Michigan Votes Forum

plans on BLOWING US AWAY... the best we can hope for now is a quick death at the hands of the criminals she has already released on us. first the inmate will 'keep an eye on our wallets' then they will 'blow us away'.

Good postings. I didn't know anybody followed this board since the timing for effect of SB 689 has passed. It seems the truth that has no place in the papers, on TV, or in state government has found it's way onto this board. While we're on the subject of truth, has anybody else heard of the state employee's answer to no early retirement bill thanks to the governor? It's called retiring in place. It seems the senior employees that would exit under such a bill have many things in common. They are: at top of their carrear ladder at top of their pay scale super high annual leave(vacation) accrual super high annual leave balance super high sick leave balance many even have their banked leave time balances still available from years ago all get 12 or 13 paid state holidays per year all belong to the expensive pre 1997 defined benefits retirement plan The governor, thru her speaking heads, has said an early-out would cost the state money instead of save it. Well OK...good enough. The senior state employees are seeing that the governor's statement comes true without an early-out. Be careful what you ask for because you might get it, and in this case it's called retiring in place. Retiring in place is based on heavy leave accrual rates, state holidays, and huge leave balances. The leave usage combined with state holidays, combined with showing up for "work" once in a while, is leveraged out into the future to accumulate more retirement credit, more annual leave accrual, more sick leave accrual, more retirement credit, and higher pay rate making their future pension checks hard for the state to swallow. And all this time they are in full pay status with full benefits too. They are taking more vacations than a retiree takes and we're footing the bill while they take our state treasure out of state to spend it. An immediate early-out would stop all this in it's tracks, but I digress. I guess the principle at work here is the senior employees feel or know the governor and legislature have no regard for them and are just returning the favor. State house and senate sessions are live on the internet at the legislature's site. If you've ever watched, you already know where the senior state employees' lack of confidence comes from. Sessions are a combination of fluff, filings, fluff, welcoming children to the chamber to watch them do nothing, fluff, and then a recess while they discuss where they're going on their next extended break in session. The people's business is rarely if ever conducted in the light of day. If this doesn't give you a feeling of complete hopelessness, I don't know what will. Retiring in place used to practiced by a very very few crappy employees the state should never have hired in the first place. Now it appears it's going to be the norm for many years to come as these senior employees put it to the state the only way that's left to them. The funny part? The governor and legislature doesn't care how much it costs due to their actions and inactions. We the taxpayer will be picking up the tab so open wide. BON APPETITE!!!!!!!!!!!!

I agree. When you refer to disrespect for state employees in Michigan, you only have to look south of the border for proof. Indiana has a higher retirement factor and a rule of 85 years of service and age to retire without penalty. Ohio has a higher retirement factor and a rule of 85 years of service and age to retire without penalty. Michigan has a lower retirement factor yielding smaller pensions plus the state employee in Michigan cannot retire at age 57 with 28 years service totaling 85 without penalty as there is no rule of 85 such as Indiana and Ohio have. There are penalties of 6% for each year shy of 60 years old unless the state employee in Michigan has 30 years service. Of the three states mentioned above, only Michigan has no rule of 85 and Ohio and Indiana have and have had such a rule for years. It only makes sense. And the Governor and Democrat controlled House in Michigan say there is nothing they can do to fix state employee retirement requirements. YEAH, RIGHT....

I hope you are not jerking our chain saying that a state of michigan employee can't retire with the 85 you spoke of. I've heard of the various state employee unions plead for a permanent 80 and out and told their members "I'm sorry, we couldn't get it for you". Why on earth would the employee unions perpetually want the state to go from 90 and out to 80 and out without ever considering 85 and out? Why would the michigan press, if any, not point this little oversite out? Why would the state, when asked for 80 and out, not say "How about 85 and out like Ohio and Indiana"? Something stinks here. Instead of asking for 85 and out, the employee unions are obviously protecting their dues base by only asking for permanent 80 and out which they know won't be approved. Meanwhile they do what they do best, collect dues, while strokin their members with the "We tried" routine. The "michigan press" would have to be looking the other way big time not to point this little scam out, so the members and general public could see what's going on. As the state never pointed this little scam out, it's apparent the state does not care about the employees that were forced into the so-called unions. All of the above would have to happen to fit your facts regarding Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, and 85 and out rules. Be advised, I'll be checking it out and will re-post on this board if you're wrong. It sounds so bizzare.

I belong to a state employees union. now you mention it all it has been any good at is collecting dues. if the facts in the previous posts check out I'll be phoning my unions office monday morning. bet I won't be alone. alot of people I work with watch the board here in hopes of an early out. what has just been posted will really get their attention.

I also am a member of a union for state employees. I called my union rep yesterday about the posting here on 3-28 called RULE OF 85 IN INDIANA & OHIO. He checked the facts and phoned me back to say those are the facts exactly. He also agreed with me we've been had. Today we're working another 3 or 4 years at the end of our careers just to fatten the union's coffers. That figures. Every union member should call their unions office Monday morning to ask what gives.

At our rare union meetings it looks like all we get is a free meal? If our union had our interest at heart instead of their wallet they could have said 'indiana and ohio have a rule of 85 do you think we should try to get that for you?' I just googled the indiana and ohio retirement sites and they truly do have a rule of 85 so their state employees can retire without penalty. If we had a rule of 85 retirement section in Michigan we wouldn't keep wishing for an early retirement bill. The sad part is we provide more and more dues so our unions to see it won't happen. Does anybody know how we go about setting up decertification votes for our unions? Please post. Thanks.

I just checked Senate Bill 689 out. I've drawn five interesting conclusions due to timing if effective 2008 instead of 2007 as introduced. The first is the November 1st effective date is the end of a pay period in 2008 and not in 2007. This would make processing an early out real cheap and easy for the state if put off until 2008. The second is there was a two percent state raise effective October 1st 2007 but NO STATE RAISE was authorized effective October 1st 2008. This would save the state money on benefit payoffs if put off until 2008. The third is the bill was introduced and passed at the Senate in 2007 but will live on thru 2008 giving the House the opportunity to act. The fourth conclusion is no legislator was up for re-election or term limited in 2007 but 3/4 of the legislature faces these prospects in 2008. SB 689 lists August 1st for sign-up necessitating passage a couple months earlier to gear up processing at Retirement Services. Saving the state money, reducing staff, and clobbering the structual deficit would be nice to campaign on ONLY IN 2008. The fifth and perhaps personal reason for legislators to support an early out occurs only in 2008. It would offer a plain cotton parachute to the staff of legislators who are unseated due to term limits or voters who have had enough of the tax increases plus smoke and mirrors our legislators have used to rescue a dying economy in our state. On SB 689 the date allowed to withdraw an early-out application is thru December 15th allowing employees of election winning legislators relief. The effective dates are between November 1st and December 31st. PERFECT...PERFECT...PERFECT. INSTEAD OF WHINING ON THIS BOARD, JUST GIVE THE LEGISLATURE A COUPLE OF MONTHS WHERE THE HOUSE PLACES 2008 STICKERS OVER 2007 ON SB 689, THE SENATE CONCURS WITH THE CHANGE, AND IT'S PRESENTED TO THE GOVERNOR WITH A VETO PROOF MAJORITY. AT THIS POINT SHE WILL CLAIM IT'S HER IDEA. So much for no early-out on my watch!!!

On the subject of early retirement, we should above all remember SB689 was passed by the Senate in August 2007 and sent to the House. Then somebody referred it to the Government Operations Committee to die a slow sure death. And who was that somebody you ask?? Well, that was Speaker Andrew Dillon. And why was SB689 not worth serious consideration in the House?? Well, that one was because Mr. Dillon's Mother Jenny said it was not to be considered. WHEN ENOUGH PEOPLE IN MICHIGAN VOTED FOR GOVERNOR JENNIFER GRANHOLM'S RE-ELECTION, I'LL BET THEY HAD NO IDEA THEY WERE VOTING HER IN AS THE HEAD OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, A LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, AS WELL. Okay...now why would the House hold out for and approve a huge income tax increase on broke taxpayers and 22% surcharge on struggling business in Michigan?? Why would the House insist on increasing year-to-year spending levels?? Why would the House not reduce the size of Michigan government with SB689 along with other obviously needed budget cuts in our time of recession?? Why was the one budget cut the House backed to unleash hoards of prisinors upon us?? Well, the reason for the above was MOTHER JENNY told Speaker Dillion that's the way it was gonna be. IT'S NOT CLEAR AT THIS POINT IF SPEAKER DILLON IS AUTHORIZED TO WIPE WITHOUT SAYING "MOTHER MAY I?". WHAT'S CLEAR IS SPEAKER DILLON HAS FORGOTTEN WHO HE IS, WHAT HE IS, WHO ELECTED HIM AS REPRESENTATIVE, WHO ELECTED HIM AS SPEAKER, AND WHAT HIS RESPONSIBILITIES MOST CERTAINLY ARE. Our Speaker was a man of respect and principle. Now, he has been turned to the dark side as Mother Jenny's puppet and speaking head. His constituents elected him to represent their interests. Speaker Dillon now represents the interests of Mother Jenny's supporters in her past elections PERIOD. His fellow Democrats in the caucus thought they had voted for Representative Dillon as Speaker to lead a Legislative Branch of the State of Michigan. Speaker Dillon now represents the interests of Mother Jenny's supporters PERIOD. Speaker Dillon operates as if he has no responsibilities except to obey Mother Jenny, and that's to the letter. WELL, AUGUST MAY PROVIDE SPEAKER DILLON'S CONSTITUENTS THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE THEIR YES MAN RIGHT OUT OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Do you recall why August is important?? It's because this select group of voters will most likely have the opportunity to recall Mr. Dillon effective upon certification of the primary vote. Also they have the opportunity to choose a new candidate for Representative that might represent them. EVERY STATE EMPLOYEE VOTING IN THIS ELECTION SHOULD REMEMBER THE RESPECT AND APPRECIATION AFFORDED THEM BY SPEAKER DILLON AND HIS MOTHER JENNY. When Speaker Dillon had to choose between the interests of taxpayers and state employees versus prison inmates and various unions' dues collection machines, how did he choose? He sided with the inmates and union dues collection. He sided with huge tax increase for taxpayers and continued imprisonment for state employees to pay high-rate union dues for another five years putting a smile on the face of Mother Jenny's union buddies. SB689 never had a chance. THOSE STATE EMPLOYEES IN SPEAKER DILLON'S DISTRICT SHOULD REMEMBER ALL OF THE ABOVE. THEY SHOULD ADVISE ALL THEIR RELATIVES AND FRIENDS A REAL REPRESENTATIVE IS NEEDED. THE RECALL AND NOMINATING VOTES MAY WELL BE CLOSE SO EVERY VOTE COUNTS. IF RECALL IS SUCCESSFUL, MAYBE SB689 WILL BECOME A REALITY RATHER THAN A JOKE. YOU ARE OUR ONLY HOPE OBI-WAN KENOBI. WE ARE ALL COUNTING ON YOU. MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU!!!!!!!!!!

Haven't checked this board in a long time as dates for the legislation SB 689 expired. I just read all the recent posts. Wow!!!! Ohio and Indiana have permanent 85 points and out without penalty? And Michigan has 90 and out if you live, plus that's with a lesser retirement multiplier than the other states. Well, thank you Legislature and Governor. Nothing you can do to fix the system to allow retirement of expensive senior state employees? Until reading the posts here, I kinda believed you. Now I don't. I confess. I'm a State employee, but I have a unique viewpoint regarding who Michigan has allowed to early retire versus who neighboring states allow to retire every day. If the info in the posts here is accurate, I'm feeling hurt. The unique viewpoint I have is injuries suffered working for the people of this State. Maybe the wussies posting here that say they are State Policemen, human services workers, corrections workers and the lot would like to trade places with me? So you think you've gotten no respect? So working with a survey crew getting level shots on the black and white line separating lanes going the same direction, the following happened. We had 10 signs out, 5 per side, but facing the same direction. Men working, survey crew ahead, do not pass, do not pass, do not pass. One of our "customers" decided this would be a delightful place to pass and with solid traffic in both lanes going 45MPH, she whipped out to pass a big truck. She center-punched me so hard the impact knocked me higher than the truck and 100 feet down the road. After being knocked 3 times head over heals I landed on the black and white line running like an Olympic sprinter as speed of the car hadn't worn off yet. Yes, I still had your 15 foot survey rod mainly because I did'nt have the $150 to replace it. After walking about 50 feet back up the line, setting the rod on the paint mark, and turning towards the gun, the instrument man growled, "You gotta go back up where you were hit, we already got that one". So I went another 100 feet and continued working the rest of the shift from 2PM until 5:30PM. Time lost: None (except for the time of the flight). So working with the same survey crew at a high elevation for Michigan, we were witnessing section corners in the middle of the state highway for upcoming construction. After popping the top of a survey marker box, I was searching for the 6 foot long 1 inch rod marking the section corner. When the huge stainless survey spoon hit it, lightning struck me in the head. My hat burned up, gloves blew into little peices, my clothes were singed, my whole body was burned, all hair was burned off, on the inside I was cooked medium-well, I was blind, and my heart had stopped. I was instantly 30 years older. Other than that, I guess I didn't have any problems other than being knelt down on the centerline of an active state highway. After a few minutes the heart began to tick somewhat, another crew member coaxed me to crawl towards the shoulder. Once I felt gravel I kept right on crawling until it felt like grass and just set down. I'm told it was 10 or 15 minutes later until sight returned enough to see the outline of the survey vehicle. I crawled over there, crawled in, and hid. Yeah I'm still ashamed of this, but was so scared at the time. The rest of the crew abandoned the steel measuring tape beside the road, jumped in the survey vehicle, and we went back to the field trailer looking for something to do that didn't have to be done in the clouds. After striking me, the lightning bolt was still so hot, the stainless spoon had melted to a 45 degree angle. Time lost: None(except for except for that necessary to get back to the vehicle) So working on a construction survey crew, we set out to cross section the largest pile of sand ever made by the local producer. And it was a monster. The idea was, the State buys the pile of sand, figures the volume of sand before and after the project, and pays for the difference. It was earliest spring and I was on the top of the pile right on the edge to give a level shot. All of a sudden I felt a disturbance in the force. I looked back over my shoulder at the fella measuring me off the base line at the top of the pile and he looked scared. The pile had broken off about 25 to 30 feet from me and I was going down. With the 15 foot survey rod, I kayaked for my life on the surface of the collapsing pile. Right third of rod broke away and I kayaked with what was left. Left third broke away, I gave the State back the middle portion, and swam the breast and every other part stroke inside the collapsing pile of sand. When everything ground to a halt, it felt like half a building was crushing me. All that stuck out was my nose, right eye, and right hand. I had ended up about 80% of the distance down the pile. It was cold as the pile had just thawed out. The crew member that had been at the top ran down to me and uncovered my pie hole. I was really glad to see him even with one eye as my nose was full of sand and couldn't breathe. He, the other crew member tried to get me out but the pile just kept collapsing. Finally two truckers who showed up to start the project had a big piece of plywood. They hammered it into the pile just above me and dug me out. Total time trapped was about an hour. My arms snapped tight to my chest and legs slammed up beneath me as the temperature had nearly frozen me. One crew member and one truck driver grabbed me like a suitcase and bounded down off the pile. We had just cleared it when there was another disurbance in the force. The rest of the pile came down and covered the spot we all just were with about 10 to 15 foot of sand. The truck driver said "Crap, I knew I'd lose my plywood". After being stuffed in the survey vehicle we hauled over to the local restaurant. I was brushed off the best they could and carried in again like a suitcase. The instrument man ordered several pots of coffee which they poured down me for about 2 hours. As we were expected back at the office at noon, the guys helped me to the vehicle and they took me home and helped me in the house. They said even though we only had a half hour lunch, they would try to stretch it to an hour and stay late at night to make it up. The crew showed up an hour later and I walked slowly to the vehicle. The instrument man said, "I'm sorry but we have to go back to the office as the project engineer has to talk to you". I thought I was fired for sure. We all went in his office and he read the riot act to us. One of our "customers" had reported that we were at the restaurant for 2 hours. Instrument man got a written reprimand and us other two crewmen got a verbal reprimand. We had went out early that morning before starting time, completely cross sectioned the sand pile (as the pile collapsed on the last shot which the instrumentman had just gotten), darned near all been killed, crewman dug out and warmed up by noon plus the project had started at 10 o'clock. Somehow the Project Engineer and "customers" thought the State had been screwed. Oh well!! I was not charged $150 for the survey rod as the State still had it. The pieces were in that pile somewheres. Lost time: None(except for that necessary for employee extraction and warming) Okay. That's three of em. There were two others that should of for sure killed me too, but I just hate to lose. Anybody that wants to try the three trials by fire above and can successfully do so, we'll switch jobs. Please post on this board. If not successful, don't bother posting. With 85 points I can't retire without penalty so maybe just a transfer out would be good enough. SB689 shouldn't be dead either, but it is. The Legislature and Governor would rather release the inmates to prey upon us versus retire senior employees to save budget money. Too bad. I read in one of the previous posts here that the last early out in December of 2002 was 65 points and out but only for Governor's, Legislator's, and Judge's employees. OH MY!!! THEY MUST HAVE HAD A REALLY VICIOUS PAPER CUT I SUPPOSE!!!!!!!!!

"the impact knocked me higher than the truck and 100 feet down the road" "After walking about 50 feet back up the line," "and continued working the rest of the shift from 2PM until 5:30PM. Time lost: None (except for the time of the flight)." "lightning struck me in the head. My hat burned up, gloves blew into little peices, my clothes were singed, my whole body was burned, all hair was burned off, on the inside I was cooked medium-well, I was blind, and my heart had stopped. I was instantly 30 years older. Other than that, I guess I didn't have any problems other than being knelt down on the centerline of an active state highway. After a few minutes the heart began to tick somewhat, another crew member coaxed me to crawl towards the shoulder." I thought I was reading the National Enquirer. These kind of lies and garbage is what makes folks have such a high opinion of state employees. You have suckled at the public teat so long you don't have any idea of reality. Please seek help, and get back to work.

"We had went out early that morning before starting time" State workers starting early???? I have a bridge to sell you.

I can't believe you are still alive. I saw the lightning strik. It was hard to believe. There was no wind, no rain, no storm nothing. If you remember we was high up near the base of the clouds when you got zapped. None of us could believe you survived. When you got hit by the car I was farther up the highway about 5 or six blocks with the surveyor. This young gal stopped crien her heart out claiming she had just killed a surveyor. The guys later said you used the rod to vault the car slammed the feet down as it passed under. You sure wrecked her car. her top air intakes and windshield wipers were broke all to heck. The surveyor radioed to your crew who said youd been hit but were still working. To look at the car he couldn't believe it. I couldnt believe it. He bet the lead worker $10 the girl would file a claim for damage to her car but she never did. Only bet he ever lost. That was a construction crew with the sand pile after a co-op student came in early and forced you off our crew. I never figureed that one out. But we have a mutual accuaintence that was on your crew. He told me a third of the hill just broke off and disapeaered down the slope. He ran round back of the hill on the build road and there was this eye and hand just stickin out of the sand about 50 feet from the bottom. he claimed it was a one in a million survival and couldn't believe you all got the reprimand. Good to see your still alive and still working for the state to. At least we get our monies worth out of somebody there. I'm retired now but glad to know somebody there still works for a living. I know you gotta be jsut 2 or three years from 60 so just do your work and the time will fly by to where the penaltys end. Hang in there and the best to you.

Early retirement and supplemental pensions would be an option for some workers in the Department of Human Service's Bureau of Juvenile Justice under legislation considered by the House Labor Committee on Tuesday. The legislation is intended to offset a budget decision made in the current fiscal year that resulted in the closure 80 medium security beds and 131 workers laid off at the W.J. Maxey Boys Training School. Money from those savings was then spent on adding 150 field staff positions within DHS, as well as adding 138 foster care and 138 child welfare positions. HB 5944 and HB 5966 would apply to bureau employees laid off or displaced on or after October 1, 2007 and on or before September 30, 2008. Displaced workers would be considered those active employees who have to move from their assignment location due to layoffs, workforce reductions or facility closures. Those people would be offered two options for early out: if the person's age and service years are equal to or more than 70 years they could receive a retirement based on number of years worked multiplied by 1.5 percent of their average salary or if a person's age and service years are equal to or more than 75 years they could receive a retirement allowance based on a multiplier of 1.75 percent. The legislation also would designate bureau employees after October 1, 2007 as "covered positions" under the State Employees Retirement Act. Currently, that designation is given to Department of Corrections employees. The bill would then make bureau employees with the last three years of their position designated as "covered" eligible for supplemental pension at age 51 if they had 25 years of service, or at age 56 if they had worked for 10 years. An official with the local AFSCME said the bills could affect approximately 50 employees at Maxey. The bill sponsors, Rep. Shanelle Jackson (D-Detroit) and Rep. Paul Opsommer (R-DeWitt), said the legislation is intended to help those who have "served the state diligently," who have been affected by the budget cut, and who because of the physical nature of the job need to have the same benefits as those state employees who work with prisoners. The AFL-CIO, Michigan Association of Government Employees, AFSCME and Michigan State Employees Association support the legislation. Nick Ciarimitaro, legislation and public policy director for AFSCME Council 25, said his group has opposed other early out proposals for state employees because of the strain created on the remaining workforce, but in the Maxey case, the workforce reduction already has been mandated. He said many employees with 20 or more years of service are being lost or have to go through significant retraining because of the budgetary decision (which the group had opposed). Mr. Ciarimitaro added that while many jobs do produce stress, the bureau jobs are much more difficult because the facility is housing more violent offenders. But Rep. Lorence Wenke (R-Richland) repeatedly challenged proponents of the bills that most private sector employees who lose their jobs aren't offered these types of benefits and the cost for doing so would be paid for by business and individual taxpayers. Mr. Opsommer countered that as companies in the private sector have downsized, they have offered buyouts, particularly for Michigan's own Big Three automakers. "Is everybody (getting buyouts)? No. Can we make it better for everybody? No. I wish we could," he said. And Todd Tennis, representing the Michigan State Employees Association, said lawmakers shouldn't argue for the reduction in worker benefits simply because workers in other sectors aren't receiving them. "Let's save the ones we can," Ms. Jackson said. Mr. Tennis added that the legislation boils down to allowing some workers to retire before 80 years of age and years of service without penalty. He said that will get older workers off the rolls and bring in new people who will be paid less and will be under the defined contribution retirement plan, not the pension system. Rep. Rick Jones (R-Grand Ledge) said he supports the legislation, but wished bills providing an early out program for all state employees would be acted on as well. The committee did not take a vote on the bills as HB 5966 actually needs to be formally re-referred from the House Retiree Health Care Reforms Committee. The panel is expected to take further testimony next week.

Won't this bill help cut state spending for state employees? What is holding up this bill in the House? Won't this bill also create jobs that people desperately need? The state needs to start cutting spending NOW. What are they waiting for?

It would be an excellent way reduce the number of higher paid employees on an older retirement plan that costs the state more money. It is also a way to create jobs that MI desparately needs for our citizens. The auto plants have done this for years. The fear of our governor's wrath on this subject needs to be adressed. She has made very vocal statements in opposition to any early out bills. Lets face it, when she leaves, she will be taking her check and her husband's contracts and moving on so why can't we?

"It is also a way to create jobs that MI desparately needs for our citizens. The auto plants have done this for years." The auto companies are private, money EARNING businesses. The government is a parasite, it CREATES NOTHING, no jobs, no products, no money. The only way it can "create jobs" is if it steals money from the private sector and their workers.

It is also a way to create jobs that MI desparately needs for our citizens. The auto plants have done this for years." The auto companies are private, money EARNING businesses. The government is a parasite, it CREATES NOTHING, no jobs, no products, no money. The only way it can "create jobs" is if it steals money from the private sector and their workers. PUBLIC or PRIVATE - Cutting spending and saving money is the same thing. The difference is the revenue which the government can simply raise taxes for more money. Which is shameful without first cutting spending. Replacing senior employees with younger employees saves alot of money and also helps workforce development for the future. Larger organizations(public or private) such as GM,Ford,schools,state gov't have early-out retirement to save money.

that this will save money? Do you really believe that you will ever see any of it back? Do you really believe that they won't just hire 3 more slugs for everyone they send off to the golf course with OUR money? Do you really believe that this isn't just another plan to fill the pockets of government workers? Show me where they will have a permanent head count reduction after this and I will be behind you all the way.

"Do you believe that this will save money? Do you really believe that you will ever see any of it back? Do you really believe that they won't just hire 3 more slugs for everyone they send off to the golf course with OUR money? Do you really believe that this isn't just another plan to fill the pockets of government workers? Show me where they will have a permanent head count reduction after this and I will be behind you all the way." If they replace at 1:4 ratio,the annual savings is $192 million. Replacing 2 out of 4 saves $125.6 million. Higher paid senior employees are replaced with cheaper starting salary new employees.

when they do the normal and replace 4 with 7 ?????

But What Happens` [by Anonymous Citizen on June 5, 2008] about 2007 Senate Bill 689 (State employment early retirement ) when they do the normal and replace 4 with 7 ????? Replacing 4 with 7 means more taxes.

My department has not replaced anyone in a couple of years, and we could cut more, but it would slow down our services. I have a graduate degree. I worked for about 1/3 what I would have made in private practice, a trade off that I was willing to make because I will receive a $20,000 pension after 25 years with the state. If I had it to do all over again, I would have stayed in the private sector where, even if I was not appreciated, at least I would have been well paid. Now, 59 with 25 years, I would like to retire - no incentives necessary -- but the silly system is making me wait until I am 60, even though I know a lot of hungry kids would love to have my job. Come on, representatives, move on this bill! Even if some departments replace 4 out of 4 -- and I am pretty sure they will not -- the state would save money.

All about you. And if you were willing to take a 66% pay cut for 25 freakin years to suckle at the public teat you don't need to say anything else. That says all anyone needs to know about gubmint employees.

Gosh, I guess you're right. I sure wish I were as smart and ambitious as you. I graduated at the top of my class, but unfortunately I was part of the "ask what you can do for your country" generation and I fell like a sucker for the idea that public service was noble, and I truly thought I provided a necessary service. Like many government workers, I worked much harder, and for much less, than I would have in private practice. But as you've shown, it was definitely a waste of time and a mistake to serve the people for so long.

How to balance a $400-500 million budget deficit. 1) Raise taxes like last year to cover the difference. 2) Don't cut spending 3) Don't restructure gov't by reducing employees where they aren't needed. 4) Don't replace senior high-salaried employees with cheaper entry-level staff. 5) Don't create thousands of entry-level career jobs for the unemployed. Just do the same as always. Raise taxes and don't try to steamline state government. Too much work,it's alot easier to raise new revenue. GOOD LUCK!

I won't forget that the house refused to pass - or even consider -- this bill, they just rubber stamped Jen's opinion that state govt should remain supersized. Maybe we should vote against ANY house incumbent who's up this fall -- it's the only way to get a message across! I sure wish we had done that in the last election!

Will Generous Motors and Chrysler go bankrupt??? - LET'S WAIT AND SEE, so sayeth our Legislature and Governor. Will the unemloyment fund be empty within about 8 months??? - LET'S WAIT AND SEE, so sayeth our Legislature and Governor. Will State revenues drop off in sympathy with the weak state and national economies??? - LET'S WAIT AND SEE, so sayeth our Legislature and Governor. Will revenues accelerate on the downside as everyone's operating capital is sucked out of the Michigan economy due to last years record breaking tax increase??? - LET'S WAIT AND SEE, so sayeth our Legislature and Governor. Will the ballot initiative gain traction with the Michigan public due to Legislature's inability to effect reduction in size of State government? - LET'S WAIT AND SEE, so sayeth the Legislature and Governor. Will the inability to heat our homes in the coming winter, inability to afford the drive to work, and negative equity in our homes force massive bankruptcies in the Michigan populace? - LET'S WAIT AND SEE, - so sayeth the Legislature and Governor. Will poor example set by State government lack of downsizing confuse the heck out of our cities and counties as to what to do as property taxes received and revenue sharing drop off? LET'S WAIT AND SEE, - so sayeth the Legislature and Governor. Will refusal to reduce State staffing result in general layoff of least senior State employees costing massive unemployment compensation, mass confusion and further costs of bumping, rebumping, and bumping again and again? LET'S WAIT AND SEE, - so sayeth the Legislature and Governor. After above layoffs effected, will most senior, most expensive, and most set in their ways State employees still be on the State payroll? - LET'S WAIT AND SEE, - so sayeth the Legislature and Governor. Six months from now, would have a retirement bill with a small incentive for the most senior State employees to retire leaving the cheapest and most productive employees in place been a good idea? WHO THE HECK CARES, sayeth the half of the Legislature voted out of office for incompetence. GEE I DUNNO, sayeth the "new" Legislature and Governor, as they scratch their various parts and look confused. Without reigning in out of control State spending, who'll be the last one leaving the state to turn out the lights? - WHERE'D EVERYBODY GO?? - sayeth the "new" Legislature and Governor, as they continue to scratch their various parts. THERE WILL BE NO RETIREMENT BILL SUCH AS SB 689 AS IT MAKES SENSE, but as a side note, DON'T YOU JUST LOVE PAYING FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE WHILE OUR STATE GOES DOWN THE TUBES? When it comes to State taxes, you always get MORE WITH LESS money available to pay them. Hey, where's the Michigan Press as all this crap takes place??? S..L...E....E.....P......I.......G........ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

You idiots. All of you should go. In the private sector people are losing their jobs and there are NO more jobs to be had. I have many friends (at least 10) and not all at the same company who havve lost their jobs this year alone. And they lose their access to retirement healthcare and everything else -- but you vote for an increase in pension benefits. What do we get??? Higher Tax bills Sucky schools Lousy teachers Higher Tax bills A chance to pay higher utility rates thanks to your stupid maneuver to end state competition ...unless we are lucky enough to move out of this deplorable state. I'm ashamed to be from here! What do you get? Perks, free gas, lots of vacation time....freebies offered under the table from those who lobby you for favored votes... What do we get. NOTHING but less money in our pockets. You disgust me.

This bill would retire senior state employees saving the state millions of dollars (read the bill analysis). 1) Steamline and reform state government. Reduce employees and cut budget (maybe allowing to lower tax hikes?). 2) Create thousands of entry-level jobs with the state. Would creating more entry-level jobs be bad for our state?

1) Steamline and reform state government. Reduce employees and cut budget (maybe allowing to lower tax hikes?). You can't be serious. When have you seen the budget cut here in the socialist utopia we call michiganistan? They will find more boondoggles for this money and purchase more votes with what's left over. 2) Create thousands of entry-level jobs with the state. Would creating more entry-level jobs be bad for our state? This is exactly the opposite of what we need. if you want to cut the number of employees then that is great. It sounds like you are using this as another make work project for more parasites to feed at the public teat. I can see that the public indoctrination center that you attended did it's job well.

You say "ask what you can do for your country" generation" I Say "Bull Puckey" You say "I worked much harder, and for much less, than I would have in private practice." I Say " Horse &%#$@ You can't really believe all this rot. If you do then how in the world did you "graduate at the top of my class"? You need to seek help for these delusions. Good Luck

Nobody seems to be interested in cutting spending. So, enjoy the alternative. Keep paying more taxes and stop complaining or get busy exploring ways to cut.

Yeah, you're right. Nobody in power seems to be interested in cutting spending. Maybe we can change this in November. The House doesn't give a hoot about the people of the state or the people's interests. Half the members are Michigan Representatives, most of which are Republicans. The other half are just Representatives who think their oath of office says to support the Governors biases and every screwball idea she comes up with. Will this or any other retirement bill be approved? Well, the Governor says "Not at this time". You see, it would reduce the dues collection on state employees forced upon them years ago by the State. It isn't the number of state employees paying that matters so much. The unions make their money ripping a state employee for a PERCENTAGE of their gross paycheck. The more the taxpayers pay for that employee's efforts, the more the union makes. If the Legislature was to early-out the expensive employees and replace a few of them with those costing half as much, it would reduce thier dues collection. And all this at a time when there is an election to be bought. If the unions are to purchase vicious attack ads, it would be in their interest to do it with recycled taxpayers money. The Governor apparently likes it that way and has told half the House they do too. Obviously, there can be no retirement bill on the Governor's "watch" no matter how far the Michigan economy falls in the crapper, so as you say, enjoy the alternative. Keep paying more taxes and stop complaining or get busy exploring ways to cut. Maybe you could learn how to vote, other than pulling one lever or voting for the best looking candidate. Brains count. We need some in Lansing.

This comes as a surprise to me. No one announced this as I would have taken advantage of this retirement as a long time state employee.

There's a new early-out bill a brewin. Check out HB 6379 on the Michigan Legislature site. It's a little wierd as the dates initally say 2008, but then the detail refers to 2009. Also it says all requirements must be met, but "B" requires you to be a city or county employee and "C" requires you to be a state employee. I guess only those with a split personality need apply. Anyways, it looks like a bill thrown together in a hurry as there are no co-sponsers in addition to the above gaffs. It looks like if the little problems above are fixed, HB 6379 intends this year to early retire state employees and certain court employees, requires 80 points with no age requirement, lets you sign up from August thru October, and lets you leave November 1st thru the end of the year. Sick leave balances are to be spread over 60 months, but at least you can have your annual leave balance in lump sum upon retirement. JUST WHAT THE DOCTOR ORDERED!!!!!!

I sure hope you're right Dr. D. I wish they'd post an analysis. I'm a little afraid that some other govt-ish groups are 'state employees' for the purposes of retirement even though they don't technically work for the state. Someone suggested to me that this might be a bill written for a specific set of people, though I'm darned if I know who. But there's time for them to fix it and save some money if they don't let this one die, too.

Recently received from the Governors Office: "Thank you for contacting Governor Granholm to share your suggestion to institute an early out retirement incentive to state employees as a way of reducing state funding and stimulating job growth. The Governor is always pleased to hear from fellow state employees on how we might make public service with the State of Michigan a great place to work. I will be sure to share your thoughts with the Governor so she may keep them in mind as she continues to address state employee issues or should legislation on this issue be presented to her for signature. Again, thank you for contacting our office on this important issue." Issue Specialist Constituent Services Division Office of Jennifer M. Granholm

There was news this week of the Legislature discussing early-out legislation. "Rep. Rick Jones (R-Grand Ledge) said in the Maxey case, workers are dealing with violent offenders and he understood the need for a carve-out. But he urged the committee to not continue that pattern and instead approve a bill that provides an early out option for all state employees. He said that would allow older employees who want to leave the ability to do so while at the same time hiring younger employees and keeping that talent in Michigan. The idea of an early out for all state employees has been kicked around for some time, particularly with the state in a budget crunch. But no legislation has made it to Governor Jennifer Granholm's desk. The governor does not support an early out program for all state employees because of the lingering brain drain effects the last early out program had." Question: Who keeps saying the Governor does not support an early out program because of a brain drain perception? 1) it's been over 6 years since the last early-out. Certainly, one would hope, that any necessary positions would have been filled by now. 2) This is a natural order of workforce development. People retire and then you replace them, if necessary. 3) Has the Governor considered the "brain drain" that happens to an employee after over 30 years of service? Morale, ambition, enthusiasm, career motivated - these are all typical declining factors that should be considered. 4) Only a fraction of the state workforce would be able to retire. The remaining "brains" should be able to educate the new highly educated, highly qualified and extremely motivated replacement employees. 5) These senior employees will have to be replaced sooner or later, so why would we wait? There is a large and growing state population searching for long-term career employment. Take advantage of the large hiring pool and give some of them a job. Consider the following questions with replacing a senior state employee with a new state employee. 1) Would this be considerably cheaper? (Might not need to fill the vacating possibly obsolete position (reorganization?), lowered salary, lower pension costs, possibly lowered health care). We need to save anyway possible. If not for the current budget, then certainly for the rainy day fund. 2) Would the new employee have newer 21st century education training and skills? 3) Would the new employee be more career-driven? 4) Would the new employee have more ambition, enthusiasm, morale? Please pass these ideas to the Governor, if possible. I was hoping for more action from this office, since most early-outs have resulted from an executive order from the Governor. At least, if the Governor is for early-out, then send a message to the Legislature to get it done.

Although the government is doing the best they could to improve the retirement bill, a recent Gallup poll revealed that most people aren't confident about retirement and a lot of retirees aren't either.  There's no cash advance loan big enough to fix Social Security at present, and you can't depend on a quick payday loan to securely be able to enter into retirement. Retirement is something we all should have on our minds. It may be an early retirement or you reached the maximum age for working people. However,  the old model of retirement is on the way out, as hardly any companies offer pensions and those not about to retire in the next ten years won't be able to depend on Social Security realistically.