Op-Ed: Just $25,000 a year for a lifetime of service

The following op-ed is a response to the Sept. 23 editorial maintaining that the state's public employee unions continue to secure benefits without worrying about the long-term fiscal consequences.

The average pension for a retired public employee in California is about $2,000 per month, or less than $25,000 per year. These public servants include cops, firefighters, teachers, engineers, scientists, and many others who serve you, the public. Less than $2,000 per month for a lifetime of public service isn't much to live on.

Who pays the $25,000 per year? The public agency employer, meaning the taxpayer, pays about $3,000 of that amount. The rest comes from employee contributions made over many years and earnings on investments of the funds by the retirement plan. A few public agencies have decided to reward retiring managers with six-figure pensions. Those extraordinary cases are the stories that make the newspapers and main stream media, but they are not the norm. $25,000 per year, not six figures, is the average and the norm.

A major fact overlooked by the detractors of public servants is that all the contributions to the retirement plan, including those made by the public employer and the employee, are funded during the employee's working career. Thus, when the taxpayer contributes money to an employee's retirement, they are also receiving the benefit of public service at the same time. Once the employee retires, neither the employee nor the taxpayer contributes another nickel to the pension plan on his or her behalf.

There is also an issue regarding medical plan coverage for retirees. Currently, in some agencies, public employees and their employers contribute money to pay for a portion of the medical plan premium costs during the time the employee is working, as well as during retirement. There have been proposals to fund medical plan premiums for retirees in advance, before they retire, the same as is currently the process for pensions.

Financially, it doesn't make much difference. Would you rather fund a future financial obligation now, in advance, or continue the pay-as-you-go funding mechanism for future retiree health benefits? It is a subject worth investigating, and many public agencies are trying various options.

Either way, providing medical coverage for our senior citizens, whether they are retired public servants or anyone else, is an accepted and worthwhile public policy. The only question is when and how the funding should be provided.

It is sad that the public employee-haters continually criticize the pension plans for our public servants as if that has caused the current world wide economic downturn, along with their view that retired public employees don't deserve even $2,000 per month as a pension after a lifetime of public service. Perhaps we should pity those who are so mean-spirited as to hold that view, but we certainly should not give them even an ounce of credibility.

Mark Sheahan is president of Professional Engineers in California Government and a resident of Yuba City.