Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on April 5, 2007, to revise the law that allows retired teachers to return to work in certain school districts or in certain academic subjects where there is deemed to be a teacher shortage, and not have their pension benefits reduced. In other words, a "retired" teacher may simultaneously collect both a pension check and a paycheck for working. Under current law, the a “retired” teacher already collecting a pension can also collect a salary for up to six years. The bill would extend this to eight years

The vote was 105 in favor, 1 opposed and 4 not voting

(House Roll Call 527 at House Journal 58)

Click here to view bill details.

Teachers in MI almost have it as good as the US Congress! Let's rob Peter some more to pay Paul, i.e. "retired" teachers.

Let's give them the same 'benefit' as our Federal simple servants. They do the same thing. Gee, I love these unions. Why didn't I think of that?

new graduate teachers from getting jobs. This double dipping should not be allowed unless it can be proven that no qualified teachers are available to replace the "retired" teacher. Also, does the additional time add to the pension the teacher is already getting? IOW, pension + salary+ pension increase due to increased service time used in pension calculation? And how do the health benefits, sick leave etc figure into the calculation. Will they be subcontractors with no benefits-other than those earned via retirement- or will they recieve sick pay, Holiday pay,etc.

Another Democrat sponsored give-away bill to their faihful supporters.

of new teachers starting out. The colleges are turning out usefull idiots by the thousands and lots of them are the kind of slackers that want to indoctrinate kids instead of getting real jobs. There will never be a shortage of slackers that want to line up at the public trough to get a piece of the largest make work program in history.

This bill helps to put some -=- but only some -- retired public school teachers on an even footing with private sector retirees, who collect full pensions and are not penalized economically for going back to work in their old occupation.

When will it end? The NEA and MEA control the politicians with money. Contact your local school. Oh, I forgot, they are on Summer vacation. Just in time for you to pay your summer property taxes, which goes to you know where.

Look at all the districts who are laying off teachers.

Where in the heck is our governor??? When is she going to do something {anything} Who in the hell voted for this clown???

v

"This bill helps to put some -=- but only some -- retired public school teachers on an even footing with private sector retirees," If you wanted to be in the private sector you should have went. I would gladly trade my private sector retirement for your taxpayer subsidized retirement. You seem to like the money part but not the rules part. You folks are pathetic.

I do work in the private sector, and have done so for 52 years. I do not, and never have envied or resented public employees' work conditions, pay or retirement benefits. If some retired teachers have knowledge in areas in which there is a shortage of qualified teachers, they should be permitted to go back to work as contractors without having to give up their pension benefits. That's the free market at work, remember? The only understandable opposition to bringing teachers out of retirement would be from the unions, which have an obvious motive for it.

When is she going to quit???

'Where in the heck is our governor???' She's in Detroit schmoozing with Conyers and Kwame.

anyone who is not 55 or older--especially in MI--given the current youth flight from the state. Also, in other states where similar legislation has been enacted(because there is a GENUINE teacher shortage), several "retirees" retire midyear so they can come back with two checks. Is there any language about step pay? In some states they stipulate that the "retiree" must come back at step zero. What ABOUT seniority? What about retirement draining? Would the "retiree" lose retirement healthcare while the district resumes the healthcare costs?

would entail sign on bonuses for new teachers with longevity pay at five or 10 years.

Someone posted: “A better solution would entail sign on bonuses for new teachers with longevity pay at five or 10 years.” As far as I know, signing bonuses and longevity pay are contractual issues to be negotiated and settled by local school districts and their teachers’ unions. They are not matters impeded by state law. My school district does, in fact, offer teacher longevity pay. It does not offer signing bonuses. (How do I know? The contract is a matter of public record.) On the other hand, skilled teachers (and administrators) who retire and then return to work have some limitations placed by law on the total compensation they can receive. According to the Mackinac Center’s synopsis of this bill, “Under current law, the a ‘retired’ teacher already collecting a pension can also collect a salary for up to six years. The bill would extend this to eight years.” The two year extension is a modest benefit for teachers who wish to and can return to work. Many private sector employees retire, then turn right around and go back to work doing the same job from which they retired, as contract workers. They are allowed to collect both their pensions and new paychecks, without State-imposed restriction. That is the free market in operation. It seems the only real opposition to legislation like this would likely come from unionized teachers’ and their unions, which have an obvious interest in doing so. Interestingly, though, the unions do not oppose this bill. Taxpayers, who foot the bill for public education should applaud legislation that abets the cause of placing qualified teachers in classrooms and administrators in their jobs by the most efficient and economical means. This bill is one of them. The further fact that this basic law was first enacted in 1999, and since has been extended twice. It evidently is a legislation that actually is working constructively for its intended purpose.