[quote=sym]BG, I am not saying pensions are an entitlement. IMO pension is just like any other work benefit e.g health/dental/flex/parking… Today some companies provide and many don’t.
Also with passing decades corporate benefits vary, and that is the evolving nature of workplace. Not much to complain about. What was offered as pensions in the past is available for most employees in the form of other retirement benefits.
I don’t have pension, but my Dad has one. I also know my Dad’s pension plan was revised over the years. Would I like one? Most likely. Do I miss not having one? Definitely not.
What bothered me (and perhaps few others) was your reference to people having not worked long enough yet willing to complain about someone with pension benefits 🙂
I don’t see the analogy – why does it matter how many years some one has worked. If one can work less hours and are able to spend more time with family/community work, I say more power to them for effectively managing their time and resources.
CAR, in my mind pensions are employment benefits, just like 401k’s. One can choose to have one or not. If one is enrolled (optionally/not) it is something to use after reaching a predefined age.
I know for a fact 401k balance follows the market, so there is no guarantee one will have the projected nest egg when the age limit is reached. Pensions perhaps predefined, BUT certainly not off limits to market variations.
The one other point I did not follow was the distinction between salaried worker moving to hourly work. If the salaried employee (most like exempt) does not like it, one certainly has the option to change to an hourly work. There is no difference between a salaried worker switching to an hourly worker and one who was initially hired as an hourly worker. The rates are market based, and companies can’t certainly have classifications of exempt, exempt but hourly, or ‘true’ hourly worker.[/quote]
sym, you weren’t the one(s) that said that pensions were “entitlements.”
Perhaps you have not been able to read thru the dozens of “public pension slapfest” threads on this forum. Yes, there are dozens, filled with ignorant posts by uninformed posters. Some of the chief complainants are those whose signature on their college diplomas are still damp (the under-35 group). If they have a Bachelor’s degree, they may have been working FT 3-12 years and if they have a masters degree, they may have been working FT 1-10 years.
The Piggs with doctorates either earned a defined benefit pension themselves, are in the process of doing so and/or have a full understanding themselves as to how defined benefit plans work 🙂
I’m not trying to put anyone down here. The way defined benefit plans are funded and calculated can be very complex and difficult for the layperson to understand.
When I was early-mid career (in whatever peon classification I held), I would never have dreamt of complaining about a pension that a worker 20-40 years older than myself earned throughout their lives! Instead, I occupied my thoughts with how I could earn one for myself.
Every generation has to “support” someone. We supported the millions of “blue-haired ladies” of the Greatest Generation and a few of the WWII Gen. Nearly all of them got their hair and sometimes their nails done every week. They were ALL on SS and the vast majority who were widowed had little more than that or no income whatsoever beyond that. Why did us boomers have to “support” them all? Because 99% of them never held a paying job, or if they did, they were “self-employed” on a farm most of their lives, their job(s) were prior to the SS Act or they did not work long enough for a benefit. By law, they were able to latch onto the work record of a current spouse, deceased spouse or ex spouse to “qualify” for SS, which most collected from age 62 forward. Why so early, you ask? Because they could! If still married to a SS recipient, they took the benefit anyway as OASDI is not based upon “need.” For the many unmarried ones, there was great need. These are the American women who were my mother’s age but mostly my grandmother’s age . . . the Greatest Gen is dwindling fast and the WWII Gen is right behind them.
Not fair. I hope I see even 1/4 of what I have contributed into the bloated “system.” And I’m likely a helluva lot closer to becoming “eligible” than most of you.
As to your comment about `managing one’s time wisely,’ most of the current civilian (and a few govm’t) hourly workforce now has the option of taking advantage of coming into work late, going home early or even working from home.
Workers in previous generations did not have the option to “manage their time wisely.” Of course, most did so while “on the clock,” to produce what was expected of them in their allotted eight hours. This didn’t get them “flextime,” allow them to come and go as they pleased or allow them to “telecommute.” Occasionally, one could earn “comp time” on their paystub (paid at the rate of hour for hour) if they came in on a Saturday for 4-8 hours of “file projects” under the direction of a supervisor, who was present. The M-F choices were either “face time” or “leave time.” IOW, any absences from the office came off the worker’s leave balances, making it impossible for many with impromptu kid or caregiver problems to ever take a vacation, because they were perpetually out of leave. “Work-life benefits” were virtually unheard of.
I think FSD was making a distinction that he/she was unfamiliar with the “hourly-worker world” (which is essentially representative of the vast majority of US workers in conformance with Federal law). FSD alluded that, as a “salaried worker,” he/she was was often at his/her employer’s “beck and call” 24/7.
Everyone has choices and can seek and accept an hourly position over a salaried position. Especially if they feel they have been taken advantage of by employer(s) in the past.
You are correct in your definition of defined benefit pensions and defined contribution retirement plans.
