It should be for all employees. Why should vested actives get an additional "benefit" when inflation is under 3%?? They're just being greedy and taking money out of the Plan so those coming behind get reduced benefits. The cola isn't designed as a benefit - it's a protection for the benefit to ensure it isn't eroded by inflation. It's no wonder that the Herritys of the world go after the teachers and FCPS as inefficient and wasteful when this is the attitude that they hear from teachers - "give us everything and don't touch my benefits, or even the overly large inflation protection you gave me..." It leaves a bad taste and those of us coming behind bear the consequences.

Anonymous wrote:
As for "we can't go back on promises" - hogwash. You can't claw back the COLA or raises already given. But you most certainly can (and should), in the new CBA, state that COLA increases will be determined by the CPI for both current and future retirees.

I am fine with that for new hires and non-vested employees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that FCPS teachers have a great health plan and excellent retirement perks. It's been that way for years.

That is part of the argument for those that think teachers shouldn't complain about salary/work load (and fueling the argument that teachers don't even work an whole 8 hr/day, generous time off for holidays, snow days, etc.).

The BOS is never going to do anything about it. The teachers are too strong and vocal.

Retiree healthcare isn't cheap.
https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/2017%20Retiree%20Premium%20Charts.pdf

yea, no kidding!

What? Don't you know teachers get Cadillac benefits?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that FCPS teachers have a great health plan and excellent retirement perks. It's been that way for years.

That is part of the argument for those that think teachers shouldn't complain about salary/work load (and fueling the argument that teachers don't even work an whole 8 hr/day, generous time off for holidays, snow days, etc.).

The BOS is never going to do anything about it. The teachers are too strong and vocal.

Retiree healthcare isn't cheap.
https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/2017%20Retiree%20Premium%20Charts.pdf

yea, no kidding!

I've had many people tell me they think it's "free" or "fully paid".

Anonymous wrote:I think there is some confusion - the OP noted that the cola was for after retiring, this has nothing to do with salary increases for teachers while working. Also, the benefits that were earned are not impacted. A cola is designed to maintain purchasing power - it is not an additional 'benefit' that is designed to increase the overall compensation as some PP seemed to argue.

I'm all for paying teachers well, and FCPS does pay well, especially after last year's contribution of an additional $44M. In terms of total compensation - salary plus benefits - FCPS ranks at the top of the surrounding school districts. But that doesn't mean that additional raises should be made after retirement. The County and State pension plans increase benefits by CPI and FCPS should do the same.

Adjusting this will free up money that can support some very important programs that otherwise have been identified by the Superintendent's Budget Task Force as high on the list to cut.

This is true. But when inflation isn't 3%, it has the impact of increasing overall compensation in excess of the amount required to maintain purchasing power. In that situation, it is very much an "additional benefit." That's why sensible jurisdictions chain their COLA increases to the CPI.

As for "we can't go back on promises" - hogwash. You can't claw back the COLA or raises already given. But you most certainly can (and should), in the new CBA, state that COLA increases will be determined by the CPI for both current and future retirees.

I can't stand him. He wants to make it so that no one can retire anymore. Reducing the benefit amount upon retirement. Reducing the age to retire to the point of discouraging anyone from applying who is not right out of school is detrimental.

Pat Herrity (Board of Supervisors) weighed in with some thoughts on pensions:

It is Past Time for Serious Pension Reform. The last Herrity Report contained my detailed thoughts on serious pension reform. I have summarized those thoughts below. For the full version please click here.

Most of our residents are in complete disbelief when they learn that Fairfax County offers, and continues to offer, a pre-social security supplement benefit - also known as the second pension. Employees that started working for Fairfax County right out of college can retire from the County as early as age 55. In addition to their regular pension benefits, which are more generous than surrounding jurisdictions, County employees get a second pension benefit that provides the employee a County-paid benefit equal to social security payments until they reach social security age. Unlike actual social security payments, which saw no increase last year, the County's second pension recipients receive a guaranteed 3% increase. Serious pension reform in Fairfax County is past due and it starts with elimination of the second pension benefit for new employees.

Here are just some of the reasons I believe we need to eliminate the pre-social security supplement for new general County and school employees:

This benefit does not help recruit or retain employees. Compensation plans should be designed to recruit and retain employees - this benefit does neither. The benefit is not valued as much as salary by the employees we are trying to recruit. Because the benefit is not paid unless you retire, it encourages employees to retire earlier.
Fairfax County is the only jurisdiction in Virginia to offer this benefit.
It is an expensive benefit that adds 6% to the cost of every payroll dollar. This benefit cost the County $35M and the school system $75M in FY 2016.
The cost of providing this benefit continues to grow and is unsustainable. As people live longer, the cost of providing this benefit continues to grow and continues to crowd out important County and school programs.
The cost of this benefit is unpredictable. Because this is a defined benefit, poor market returns can significantly increase the cost of the benefit.

As discussed further in the link pension reform starts with eliminating the pre-social security supplement, but we must also address the County's retirement plan and the school system's supplemental pension plan (ERFC). This includes changing the retirement age, phasing out the County's DROP program (allows for retirement payments prior to retirement), reducing the high costs of administering the benefit plans, and investigating the conversion to a hybrid plan like the rest of the counties in Virginia have done. I have not addressed several other pension issues including the optimism of the pension return assumptions and the funding level of the pension liability. We need to keep our promises to our current employees, but must move our compensation programs into the 21st century for new employees.

Our hard working County employees and teachers continue to ask for salary increases to get them to market averages. Unfortunately, too many of our compensation dollars are going towards pension benefits which competes with the ability to fund employee and teacher raises and attract high quality candidates for openings. The cost of benefits for County and school employees range from 60% to 80% on top of each payroll dollar, compared to 25 to 35% for most private companies. Growing pension liabilities also compete for funds with the high quality services that our residents expect.

I have been working to address the County's overly generous and unsustainable pension costs since 2010. I spoke about the County and school pension issues repeatedly during the meals tax debate as a prime example of where the County needs to get spending prioritized and under control. Largely as a result of the meals tax discussions, several of the County's civic associations, business groups and community groups have joined me in the call to reform the County's pension benefit programs.

The goal of these reforms cannot just be to make our pension benefits sustainable and affordable, but to change our total compensation packages so that we can do a better job of attracting, retaining and rewarding a quality workforce. Despite a delay in discussing our pension costs, it appears that the Board is finally prepared to look at pension reform. Hopefully this time we end up with meaningful pension and compensation plan reform and not a few more nibbles around the edges. We need to keep our promises to our current employees, but must move our compensation programs into the 21st century for new employees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that FCPS teachers have a great health plan and excellent retirement perks. It's been that way for years.

That is part of the argument for those that think teachers shouldn't complain about salary/work load (and fueling the argument that teachers don't even work an whole 8 hr/day, generous time off for holidays, snow days, etc.).

The BOS is never going to do anything about it. The teachers are too strong and vocal.

Retiree healthcare isn't cheap.
https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/2017%20Retiree%20Premium%20Charts.pdf

yea, no kidding!

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that FCPS teachers have a great health plan and excellent retirement perks. It's been that way for years.

That is part of the argument for those that think teachers shouldn't complain about salary/work load (and fueling the argument that teachers don't even work an whole 8 hr/day, generous time off for holidays, snow days, etc.).

The BOS is never going to do anything about it. The teachers are too strong and vocal.

I think teachers do and should have good health care and should be paid competitively. Unfortunately, the evaluation system for teachers seems to value seniority and years of experience over actual quality of teacher, so, to pay the good ones well, we have to pay the mediocre ones well, too. I think pensions, as a retirement option are going the way of the dodo and the retirement of the baby boomers is going to put financial strain on many, many systems to the detriment, in the case of the schools, of our children's educations, unless FCPS is able to cut some of it's consultative and administrative bloat. I still don't think continuing to add to the ranks of pensioners is going to help the school system, and a lot of government organizations that still offer pensions need to reconsider their retirement options before pensions become the bulk of the budget rather than upkeep of community resources.

That teachers get generous leave isn't an argument, it's a fact. There are few other professions that give holidays, weeks of break for Thanksgiving/winter holidays/New Year's/spring plus the majority of the summer. Most teachers I know work more than 8 hour days, but so do most salaried professionals, when required. Teaching is hard, but, guess what? So are a lot of other people's jobs. I've been told I shouldn't complain about my job because it pays well, but I do it anyway because sometimes, getting called at 10 p.m. for yet another completely preventable emergency gets old. But, the pay is for the shitty hours and being on call 24/7.

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that FCPS teachers have a great health plan and excellent retirement perks. It's been that way for years.

That is part of the argument for those that think teachers shouldn't complain about salary/work load (and fueling the argument that teachers don't even work an whole 8 hr/day, generous time off for holidays, snow days, etc.).

The BOS is never going to do anything about it. The teachers are too strong and vocal.

Retiree healthcare isn't cheap.
https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/2017%20Retiree%20Premium%20Charts.pdf

If inflation picks up and exceeds 3% I'll bet you'll hear about changing the plan terms...

It's no secret that FCPS teachers have a great health plan and excellent retirement perks. It's been that way for years.

That is part of the argument for those that think teachers shouldn't complain about salary/work load (and fueling the argument that teachers don't even work an whole 8 hr/day, generous time off for holidays, snow days, etc.).

The BOS is never going to do anything about it. The teachers are too strong and vocal.

I think there is some confusion - the OP noted that the cola was for after retiring, this has nothing to do with salary increases for teachers while working. Also, the benefits that were earned are not impacted. A cola is designed to maintain purchasing power - it is not an additional 'benefit' that is designed to increase the overall compensation as some PP seemed to argue.

I'm all for paying teachers well, and FCPS does pay well, especially after last year's contribution of an additional $44M. In terms of total compensation - salary plus benefits - FCPS ranks at the top of the surrounding school districts. But that doesn't mean that additional raises should be made after retirement. The County and State pension plans increase benefits by CPI and FCPS should do the same.

Adjusting this will free up money that can support some very important programs that otherwise have been identified by the Superintendent's Budget Task Force as high on the list to cut.

I thought all of the retirement stuff was mandated by Richmond, not Fairfax. I might be wrong, if someone knows for sure then they can set me straight.

Anonymous wrote:What the heck is wrong with you? There is no meals tax; it was defeated.

+1 I love the frenzied outrage regardless of the facts!