4/24/09

If Defined Benefits Are Taken Away, Will They Come To Work Here?

I'm calling it pension envy because you see articles pop up everywhere about BOS's crying over pension "problems" in down economies and police & fire personnel taking unanswered hits. What bothers me a lot is that locally, I don't see many (SBPD being the exception) local POA's or DSA's doing a public education blitz.

IMHO, an honest and well-crafted campaign with a coordinated team and spokespersons, would go a long way into helping the public understand just how dangerous your job is, how shift work and the physical and mental strains of police work shorten your lifespan by decades.

Nothing is really routine in police work. Recent law enforcement deaths or officers being forced to take a life in defense of public safety, both locally and statewide, shows just how a simple call for service or initiated contact can turn into life or death decisions being made in the blink of an eye. There's the four Oakland officers who were gunned down beginning with a simple vehicle infraction stop, the local area CHP officer paralyzed for life after being run over on the side of the road by a DUI driver, SBSO's own deputy killed by a DUI driver, the Goleta Post Office massacre, deadly carjackings ending in police shootouts, violence at Fiesta, felonious attacks on peace officers, deadly juvenile gangs, deadly domestic violence, and suicide-by-cop ordeals. These are just a few examples of what has gone on in recent memory and I'm not even taking into consideration everything Santa Barbara and Santa Maria police has dealt with in murder/peace officer shootings. There's more examples out there too that I've forgotten. And I'm not even getting into the firefighters who battle massive wild land fires here and have saved countless homes and lives.

So the question is this: If the BOS takes away the defined pension benefits for SAFETY members - can SBSO attract well qualified future hires?

I honestly think the answer is a big NO. I mean, with the cost of living in this area combined with the inherent dangers of police work, who'd WANT to come here for lower wages and lower pensions?

Somebody in those POA's and DSA's needs to step up to the plate and explain to the public that lower wages, benefits and pensions will pretty much guarantee high caliber and quality law enforcement candidates will go elsewhere to work. And SB County sheriff's department will turn right back into a training ground for other agencies at taxpayers expense and/or scraping the bottom of the barrel for the rejected leftovers.

The taxpayers deserve to be protected from harm by the best of the best. To achieve and retain the "best of the best" costs money, however a highly qualified deputy is worth their weight in gold if you have to dial 911 in dire circumstances. Hint: see the above examples and think "there but for the grace of God go I."


Santa Maria Times Letter: The nightmare of pensions
"...Pension benefit reserves are basically insolvent. Retirements, especially in the fire and police departments, in their 50s at virtually full pay has exasperated the debt.

These same retirees did not even contribute to their retirement, their union steamrolled over our elected officials, so we paid for them.

Our local and state problems are worse than Social Security. We can’t print more money.

What needs to be done as a first step is to quickly change the retirement age to 55, and reduce the retirement computation to 2 percent a year...."

Lompoc Record Letter: Advice for a very sick friend
"...Revisit the defined-benefit retirement program, which must be replenished by sizable taxpayer dollars periodically when revenues fail to meet required funding.

Additionally, reduce the percentage amounts a retired person would receive, which could almost equal the amount of salary and benefits they earned while on their job. This should more closely compare with what the private sector offers.

Admittedly, you can't change those who were given assurances when hired, but all new staff members hired could be at a revised and less-costly pension benefit...."

0 comments: