Wylde pushes Silver, Skelos on pension reform




Kathryn Wylde

President & CEO

  1. mitch says:

    At least you know right up front that Silver is opposed because he has never cared about taxpayers. But don’t expect much from that GOP Long Island crowd either. They seem to like high property taxes.

  2. Michael Kink says:

    Totally makes sense — Kathy Wylde wants workers to pay for all the pension fund losses caused by the big banks and hedge funds that back the Partnership for New York City. She’s against accountability and against amending the Martin Act to prosecute Wall Street fraud that hurt our pension funds. Wall Street is the most special of the special interests. Let’s see if the Legislature stands up for the 1%.

  3. Bob says:

    The various business interests sure want this pension “reform” to happen.

    Look how there’s been such a coordinated, vigorous push from supporters. What are the stakes here? For Cuomo, he can garner continued campaign contributions and political support from his business patrons as he prepares for his political future. For business and industry in NYS, they get to diminish the influence of unions in labor-management issues. And, as a bonus, with public employee compensation even further reduced than it already has been, they are in a better position to depress salary and benefits for their own private sector employees.

    Looks like a win for everyone except the middle class.

  4. Walt says:

    What she really meant was they (private business) do not give a decent pension to its rank & file workers so you must not give it to state workers or we will be forced to. She also meant to say that private workers can do the job of state workers (but neglected to say at what cost). AS a state worker in a professional title, I’ve recently seen three jobs advertised where I’m more than qulified that offer minimum salaries twice what I am now making. Everyone who took state jobs knew they were being underpaid in salary, we took the jobs because the health care and pension benefits made up that salary difference. You taxpyers bitch and moan but ou can’t have it both ways, You can pay me now or pay me later! Lowering my health benfits and pension will require at least a 40% increase in salary. But Cuomo’s new civil service plan to get a more diverse workforce is willing to sacrfice current professional standards in future hiring. Follow Cuomo’s path and the state workforce will be dumbed down and not able to perform required functions in the future. Maybe this is all part of Adolph Cuomo’s master plan, lets blame the state workers, lets fire them all and privatize the entire workforce!

  5. Upstate says:

    How about they have NYC public employees under Tier 5, since Patterson did not require them to adopt Tier 5 while he was requiring all of the upstate public employees. Two full years where most new Public employees are required to pay into their retirement for their entire career while NYC continues under Tier 4 and earlier. Wonder what Patterson was thinking? Not really since he is not so bright and would not have been where he was except Spitzer needed him for balance with his base.

  6. Hope for the Best says:


  7. Alf Land-Doin says:

    Partnership for “Witch” Side of New York sez” What?”.

  8. state kate says:

    And those obscene pensions being collected by those convicted pol’s – what of them?

    The “state employees are taking too much” mantra doesn’t cut it when you figure in all the “special” do nothing management jobs in state govt, as well as elected officials’bloated salaries and pensions over the last 25 years. State employees aren’t taking anything more that wasn’t over-due to them anyway.

    No, we must take a good hard look at those sweetheart deals made behind closed doors in order to get a more accurate accounting as to what caused this calamity with pensions.

    It’s bad enough that Congress has raided the Social Security monies over the years, but to come after what little we have left is just piracy at its worst.

  9. ame says:

    Shouldn’t the question be why don’t private companies provide decent pensions for their employees? How many of us know people who have had to put off their retirement due to the losses in the market that caused their 401(k)s to tank.

    How is that work is not valued as much as capital? Well, that’s a rant for another time.

  10. WNYPlanner says:

    “On behalf of the members of the Partnership for New York City, representing the largest private sector employers in the state” which is the FIRE Sector, also the leading campaign contributors in the Nation as well as the state. The financialization of New York State because of this sector has created a one-horse town. Upstate NY knows well what happens to one-horse towns…talk to Rochester. They also represent the richest of the richest not only in NYS but in the US. They have been largely responsible for the private sector’s wholesale conversion of Defined Benefit Pensions to 401k style stock investments. Now, they are also instrumental in assisting corporations to eliminate pensions entirely…all just so that the bottom line looks good on the books and CEO compensation is increased because of so-called good performance. Truthfully, many of these retirement funds were used to close the gap between profit and CEO pension liabilities…that’s right, “liabilities”. This group is also, the only ones who will benefit from this proposal.

  11. Informed says:

    Sounds like real pension reform may finally come to pass! What a great day for NY that will be.

  12. PayingAttention says:

    Who said pension reform warrants a new tier?
    Reform can happen without making another mistake — pass Tier VI and in five years you will see Tier VII to fix a mess Prince Andy makes.
    Let us see who has guts in the NYS legislature now.
    Those that have them will just say NO to Andy.

  13. Notintheknow says:

    This really should have been addressed in the 90′s when the state and the localities were paying just above 0% on the average. The government took all the money the retirement fund was saving and spent it to make themselves look good. Now because of the 08/09 financial meltdown they are crying unfair. They say they need relief now but any new retirement tier won’t give them relief for about twenty years. The question to ask is how many of our elected officials and their minions in the 90′s set aside some of their savings for the future?

  14. hotrod107 says:

    what i have never understood is the people that say wall street will benefit from a 401k plan. wall street, the stock market is where the pension fund is invested now. please articulte on how it would be invested differently?

  15. As has been noted numerous times hotrod: Pension funds are managed internally. Wall Street firms get little to no income from them because of that. Under a 401k style plan, Wall Street would get management fees from every single participant on an annual basis of 1% of their fund balance or more, just like anyone else with a 401k.

    When people say pensions are more cost effficient to administer than 401ks, that’s why.

  16. hotrod107 says:

    so why can’t the comptroller become the management compny? charge less of a fee and pay state workers that do the work. wouldn’t this be a good solution?

  17. It isn’t really that simple hotrod. 401ks function completely differently than pensions – that is the simplest answer. But I’m not going to give you a long, drawn out explination between the two here. If you don’t understand the differences, it would help to educate yourself on them, no?

    Honestly, you’d do well to learn to use Google, because then you could learn for yourself the differences and form your own opinion based on the knowledge you acquired.

  18. hotrod107 says:

    i certainly know the difference between a defined benefits plan and a defined contribution plan.

    your response is a typical. my question has not been considered or answered.

  19. If you actually knew the difference hotrod, you would be asking these questions, would you?

  20. Er, wouldn’t be asking…

    Cell phone chicklet keypad fail.

  21. hotrod107 says:

    the ? at hand is the state could start their own mangement co. they would direct the investments the same why the pension fund is invested. they could invest in any mutual fund, stock, bond.

    they could have 250 different investment oppertunities for the holder of the 401. the holder would make the final decision.

    this could be done in house

    as you said the fees will be stiff if outside staff does the work. not always the reality. so if done in house you charge the holder a lesser fee than wall st to do the paperwork.

    it would be a self funded opertion.

    of course it could never work in ny as the legislature would commadeer the funds as revenue and spend it where it wasn’t meant.

  22. hotrod:

    Your question at hand was answered. The answer is no. If you understand the difference between pensions and 401ks, then you already know the reason why.

    So, that leaves two explinations for your continued questioning:

    1. You REALLY don’t know the difference.

    2. You are asking questions simply to be an annoyance.

    Regardless of the explination, it is clear your reasoning for asking is partisan in nature and has nothing to do with looking for information.

    And to answer your question more verbosely: It cannot be done unless you intend on turning OSC into a securities firm (which would cost the taxpayers and arm, a leg, and their first born), and even if done at cost, it is more far more costly administratively to manage 1 million separate 401k accounts than it is to manage 1 large pension trust fund.

    Before you ask probing question #5326 on this subject, know than I’m done playing the game on this thread.

  23. hotrod107 says:

    doesn’t the individual manage their own account in a 401?

RSS feed for comments on this post.