Emanuel Says He Favors Reduced Pensions for Current Workers and New Hires
By DAN MIHALOPOULOS
Published: January 8, 2011
Although Mr. Emanuel has not yet publicly detailed his plan to confront the city’s perennial budget deficits and the severely underfinanced employee pension funds, he told union officials in a private meeting on Dec. 15 that he thought it could be necessary to cut the pensions of all employees, said people who attended the meeting.
Mr. Emanuel made the comments while he was being interviewed by leaders of the Chicago Federation of Labor. That umbrella group for 300 unions has not yet endorsed any of the candidates who will be running in the Feb. 22 election to succeed Mayor Richard M. Daley, who is retiring.
“The sticking issue for all of us is the pension issue,” said a labor activist who attended the meeting with Mr. Emanuel. “I can’t tell my members we are going to support a guy who is going to cut your pensions.”
The labor leader and others who attended the meeting said they did not want to be identified for fear that Mr. Emanuel would retaliate if he were elected.
Mr. Emanuel plans to disclose his position on city finances in a speech sometime in February, said Ben LaBolt, his spokesman. Told of the union officials’ accounts of the endorsement session, Mr. LaBolt said, “Rahm told the truth about the financial conditions of the pension system and the crisis that it faces.”
In a statement, Mr. LaBolt added that Mr. Emanuel believed “fundamental reform” was necessary to ensure that workers would receive pension benefits when they retire.
“Rahm knows — and Chicagoans understand — that the pension system as currently constructed is not an honest system,” Mr. LaBolt said. “It’s not fair for taxpayers, and it’s not fair for city workers.”
Public employees’ retirement funds have been hit hard not only by the weak economy but also by early-retirement offers, wage increases and the Chicago Public Schools’ partial “pension holiday,” which has allowed the district to reduce its pension contributions.
A new state law will require Chicago and other cities in Illinois to contribute more money toward pensions for police officers and firefighters. Mr. Daley strenuously objected to that change, warning that it would result in the biggest property tax increase in Chicago’s history.
State lawmakers also approved changes last year that limit pension benefits and raise the retirement age for new public employees, but that legislation did not affect workers already on the payroll.
The mayoral candidates Miguel del Valle, Carol Moseley Braun and Gery Chico have said they favor a two-tier pension system with reduced benefits only for new hires.
“I just don’t think it’s right for current employees contracted under certain terms to be told, ‘No, that’s not going to happen,’ ” said Mr. del Valle, the city clerk, adding that he believes doing so would violate the State Constitution.
Has the FOP endorsed a candidate yet? When do they do that?
ReplyDeleteNONE of the mayoral candidates, no matter what they say today will look out for your pension when it soon comes down to taxpayer vs. police. The taxpayers= shitload of votes.
ReplyDeleteThe police= handful of votes.
They will do only what they are forced/pressured to do and that can only come from our VOICE. And who is our voice SUPPOSED to be? The FOP. Many years ago I dropped a post at Second City Cop trying to talk SCC into unmasking and running for FOP office but it's simply not his thing. I take heart this election because I have read Mike Shields platform and I agree with most of it. Most important, he understands that PENSION is the highest priority and he is outlining specifics, not the vague bullshit we usually are offered. The reason I believe he will honor his promises is his past performance. He has put his money where his mouth is by voting to open the pension books to the Inspector General, whistle-blowing Huberman (insert your own joke here) and calling out Shortshank's HACK S. Neely, the City Treasurer for pay-to-play that led to Shortshank's NEPHEW bilking our pension. Mike isn't perfect but that took gotta-push-'em-in-a-wheelbarrow size STONES and SMARTS that are sorely needed in this Daley-created Ragnorak we are enduring.
I am voting for Mike Shields. But know this, Mike: You will be held accountable for your promises. Don't let us down.
Hey Schickegroover -
ReplyDeleteMikes team hasnt made "promises" per say...anyone that makes a promise guaranteeing results is a fool. And Mike and his Team aren't fools. I specifically heard one of his guys say something to the effect of 'we cant PROMISE you results, but we can promise you that we'll bust our asses and make every attempt and effort to give 110% effort towards the goals deemed necessary by the majority of the membership".
I know alot of the guys on his ticket and I can say without equivocation that theres a ton of talent there. Glen P. I believe has the most time out of that group, but thats good because we need younger, fresher ideas. The current FOP is stuck in the 80s and that thinking isnt gonna work in todays union.
That being said, SHIELDS AND TEAM ARE GETTING MY VOTE and for the same reasoning that you put forward. And everyone of my friends and family on the job feels the same way.
Go get 'em guys!!!
The FOP has yet to endorse a candidate. This latest interview by Emanuel only underscores the necessity and urgency of a strong FOP.
ReplyDeleteMy actions in the past have show that I'm ready and willing to stand up and fight for what I believe in, and with a talented team behind me, I know we can make the FOP a voice that counts and will be heard.