workshop. My friend, as instructed, asked the UFT employee to check her W2s. The pension person requested her 2017 returns. This is unusual, as few people I know do their tax returns before the year actually ends. (Maybe Donald Trump, but everyone knows rules don't apply to kings.)
It then took the woman another five minutes to flip through the returns and determine that 2017 was not, in fact, a year for which my friend would have one. Instead of looking through five years of returns, as my friend was asked in a letter, the rep looked only at the 2016 returns and came up with a figure that way. This was problematic because my friend could have made more money other years. In fact, my friend says 2013, 14, and 15 were her best years.
When my friend asked about medical expenses, the woman told her they would be exactly the same. This is unusual, because retirees no longer get prescriptions via UFT Welfare Fund. They to tend to, therefore, incur higher costs. Perhaps the UFT employee didn’t know that. Oddly, I do.
My friend then told the rep that she had gone for a workshop at Queens UFT, attended by 150 people, and that the information she was giving contradicted what she had heard at the workshop. The rep contended the information at the workshop was incorrect. My friend then asked if there was any more information she could give, and the rep said no. The rep claimed said she was correct, and that someone in Queens told 150 people the wrong thing.
My friend then stood up, and said, “Thank you. This consultation is now over.” The rep said, “Look at you. You’re standing up. You have an attitude.” My friend then went outside. The rep followed her and gave her version of the meeting to everyone who happened to be in the waiting room, making certain all present knew about my friend's attitude.
My friend asked the rep to please stop announcing the results of this meeting to everyone in the room, and requested a supervisor. Eventually she got a name. At the appointed floor, someone came out and said a person, not the supervisor, was expecting her. The rep had evidently given her a heads-up. My friend got to give her version of the story to this person. The person apologized for the inconvenience and offered a consultation with someone she described as the top person. My friend asked if they would cover her parking the next time and was told they don't do that.
I'm sorry she has to go again. But I don't blame her for having an attitude. Everyone has an attitude. The best thing to do, as far as I'm concerned, is to adjust it to suit the situation.
Wednesday, June 01, 2011
Rethinking Teacher Contracts
The geniuses at Education Sector have come up with ways to economize on those wasteful teacher contracts. If only we could eliminate raises, sick days, pensions, class size restrictions, and those awful health and pension benefits, we'd have more money to lavish on the children we love.
Thanks to Education Sector, our children can look forward to even more opportunities to get jobs without raises, sick days, pensions, workload limits, and those awful health and pension benefits. This is a great way to sustain tax breaks for those who really need them, like Bill Gates and Eli Broad. But why should we limit such great ideas to teachers?
Couldn't we save money on restaurant bills if we got rid of this whole tipping nonsense? I mean, if an entree costs 18 bucks, shouldn't it cost 18 bucks? And are we actually paying for those hairnets I see them using in the kitchen? And what about those long rubber gloves the dishwasher is using? How will he know how hot the water is? And are we actually paying to heat it?
Often, I'll see restaurant staff sitting around doing nothing. Sometimes they'll even be eating. Is the price of their food reflected in my eighteen bucks? And if they have nothing to do, shouldn't they go out and make the world a better place? In fact, if they weren't wasting their time cleaning the restaurant, they could clean the streets and save us the expense of hiring sanitation workers. What the hell does Education Sector care if there's a little grease on their plates, or the odd rodent jumping into their soup? Maybe that 18-dollar entree could be ten bucks if we stopped throwing money at the problem.
Also, I've just about had it with these doctors. Why should they have health insurance? If they're so smart, can't they heal themselves? Why should they have professional associations lobbying for them? Are they socking money away for their retirement? Wouldn't it be better if they just stopped charging so much? And what's with these receptionists? Are we paying for them? Wouldn't it be better if the doctors came out, greeted you personally, filled out whatever forms need filling out, and took you into the office?
What really grinds my gears are those waiting rooms. If there are too many people, doctors ought to bring them all into the offices, and that way they'd be sufficiently motivated to get them out quickly. The more they treated, the more money they'd make. You know, like merit pay. Let's find ways to keep it moving and stop wasting time. As long as they're effective doctors, who gives a golly goshdarn how many patients they treat?
Forward-thinking Americans could apply the Education Sector method to many areas of society, save lots of money, and give it back to billionaires in tax cuts.
Because that's what our nation needs more of.
Thanks to Education Sector, our children can look forward to even more opportunities to get jobs without raises, sick days, pensions, workload limits, and those awful health and pension benefits. This is a great way to sustain tax breaks for those who really need them, like Bill Gates and Eli Broad. But why should we limit such great ideas to teachers?
Couldn't we save money on restaurant bills if we got rid of this whole tipping nonsense? I mean, if an entree costs 18 bucks, shouldn't it cost 18 bucks? And are we actually paying for those hairnets I see them using in the kitchen? And what about those long rubber gloves the dishwasher is using? How will he know how hot the water is? And are we actually paying to heat it?
Often, I'll see restaurant staff sitting around doing nothing. Sometimes they'll even be eating. Is the price of their food reflected in my eighteen bucks? And if they have nothing to do, shouldn't they go out and make the world a better place? In fact, if they weren't wasting their time cleaning the restaurant, they could clean the streets and save us the expense of hiring sanitation workers. What the hell does Education Sector care if there's a little grease on their plates, or the odd rodent jumping into their soup? Maybe that 18-dollar entree could be ten bucks if we stopped throwing money at the problem.
Also, I've just about had it with these doctors. Why should they have health insurance? If they're so smart, can't they heal themselves? Why should they have professional associations lobbying for them? Are they socking money away for their retirement? Wouldn't it be better if they just stopped charging so much? And what's with these receptionists? Are we paying for them? Wouldn't it be better if the doctors came out, greeted you personally, filled out whatever forms need filling out, and took you into the office?
What really grinds my gears are those waiting rooms. If there are too many people, doctors ought to bring them all into the offices, and that way they'd be sufficiently motivated to get them out quickly. The more they treated, the more money they'd make. You know, like merit pay. Let's find ways to keep it moving and stop wasting time. As long as they're effective doctors, who gives a golly goshdarn how many patients they treat?
Forward-thinking Americans could apply the Education Sector method to many areas of society, save lots of money, and give it back to billionaires in tax cuts.
Because that's what our nation needs more of.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)