2005 Senate Bill 635: 401k type pension for new school employees

Legislation watch

Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next

Introduced by Sen. Wayne Kuipers (R) on June 22, 2005, to no longer provide the traditional “defined benefit” pension system for new public school employees, and replace it with a “defined contribution” plan (401k type plan) that is essentially the same as what is now offered to state employees. Also, to establish a graduated post-retirement health care benefits system for new school employees, in which full benefits would go to those with 30 years of service, and proportionately smaller benefits to those with fewer years. The bill would not apply to current school employees, who would continue with their current retirement systems.
- Referred to the Senate Education Committee on June 22, 2005.

Most Recent Comments

Add Comment

1) School employees get $78,000 with bennies by Anonymous Citizen on June 28, 2005
That's No. 1 highest in the nation. Average annual salary and benefits combined for Michigan school employees is $78,000, according to a recent article in Reason magazine.
Is it just coincidence that we have the highest unemployment, are the only state losing jobs, and by the way, have public schools that are not noticably any less mediocre than states which pay much less?
Reply

Line

2) It's about time! by Anonymous Citizen on June 28, 2005
There are millions of taxpayers like myself that have to pay for their own health insurance, and have no pensions. Yet we are forced to pay for all government employee's benefits. Teachers by far have the best coverage.
This has to stop! Let them pay out of their own pocket.
Reply

Line

3) This is needed by Anonymous Citizen on June 28, 2005
The 401K plans are what most private employers are going to. Taxpayers can't afford to support a special class of people (Government employees) whose benefits are far above the rest.
Where government employment used to be considered the employer of last resort, it is now considered the first choice because they are the only ones who have such generous benefits. As a matter of fact, in some cases the employeees pay nothing toward the benefit plans.

They need to adjust as the rest of us have, or are going to. There is nothing wrong with a 401K plan. It's just that it requires sacrifice and effort, which is something some people are not willing to contribute.
Sure, there is some risk, but why should government employees be exempt?
Reply

Line

View Full Conversation