AJC.com > Blogs > Get Schooled > Archives > 2008 > October > 21 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USBattle brews over teachers’ pensions
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Retired and current teachers are outraged over a plan by Gov. Sonny Perdue to eliminate the guaranteed cost-of-living increases paid to retirees.
Currently, retired teachers automatically receive a 3 percent cost of living increase every year. But Perdue wants the Teacher Retirement Board to vote on these increases annually - meaning there’s a chance the extra money will be denied when the economy is weak.
Many retired teachers say the increases are needed because they were underpaid when they worked in classrooms.
It’s interesting that while retired teachers were given a 3 percent raise, current teachers typically receive only a 2 percent raise from Perdue and the Legislature. (Some local districts kick in extra money.)
Should retired teachers be guaranteed standard-of-living increases? We all know the great service teachers provide, but how many other professions are promised this?
UPDATE: Some Clayton teachers protested Perdue’s proposal today.
Comments
By bearcasey
October 21, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this
Just like a politician, change the rules in the middle of the game! I taught for 31 years and retired in 2006. I traded higher pay in the private sector for a decent retirement program. No fair changing it now. Reduce Sonny’s retirement benefits!
By Joy in Teaching
October 21, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this
Sonny has been wanting control over TRS almost from the very beginning. Well…make that right after he screwed over the flag folks, that is.
Why should teachers be surprised that he’s been trying to screw us over as well?
By jct
October 21, 2008 9:43 AM | Link to this
Laura, what does this have to do with other professions?
We were told that you pay 5% of your gross pay into this system. We kick in rest. You work for lower wages for 30 years and you will have a pension. Upon retirement you will receive 3% COLA per year.
TRS is a fully funded, well run system. Why does Sonny need to get his hands on it?
He already got his hands into the ERS system and got the COLA change. The regular state employees just rolled over.
He can forget about that with us. We will not roll over or stand by quietly.
By BB
October 21, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this
Sonny lied to teachers in order to be voted into office his first term. He needs to keep his hands off our money! I retired in 2007, and still have to work to make ends meet.
By DB
October 21, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this
Should retired teachers be guaranteed standard-of-living increases?
Hell, no. No one is guaranteed anything in this day and age. They didn’t have guaranteed raises when they were teaching — why do they get them now? It’s an unaffordable luxury.
By I think this may be illegal
October 21, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this
I’d like to check into the legality of taking away monies that were paid into the system by teachers. Can Sonny just go to my 403b and take money from that, too, because he wants it?
By Holymotherofgod
October 21, 2008 1:25 PM | Link to this
Laura, I think that you are missing the point. TEACHERS PAY INTO THE SYSTEM! If left to our own devices, we coculd certainly have invested that money elsewhere and probably have done better in the end. But we have not choice.
Yeah, teachers provide a valuable service…Thanks for the lipservice. I don’t see you ponying up to teach a couple of weeks in the public school system. Until you do, leave your opinion of the money that we earned and paid into the system to yourself.
By Holymotherofgod and another thing
October 21, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this
Did you know, Laura, that teachers are told to sign a contract without knowing what our salary will be the next year? We are bound to the contract, too, even though the counties and systems can, at Sonny’s whim, increase our salaries or not increase our salaries. How many other professions have that happen? Huh?
By BB
October 21, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this
Teachers don’t have a choice of whether or not to pay into their retirement account. We also pay social security, so that’s a double whammy! I wish I could have afforded to invest in a retirement account OF MY CHOICE!
By catlady
October 21, 2008 1:59 PM | Link to this
If they choose to enact this new rule (i believe it is wrong) it should NOt be retroactive. That is, if you are already a teacher in the system, the old rule applies. New teachers would have another instance of fair warning.
Does anyone in their right mind think that during good times the cola will increase? There will always be “bad times”.
look how well Sonny”s boys forecasted the demise of the HOPE scholarship. The great budget surplus!
In addition to what Holymother of God wrote, we can always have our assignment switched after we sign our contracts.
By jim d
October 21, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this
Awright, we’ve blogged this one before.
If you don’t like what sonny boy is proposing just take your PLOP (Partial Lump Sum Option payment)and get the hell out. Then rehire back in.
For someone that feels their educational background warrants respect from all, some teachers just ain’t too bright when it comes to money.
By jim d
October 21, 2008 2:56 PM | Link to this
Teachers wake up!!
Y’all are missing the boat on this one.
Cash out and buy stocks while they are cheap.
If you have 20+ years in the system check out the PLOP that would be available to you at the TRS website simply enter the calculator link at the bottom of the page and plug in your information.
Hell, just retire, take the PLOP, invest in stocks while they’re down then re-hire back into the system and keep working.
Y’all can’t possibly be so blind you can’t see how this could work.
By johnson
October 21, 2008 3:06 PM | Link to this
That’s what they get for electing a republican. They should have kept Roy Barnes. I keep telling people if you don’t make more than $250,000 a year, then you better vote for a democrat.
By jim d
October 21, 2008 3:16 PM | Link to this
Right Johnson, NOT.
one of your presidential candidates is hell bent to institute “pay for performance” for teachers. Care to guess which one?
Here’s a clue.
He’s the liar
By johnson
October 21, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this
Better a so-called liar(if that’s what your party is calling him now), than a racist old coot.
By jim d
October 21, 2008 3:37 PM | Link to this
What has he lied about? You may ask.
By dragonlady
October 21, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this
I retired after 37 years. Paying into the retirement fund was not a choice—I had to do this. Then when I retired, I discovered I would get next to nothing for Social Security, which I also paid into, because receiving Social Security as well as teacher retirement is considered double dipping.
My husband was a building contractor who paid both the employee as well as the employer part for years. AFter his death, I also could not receive any of his Social Security.
And now Perdue wants to take away my COLA?
No, it is not right. But teachers are punished in myriad and creative ways just for loving to teach.
By jim d
October 21, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this
Johnson,
NOT MY PARTY. I’m independent!
By jim d
October 21, 2008 4:10 PM | Link to this
dragon lady,
Perhaps Sonny Boy is just taking teachers at their word? “I’m not in it for the money”
By TheBlogger
October 21, 2008 4:15 PM | Link to this
Ummm, guys? Let’s not stray from the true facts in this case…..
The TRS is solvent. There is plenty of money “in the bank” to support any cost-of-living increase which has been promised. The TRS is the BEST pension plan not only in GA but also in the nation. The money currently in TRS has been properly paid into and accounted for.
The only reason that the republicans and our governor want to change the rules here is to eventually allow them to raid our TRS and shift the money else where. That would be simply WRONG. If they raid our TRS, then there won’t be money left to pay for the future teachers retirement.
Currently, the money is there for all current and future teachers. Why mess with it? That is the real question that must be answered - and the above paragraphs explain the real reason.
jim d As a teacher, I would look forward to “pay for performance” as long as it is my performance that is measured (and not my students). I am a d@mn good teacher and I would bet that my pay would increase under those circumstances. However, I also teach many students that are not good students - and I should not be penalized for that! I cannot pick the students that sit in my classroom.
By Tony
October 21, 2008 5:05 PM | Link to this
TheBlogger is right when he/she states that the Georgia TRS is in good standing. It is one of the very best retirement funds in the nation, too. I, too, question the governor’s (and cronies’) motives regarding the retirement fund. I say they should keep their hands off.
About funding, many teachers think the money in the retirement fund is all theirs. Truth is that only a fraction comes from the required payroll deduction. Local boards of education contribute more than two times the amount teachers put in. The same is true for teachers’ health insurance. So, the money is not all from the teachers’ pay check. It does however belong to the teachers who pay in because of the legal status of the fund and the promises made during their years of employment.
On the question of entitlement to the two COLAs, I don’t believe we are entitled to the raises. I think for now there is no true reason to rush to change the rules, though. The system is well funded and will continue to be.
By jim d
October 21, 2008 5:23 PM | Link to this
Ah yes Blogger,
So what measure would you use?
By jim d
October 21, 2008 5:28 PM | Link to this
BTW bloggrer,
how strong are you with the NEA?
From the July 5, 2007, Philadelphia Inquirer article:
Illinois Sen. Barack Obama today endorsed the idea of merit pay for teachers before an audience hostile to the idea, the giant National Education Association, but he softened the blow by telling the union’s national assembly that he would not use “arbitrary tests” to link pay to performance.
“I think there should be ways for us to work with the NEA, with teachers’ unions, to figure out a way to measure success,” Obama told a crowd of about 9,000 at the Pennsylvania Convention Center. “I want to work with teachers. I’m not going to do it too you, I’m going to do it with you.”
By Time for a Change in Ed
October 21, 2008 6:26 PM | Link to this
As someone noted before, if they’re going to change, there needs to be more notice. My mother taught for over 30 years (with a Master’s degree in her subject area) and never made even $40K per year. Her annual teacher retirement pay, therefore is less than $2K per month. By contrast, a staff member at my school is now making $81K after 33 years (with the same education, less responsibility in her job). If she retired this year, her pension will be almost $4500 per month.
Why would you begrudge those older teachers who didn’t reap the benefits of the Miller/Barnes years a 1.5% per year raise? (Don’t even get me started on Sonny and his falsehoods - I just couldn’t believe enough teachers were STUPID enough to vote him in a second term after all the cuts he made - just because he gave folks a $100 classroom gift card right before election time - bogus!)
It is NOT the retired teachers’ responsibility to make up the difference in the ERS’s pension fund. Will we all be expected to “chip in” to fund the Atlanta Public School System’s sad pension fund next?
If someone’s going to take a vote on the COLA, make it the legislature - and see if they’re willing to explain their decisions. Giving that power to a board is ridiculous!
By TheBlogger
October 21, 2008 7:41 PM | Link to this
jim d Way off topic on this - I wonder why you brought it up. Anyone with (and some without) knowledge of epistomology can determine who is a good teacher. I would bet that even you can walk into a random classroom and fairly accurately assess if the teacher is doing their job or not.
My point is that their are excellent teachers that teach their heart out, but the kids sitting in their room may not be the best ‘students’ for whatever reason. Does this mean that this great teacher should be penalized because those ‘students’ are not good students?
If you go down that path then every single teacher that gets ‘stuck’ with those ‘bad students’ will either quit or end up getting removed. And, only the teachers with ‘good students’ will be appropriately paid.
There are other ways to measure teaching quality. For example, there are already official teacher observations required by law. Those can be used if done properly. I am sure that there are other ways, but I am a little tired now and am going to take an early nap - hope that I haven’t caught a cold!
If we are to measure teaching quality, then measure the teacher.
If we are to measure student learning, then measure the student.
Those can be two very distinct things.
By Pay for "performance"?
October 21, 2008 8:13 PM | Link to this
So if we pay for “performance” than Barney Fife gets a huge raise because the crime rate in Mayberry is low, but the cops on Law and Order get a pay cut because a perps are always breaking the law?
Sure, after all the “statistics” prove how “effective” Barney Fife is, right?
By What's next, Habeas Corpus?
October 21, 2008 8:24 PM | Link to this
They’ve taken away your right to discipline (yet still want to hold you “accountable”.)
They’ve circumvented your rights to a tribunal, even in cases where you have been physically assaulted.
They tried to take away your fair dismissal rights.
They are now even trying to take away your basic rights as CITIZENS to participate in elections where you LIVE, and pay TAXES. (Do teachers not deserve taxation with representation?)
And now they want to start down the slippery slope of revoking your pension.
What’s next, taking away a teacher’s right to Habeas Corpus?
Congratulations to the retired Clayton teachers for standing up against tyranny.
By Teacher Now
October 22, 2008 8:50 AM | Link to this
You know what amazes me? Not one person has mentioned the fact that we, as a nation, are going through a teacher shortage. Do you honestly think it is going to be easier to recruit GOOD teachers if you take the stability of the TRS away?
One of the main reasons teachers going into the field today decide to enter teaching, is the stability. Teachers know going in that there is no way to get rich teaching, but if we stick with it, we’ll have a stable retirement. If you start changing the rules on us, we’ll simply will go to higher paying jobs. How on earth do you plan on getting people to become teachers by essentially offering them low pay, long hours, public condemnation (“those that can’t do, teach”), and now no stable retirement system?
Once again, people expect teachers to simply teach out of the goodness of our hearts. We’ll do it for a while, but it you take this away, we won’t for long.
Want to know why other nations outscore us?
They don’t treat their teachers like garbage the way the US does. Their kids aren’t allowed to walk all over teachers. Parents aren’t allowed to bully teachers into giving higher grades. People like DB are seen as the village idiots that never valued their teachers because they were too stupid to learn from them.
Until our attitude towards education changes we’ll never get ahead in a global market place.
By Catherine
October 22, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this
This is bigger than just teachers. Any government position attracts candidates looking for stability by paying lower salaries, but having a secure retirement plan. Otherwise, individuals will take their skills to the corporate world and let the bidding begin. For those who say that other professions are not guaranteed a pension, well…that’s why some people become teachers. They like the benefits, including a pension retirement with a 3% COLA. Instead of making six figures and putting money into a Roth IRA or 401k, teachers make considerably less and have better retirement benefits.
I am not sure the TRS is a major selling point to new teachers, but Sonny does not need to mess with it to get money for other pet projects. This is a slippery slope, opening up TRS to other future politicians who want to get their hands on more money.
By jim d
October 22, 2008 5:06 PM | Link to this
WHOPPEEE!!
Finally Wooten and I agree!!!
By isthatrue
October 22, 2008 10:10 PM | Link to this
Can someone please explain to me about the teachers not being able to collect their husbands’ social security or their own because it is double dipping? I’ve never heard of this with teachers. Please. Thank you so much!
By isthatrue
October 22, 2008 10:10 PM | Link to this
Can someone please explain to me about the teachers not being able to collect their husbands’ social security or their own because it is double dipping? I’ve never heard of this with teachers. Please. Thank you so much!
By dt malis
December 26, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this
Teachers are liars, thiefs and terrorists of the local community. You are part time workers on generous full time pay. You work between 160-180 days per year. Your pensions are no different than stealing money from the rest of us who worked 50 years (not 30) earned less money per year, worked 235 days per year or more, watched our IRA with 7k per year of contributions fall below par value, receive social security at a poverty level and you have the nerve to complain? The citizens of America will rise up against your self serving greed. Save for you own retirements like the rest of us. Anything you receive over and above a Social Security amount is a bonus. Shut your mouths and be grateful.
By Tony
December 26, 2008 1:30 PM | Link to this
dt malis - Your are seriously ill-informed regarding teachers’ retirement. This is our money just as a 401k or other retirement fund by a corporation is the workers’ money. Teachers work way more than 180 days. The base is 190 days, but most teachers I know put in way more hours per day and way more days per year.