LEWISTON, Maine — Bill Webster, the usually mild-mannered superintendent of schools, has drawn a line in the sand: Staffers who retire and get pensions will not be rehired for the same jobs and salaries.
“Not on my watch,” Webster said. “We can’t spend ourselves to the poorhouse.”
If you want to stay in your job, don’t retire, he said. “If you want to retire and work someplace else, fine.”
He said he didn’t understand how any organization could double-pay employees.
“School employees argue, ‘That’s my money,’” Webster said. “Well, it really isn’t their money. It’s the public’s money.” Taxpayers fund a percentage of public employees’ pensions, and in Maine, the pension fund has been chronically underfunded.
Webster’s position is unusual for a school superintendent.
At a Maine superintendents’ meeting in January 2011, Webster voiced his opposition to double-dipping. “I was one of the few, if not the only, superintendent who had this perspective,” he said.
His predecessor, Leon Levesque, retired in 2006, began getting a pension, was rehired as superintendent by the Lewiston School Committee and continued to get a salary. In 2009, his annual salary was $113,300 and his retirement income was more than $100,000 a year. Based on U.S. Social Security Administration life expectancies, Levesque’s projected pension income could be more than $2 million over his lifetime, depending on cost-of-living increases.
The practice is common among state employees.
A Maine State Retirement System list provided by request under Maine’s Freedom of Access Act shows more than 1,256 people in 2011 were retired with pensions and also drawing paychecks from the state or a school district. The highest-paid on the list were school administrators:
* Mt. Blue School District Superintendent Michael Cormier retired in 2009, started drawing a pension and was rehired as superintendent. In 2011, his yearly pension was $56,400; his annual salary, $99,332.
* Jay School Department Superintendent Robert Wall retired in 2010, started drawing a pension and was rehired as superintendent. In 2011, he received a $56,712 yearly pension and an annual $91,219 salary.
* Susan Martin, who was head of English Language Learners and is now chief academic officer for the Lewiston School Department, retired in 1998 at age 47. She was rehired by Lewiston in 2006. In 2011, Martin’s annual pension was $31,500; her annual salary, $77,311.
School Committee concerns
Webster told the Lewiston School Committee that he’d hire retired workers for lower-paying positions. If a retiring teacher wanted to become an education technician or substitute teacher, that would be “great,” Webster said.
Even though the School Committee has no policy on prohibiting double-dipping, Webster has the authority to decline to rehire retirees. Maine law says it’s up to school superintendents to recommend whom to hire; school committees approve candidates.
His position has caused discomfort and questions among School Committee members. The School Department does not have an obligation to rehire employees who retire, said attorney Daniel Stockford of the law firm Brann and Isaacson. An employee “must actually terminate employment in order to begin collecting retirement benefits,” Stockford wrote in a letter given to committee members.
School Committee member Bob Connors, a former Lewiston school superintendent, didn’t see Webster’s logic.
Rehiring a retiree with a pension doesn’t cost the school department any more, since someone will get a salary, Connors argued. And the school department doesn’t have to pay for health coverage, since that’s provided to retirees by the state.
Webster is ruling out a group of experienced, competent, retired workers, Connors said last week. “I disagree with his position that denies a person employment because they’re retired.”
Webster said that with so many jobs lost in the tough economy and recent college graduates unable to find jobs, “to me, double-dipping is immoral.”
Connors said, “I guess that makes me immoral, then.”
After Connors retired from Lewiston, he worked as interim superintendent at a few districts, including Regional School Unit 4 in Sabattus.
Rob Walker of the Maine Education Association, the state teachers’ union, said not all districts “have the luxury” of telling retirees they won’t be rehired.
In Fort Kent, a physics teacher who is “gifted and talented” retired, Walker said. Fort Kent couldn’t find another physics teacher, so that teacher was rehired.
“It has no effect on the local budget, no effect on the retirement system,” Walker said.
He said Webster’s position “sounds like more of a personal choice.” It cuts off options for retirees and school districts, Walker said.
Webster isn’t like most superintendents in Maine. Before he came to Lewiston in 2011 and before he was superintendent in the Ellsworth area, he was CEO of Haven’s Candies in the Portland area. He also spent years as a controller for Hannaford supermarkets. One reason he was hired in Lewiston was his business background.
Public more generous
Public-sector jobs are more generous than the private sector when it comes to retirement, Webster said. Pensions are things of the past. Some companies had pensions and “went bankrupt because of it.”
Today, most have 401(k)-type plans in which workers control their own retirement savings and employers contribute. With that kind of plan, “there is no liability to the organization over and above what they contribute,” Webster said. “The risk has been moved from employer to employee.” If employees invest in the stock market and the stock market tanks, it’s the employee who’s at risk, not the organization.
As long as taxpayers — and not public employees — bear the risk of paying pensions, there’s a chance the current payout level is unsustainable without more tax money, Webster said.
The public sector is where the private sector was 25 or 30 years ago, Webster said. “One part of the attractive nature of public employment has been the nest egg. You put in your 20 or 30 years, you retire and you’ve got a very comfortable pension, often after working to an age that’s far younger than a typical retirement age would be in the private sector.”
For years in Maine and across the country, educators and other government workers put in enough years — 20 has been common — to qualify for a pension, then retired and continued to work in the same job while drawing a pension and a salary.
It is perfectly legal, Webster said. Many Maine school districts “are happy to play this game” to save on health insurance costs. Because state taxpayers pay for pensions and health coverage, districts can rehire retirees without paying medical coverage, saving a district about $10,000 a year.
His refusal to rehire retired workers — one last year and two this year — is not just about Lewiston taxpayers. It’s about taxpayers across Maine, Webster said.
A law proposed by Gov. Paul LePage’s administration and passed last year as part of the budget process reduces the cost of double-dipping. The retirement age was increased from 62 to 65 for new state employees, and double-dippers can get only 75 percent of their incomes if they are receiving pensions. They are also restricted to five years of employment after retirement.
Earlier this year, Sen. Dawn Hill, D-Cape Neddick, introduced a bill that would limit these new restrictions to the mostly highly paid administrative positions, that of superintendents and principals, but would continue to allow teachers and other state workers to retire with pensions and be rehired at full salary. That bill failed by majority vote in Appropriations in May.
You have not addressed the fact, that in Maine, we teachers are subject to the Windfall tax. A penalty of such magnitude that it critically hurts single female retired teachers. I was widowed one year after my husband, suddenly died at 55. I was not able to get a job at my age, in teaching again, except for occassional substitute teaching jobs (very difficult) at $70 per day. I bring home $18,000, before taxes and insurance. At 60, I discovered I would not get one bloody red cent of my husband’s social security, which was devasting. If I lived in New Hampshire, I would receive $1500 per month in ss. Here in Maine,nothing. This one particular tax is devastating to us women, in most cases, as most retired teachers are women. I would have been better off being a waitress in Maine. Much better, financially. So my entire future, my golden years, will be one of working, at low paying jobs, just to keep a roof over my head. Oh, and I had to give up my “wonderful” medical insurance, as I could no longer pay my bills and that big payment every month.
So, this is all hogwash, this double dipping concept. Yes, it does occur, but usually it is not as lucrative as mentioned in this article. Usually it is like my scenario; one that has created a second class citizen, in poverty. Welcome to the state of Maine!!!!!!!
I just helped a fellow older female unmarried teacher get a job in another state because of this ludicrous law. She was divorced by her husband, and with no social security, and the pitiful salary that Maine pays teachers, she would theoretically never be able to retire. She is now employed in a state that will give her a retirement income after 10 years, and also social security. She was a bit shocked at how much better her life would be in this state. She can even draw on her husbands social security if it is more than what she would individually draw.
The sad part is is, she is a fantastic teacher, and it is a huge loss for the school, but individuals have to do what is best for themselves.
I really don’t understand why any teacher would stay in the state of Maine with the restrictions, and loss of social security. Maine also only pays about 2/3 of what a qualified teacher could earn in most any other state. There are plenty of teacher jobs open right now, nationwide. The large glut of baby boomer teachers are retiring (that’s me) leaving many openings in most all fields. As a matter of fact my former district still has about 100 openings as of this date.
see above.
It’s always seemed a bit unfair to me that Maine teachers, who supplement their wages with summer jobs, are required to pay Social Security, yet they are ineligible for any benefits. In other states, they are.
Too bad Maine teachers are represented by such a crummy ineffective union.
This would be a great law to overturn and pump that money back into Maine economy.
its not the unions, it is the federal government who imposed this law. And congress exempted themselves from it, so they can get all their pensions.
But this situation isn’t encountered by teachers in all states.
After 1984 all government employees pay SS. Only people prior to that have a opt out option.
What State law prevents people from receiving the money that they paid into Social Security? Never heard of this because SS is a federal program.
It is a Federal Law. Get a state pension, take a SS cut. The only exemption is backwards. The less SS you would normally have coming, the larger the cut to SS payments.
You didn’t pay SS tax on your teacher’s income, hence the windfall and larger cut.
But they DID pay full SS on all non teaching work and are being gypped out of what they paid into.
A teacher who pays into SS for 20 years then teaches for 20 years will get less SS payments then someone who only worked 20 years and then never taught.
Why are you trying to use logic and facts? Rampant jealousy and ignorance is a mark of pride to so many of these posters.
It’s because they apply their income that they didn’t pay SS on, hence the windfall tax.
No, the SS benefit is calculated only using the pay where they paid into SS. Then after that calculation it is reduced further just because they also earned a government pension.
Social Security benefits are intended to replace only a percentage of a worker’s pre-retirement earnings. The way Social Security benefit amounts are figured, lower-paid workers get a higher return than highly paid workers. For example, lower-paid workers could get a Social Security benefit that equals about 55 percent of their pre-retirement earnings. The average replacement rate for highly paid workers is about 25 percent.
Before 1983, people who worked mainly in a job not covered by Social Security had their Social Security benefits calculated as if they were long-term, low-wage workers. They had the advantage of receiving a Social Security benefit representing a higher percentage of their earnings, plus a pension from a job where they did not pay Social Security taxes. Congress passed the Windfall Elimination Provision to remove that advantage.
http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10045.html#amount
Some people worked their 40 quarters under social security before they took state jobs.
40 quarters or 10 yrs is the minimum in order to get social security
It’s the Feds who cut SS if you’re on a state pension. Total crap. Susan Collins has been really trying to repeal this law. contact her and support her effort
I have been contacting her for years about this, and get the same message back…they are working on it…blah blah blah
If the major portion of your income is from the teachers retirement system ” which no SS was paid ” then windfall tax apply s.
Social Security benefits are intended to replace only a percentage of a worker’s pre-retirement earnings. The way Social Security benefit amounts are figured, lower-paid workers get a higher return than highly paid workers. For example, lower-paid workers could get a Social Security benefit that equals about 55 percent of their pre-retirement earnings. The average replacement rate for highly paid workers is about 25 percent.
Before 1983, people who worked mainly in a job not covered by Social Security had their Social Security benefits calculated as if they were long-term, low-wage workers. They had the advantage of receiving a Social Security benefit representing a higher percentage of their earnings, plus a pension from a job where they did not pay Social Security taxes. Congress passed the Windfall Elimination Provision to remove that advantage.
but you could have worked extra during the summer or school year and paid into social security…if you pay in, you should be able to collect….if not…don’t take the fica tax!
Maine teachers draw from Maine Street Retirement. I also pay into Medicare, and will be unable to use it.
When you retire and reach 65 Medicare will become you primary payer as long as you have 10 years of payment into Medicare. That happened to me. It can change sooner if you become disabled. That law changed in 1986 I think.
you will be able to bet Medicare,
Maine has a law that cuts teachers from getting full SS benefits on other jobs they’ve had. Just ask any teacher. No matter how many quarters they work. I don’t know why anyone wants to be a teacher in Maine.
look up windfall elimination and government offset under social security, jimbobhol….and you will see how the workingman gets stiffed….but not the congress members.
All Federal employees hired after 1984 have to participate in SS. Only people hired before that date can opt out. ALL EMPLOYEES Senate House President
It is there. I have paid into SS, but since I am now in education, when I retire and draw Maine State Retirement, I will get a very small fraction of what I SHOULD receive from social security.
Social Security benefits are intended to replace only a percentage of a worker’s pre-retirement earnings. The way Social Security benefit amounts are figured, lower-paid workers get a higher return than highly paid workers. For example, lower-paid workers could get a Social Security benefit that equals about 55 percent of their pre-retirement earnings. The average replacement rate for highly paid workers is about 25 percent.
Before 1983, people who worked mainly in a job not covered by Social Security had their Social Security benefits calculated as if they were long-term, low-wage workers. They had the advantage of receiving a Social Security benefit representing a higher percentage of their earnings, plus a pension from a job where they did not pay Social Security taxes. Congress passed the Windfall Elimination Provision to remove that advantage. Look into a 403b plan.
She will get SS once she gets the 40 credits achieved. If she receive any retirement from the Maine State Retirement fund it will effect her SS payment.
She will get partial social security with 40 credits (1o years). To get the full amount she would be entitled to (as a survivor benefit) she has to have 30 years of significant earnings that she pays SS on. The significant earnings are equal to 18k a year.
That’s what I though. Maine and the other 12 State employees need to get this changed and join into the SS plan.
The state would never go for it. It would end up costing more money.
Probably more like the tax payers won’t go for it.
I wouldn’t confuse SS with a retirement plan.
it is the only retirement plan for millions of Americans.
Then millions of Americans better start planning.
yeah, I bet all those people out there making minimum wage are wondering what stocks to put their extra money into?
Save a certain percentage of your earning no matter what it is. You don’t need stocks. Start with a $25 Savings bond a month. (Even though the return is low right now) You would be surprised what you could do over time.
If I were you I would set up an account right now with treasurydirect.gov
I set up an account when they went online and moved my bonds over that I had been saving since the mid 80’s. I rolled some.
If stocks are your thing start small at http://www.sharebuilder.com/
Buy partial shares and watch them build.
Need to save a few dollars first…
start with
http://home.ingdirect.com/banking
A good rate for the environment.
There is always something to do with the money if you are willing to give up even a 6-pack of beer a month.
I’m not confusing it , but it seems other’s are trying too. SS benefits are based on life time earnings and higher income earners receive a lower benefit. Lower income earners receive a higher benefit. Thus if a teacher reported income with SS tax applied is in the lower income range they would receive a higher benefit even though their life time income really is in the higher income range thus Congress applied a windfall tax as a fairness issue. Why should they receive a higher benefit than a higher income person that paid SS on all their income. Then we have the lower income person receiving the same as this teacher, but in reality the teacher has a higher life time income. It needs to change like they did on the Federal level but I doubt it will happen.
Are all of the State Employee haters deaf and unable to read?
They can post hate posts, so I don’t know how they can be unable to read.
SS costs the state tax payer far more than the pension plan. A much higher percentage of salary has to be paid to SS than to the pension plan.
The state will never drop the pension plan when it will cost money. Instead they will continue to try to steal benefits promised for decades, promises made because the pension plan costs less.
Retired teachers may be eligible for Social Security (1) if they have enough other work covered by Social Security to qualify or (2) through a spouse’s work. But in such cases, their Social Security benefits are reduced because of their TRS pensions. The spousal benefit reduction is called the “government pension offset” and the reduction in benefits for other work is called the “windfall elimination provision.”
These benefit reductions are required by federal law and the General Assembly has no authority to change them. They are designed to keep the Social Security system from paying people benefits that are higher than their financial circumstances warrant because most of their earnings are outside the Social Security system. It’s not hate it’s law and teachers know this when hired. They changed this in 1984 to bring Federal employees into SS System all new hire’s have to pay into it only people prior to 1984 can opt out. President. Senators. and House members also included.
It seems to me that Maine jobs in general only pay 2/3 of what workers could make elsewhere. It is not as though we pay less for things here, as the gas prices, even when they went down temporaily, are among the highest in the US. And to the people who would suggest moving, it costs a lot to pick up and move elsewhere, so most are trapped in low paying jobs that may not include medical insurance. And COBRA is a sick joke. It must have been named that because it is such a huge bite out of your wallet.
Social Security is a Federal program the State’s have nothing to do with it. I believe at 65 your Social Security payout would be based on what you paid into your account vs what your husband paid in. So if your husbands payout is higher then that would be the amount you would receive . You also can get Medicare at 65.
jim they speak the truth it effects teachers jsut like they said. Lot of money for going to others that rightfully should be to retired Manie teachers and the Maine economy.
I was trying to point out how SS works normally, but the effects of not paying into SS is the problem. You have to have 40 credits to receive SS, But if the largest amount of your income earned is non SS taxed then it’s a windfall so it has to be adjusted if you try to draw SS. 14 State’s still do this but the employees can have a referendum to change it except Conn. In 1935 SS Act teacher’s were exempt from SS, but in 1950 they changed it so they could join and The then- members of the Teacher’s Retirement System voted not to join the SS system. Thus this is what we have today.
It’s only a “windfall” if it is from a public pension.
You could collect millions in private pension money and never see a reduction of one cent of your SS because that is defined as not being a “windfall” in our bizzaro world,
That’s because a person in a private pension’s pay into SS all there working days on all their income so there is no windfall.
You’re right. It’s a cruel law. If people worked prior to becoming teachers, the money they put into social security should be theirs. It’s not double dipping for these people to draw retirement income from the two separate accounts they funded during their working careers: social security and the state system. But the people in this article all seem to be in high paying positions where someone carved out loopholes allowing them double dip.
and you do know that all the members of congress are exempt from GPO/WEP as they voted themselves exempt when it was passed years ago. So all our congress people can double and triple dip to their hearts content….we little folk have to suffer that penalty, even though we may have paid in enough to get both a state, federal and/or social security benefit.
You are incorrect. Members of Congress use the same Federal Employees Retirement System as all other federal employees. They contribute to their pension fund and to social security, which is part of their retirement plan. They can also by choice contribute to the TSP, a form of 401K which the gov’t matches up to 5% of salary. The TSP has an upper limit that is reached before 5% of a Congress person’s salary however. If they became a Congress person before 1984, and have not left federal service they can fall under the previous system called Civil Service Retirement System. People in this plan do not contribute to social security and contribute, I believe 7.5% into their pension fund. Those on CSRS are in fact affected by GPO/WEP.
please go back and check your facts. While Congress contribute to either Civil Service or FERS, they are exempt from GPO/WEP provisions. They voted to exempt themselves from any pension penalites.
Technically you are correct…however they take the penalty the opposite way. Any CSRS pension is reduced by any social security benefits received. Here is a link for the facts:
http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=%270E%2C*PLC8%22%40%20%20
Thank you Bill Webster. You are an honorable person. It is about time this double-dipping fiasco is exposed. The system needs to be fixed. If someone retires after an appropriate amount of time…RETIRE! You deserve it. Shame on you if you come back to work. You should not have retired then!
“shame on you for going back to work”
**************
congratulations. that is the most ridiculous comment I have ever read.
Nothing wrong in working but the system allows for double paying teachers. The schools can’t do that anymore.
Sure, but let’s not vilify the teachers in the process. The article points out that it is the administrators, not the teachers, who are benefiting from this policy the most.
I’m not sure exactly how this ‘double dipping’ works, but I do know my mom was a public school teacher in Maine for over 20 years. She doesn’t have social security because of the pension restrictions. She tutors privately, even at 77 years old, to supplement her paltry benefits.
Social Security is pretty paltry also. Congrats to your mom for staying active and involved. Most get 11-12k a year.
Another problem I understand is the way administrators get their retirement. A certain percentage of their last three years salary average. That sets up a “good ole boy/girl” revolving door system for those higher paid positions. They trade those higher paid jobs on the way out the door to pump retirement benefits …. then start a second job or come back into the school system for another job after “retirement” passing their higher paying job to the next “good ole boy” in line. I know of a former superintendent that claims he is getting $70k a year and brags about it.
I know of one super who is a triple dipper…but then again, he’s a super star among Superintendents of schools.
I know of a CEO who Retired Retroactively, all the while receiving $100,000 per year and is running for President and Brags about it as being business savy!
He even ran a business in Utah while claiming residence in Massachusets!
Retroactively!!!!!
LOL
You are right, and this is a perfect example of why anyone voting for Romney should have his or her heads examined. This is the problem with this country. They rich figure out loopholes to keep thier selective group getting all of the money while anyone else either has to be a relative or somehow win a position if one of them should finally croak.
Figure out your own advantage. It’s there. Open yours eyes.
I would happily “have my head examined”- as soon as anyone who voted for Barack Obama has his or her head examined, in light of the out-of-control spending, class warfare, race-baiting, misery he has perpetrated on the American people, all in the name of “hope and change”. I also doubt that Mitt Romney ever smoked pot or snorted cocaine, which is still a crime.
That would be one more business than Obama ever ran.
Romney never worked as the POTUS!
and thats one job that he will Never have!
Then there’s the Texas oil company executive who “moved” back to Wyoming so that he could run for Vice President.
Wears an “S” on his leotard?
Vilification of public employees is a regular sport for some, particularly those who never had a chance or the inclination to truly bargain for their wages, insurance and retirement programs. Whether this society will be better served by denying pension programs, as the super suggests, is far from clear. We’re daily experiencing the fallout from unregulated casino capitalism, and to suggest that everybody be forced to play that game or suffer the consequence may sound tough and hard-nosed and all that – which delights the trolls – but little else. Oh, the slippery slope….
Point out where I vilified a teacher please.
Tutoring is a different matter. Especially for a teacher as opposed to a (much) higher paid administrator.
I understand that; I brought up tutoring to demonstrate that retired teachers are not the problem.
If she has to tutor at 77, her base retirement must be slim.
This matter concerns the power of superintendents and the school boards, not the “choices” of teachers. Don’t be so quick to confuse “superintendents” with teachers. The superintendents hold the power which they wield through board members who they manage to hypnotize. In at least one instance (check out the facts, citizens– the information is readily available through the Maine Heritage Policy Center and the Portland Press Herald), the double-dip bonus
shuffle was deftly executed by one superintendent working with his consistently-compliant
board; there was no public discussion or revelation of this guy’s deal–
taxpayers are still unaware that the deal took place as laggard “reporters”
snoozed at their keyboards (c’mon Lois, Clark, Jimmy…). Adding a dash of hypocrisy: at the same time he got his own, this superintendent took a stand against
teachers in the system making the same move– “too expensive to the state!” Apparently, this “educational leader” believed in combining HIS pension with HIS salary for a couple of years (without changing jobs), but was comfortable nixing such an
arrangement for his school system’s teachers. The point of all this: the idea that teachers hold “power” around this arrangement is just plain inaccurate. The power rests with school boards who twist their responsibilities and come to serve their superintendents (instead of the other way around).
All well and good, but I did not confuse the two. Please note previous posts. Whoever is responsible and whoever benefits by it, an end needs to come to the practice.
That double-dipped money should be spent instead on drawing high-quality teachers to teach our children. These children are, after all, our first priority as a national resource and will be the ones who, hopefully, will be working to fund their teachers’ and other working people’s pensions and retirement monies in the future. Next time we vote for our school board members, let’s be careful who we choose. Let’s choose men and women who put the education of our children first and the retiring “administrators” last. It is our tax monies that are at stake. We should have a say in this.
Agreed. I know Super Betsy Webb has made a real effort in Bangor.
Money talks, BS walks. Ask yourself if school districts are willing to pay what it would cost to hire the best and brightest prospects as teachers? It seem that the prevailing mood in Maine is that all teachers are over paid and get too much time off. I don’t agree with that personally.
Now if people would have only rallied around Governor Baldaccis plan to eliminate 2/3 of the school districts through consolidation, you would have had quite a few less superintendents and their staffs.
“Confuse” may have not been the best word choice; “conflate” works better. My point is that superintendents enjoy the power; teachers are not in position to give such shape to the events leading up to and beyond their retirements with any sort of ease. Also, it’s not the “last three years” of employment that factor into PERS pensions but the “three highest years” (not necessarily the same years). And, as you correctly point out, administrators accommodate each other regularly to maximize each others’ salaries during those final years.
Thanks for confirmation.
You seem to think you can tell people what to do after they retire, How would you like me to tell you what to do when you retire?
Who the heck do you think you are?
Bill Webster is not honorable. He, like you apparently, doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
” If someone retires after an appropriate amount of time…RETIRE! You deserve it. Shame on you if you come back to work. You should not have retired then!”
However, a CEO of a Company can Retire Retroactively while takeing a $100,000 Per Year Salary only to run for public office using the claim that he was a resident because he returned to that State for business purposes.
Double Dipping!
You Betcha!
The same Standard should apply to Teachers!
and you wonder why the teacher pension plan is broke?
I don’t wonder I know!
Its broke because those who promised to fund it didn’t!
Totally different. The teachers they are speaking of work for the same school. If you read what Webster said, that he had no problem if they collect a pension and then work somewhere else. So that was a nice try!
If Webster has a problem with this then he as the Superintendent should not re-hire retirees. Let him go and hire fresh college grads. Hopefully he will be willing to pay these new grads enough to live on and pay back their tuition loans.
Look-up BDN article from Tuesday February 21, 1989.
If a State Pension is anything like a Private Pension then the amount that the Pensioner receives per month is reduced if taken early. The total amount paid however ends up the same as the guy who hangs around until retirement age because of the longer duration of Payments!
There is NO double Dipping, it is an Illusion!
The Benefit is the employees as he is the one that earned it. His Private life and decisions are his and his alone!
The pension fund is nearly bankrupt and unsustainable, except for the fact that it lays the burden of compensation on the backs of hardworking private sector Mainers who do not have a comparable retirement program. Sustainability, accountability and real-world adjustments are what is required in the future if the public education system is to move beyond its current state of malaise and become a responsible party in educating our children. It’s not surprising that in many parts of the country parents are opting to educate their children outside the public school venue. This trend will likely continue for many years to come, even though it means a heavy financial burden for some, because the product provided by the union-choked education monopoly is inferior and is only getting worse.
The retirement system is unsustainable because the voters have allowed the politicians to *rob* the retirement funds. If the private sector behaved that way, the companies would be shut down for fraud. But we, the voters, keep allowing our representatives to ‘borrow’ funds from public employee retirement funds. Somehow, we are blaming the teachers.
Retirement funds are a *promise* that the tax payers have made to the people who provide services to us. The fact that the voters want to renege on that promise is pitiful.
A promise made by bought and paid for politicians. For 40 years nothing happened in Maine eduction without the consent of the union and their lapdogs the Maine Dems. Now that their unsustainable ponzi scheme has hit the wall they would have us believe that they were just innocent bystanders, when in fact they are the architects of the entire mess.
you can only blame the voters, oldmainer, not the teachers.
If you start with a falsehood then no one is going to listen.
The Maine State pension fund is one of the healthiest in the nation. The pension system saves tax payers money by costing less than paying SS for the same jobs.
If you want sustainability, sustain your education in fiscal reality.
You are the one who continues to spout falsehoods. Jobs posted by the state of Maine all claim the value of the state’s contribution to employees retirement at somewhere between 15% and 20% of pay. SS is 5.5%. Please get YOUR facts straight.
The majority of the state contribution you are quoting goes to repay the unfunded liability( mostly brought to us by Jock McKernan). The state’s current contribution to the retirement fund is less than the SS %, The unfunded liability must, by law, be repaid whether the state keeps the current system or changes to Social Secuirty,
The employers payment for SS is 6.2% not 5.5%.
I do not think that you understand the system.
It is about time that a leader in educaion is speaking up against this practice that has been going on for years–it is not right. There is a superintendent in Aroostook Cty. who presides over three districts and is “retired” but still working in the same positions, I believe–so, the question should be?
This is taxpayer money on the line, and they continue to cry poverty in the school system!
Based upon your grammar and sentence structure, I imagine education was never a big priority for you anyway.
Seriously? You attack this person based on grammar and sentence structure? This only shows YOUR ignorance. I know MANY college graduates that could not pass a fifth grade selling bee. Nor can they form a proper sentence. Spare us your hate and your intellectual superiority.
“hate and intellectual superiority”
*************
takes one to know one, dear Chimesin.
the colleges they went to must very degree mills then and of no value.
Do not worry, Chimesin. SingleTrackGirl must be on the double-dipping end, and she does not want to admit it. It is not only teachers. Other school employees have the same advantage.
Why attack at all? Being mean only makes you mean.
Do you think the original commenter was (not) attacking teachers?
Oh, yeah….someone else being contrary to your point of view deserves derision? I stand by my comment
You are amazing and I will name my next child “BarbaraAlice, Queen of All People” because that’s just how special I think you are.
Don’t be too hard on him, he’s probably a product of the Maine public education system. Motto, “Putting teachers first and kids last since 1965”.
Shows you must have failed math. The employees costs less to rehire saving the tax payer money.
Your math must be a product of government schools. Only the numerically challenged would believe that paying someone twice as much would save money. You must be a union hack who believes that state money comes from the money fairy and not from taxpayers.
Since the rehired state employee doing the same job costs less in benefits, the cost is less. A pension is deferred compensation for work alreadys done. A salary is for work you are doing.
Why am I bothering with you? If a State Employee pulled a child from a burning car Oldmainer would blame the state employee for costing the hospital money to treat the child.
You should notify the private sector of these great savings. I’m sure once you dazzle them with your grasp of economics and explain it to them that they’ll all be doing it.
Why am I bothering with you? You’re no better than most of the legisvermin, You believe that money from the state pension system comes from the money fairy instead of the taxpayers.
you’re a very sour person
The truth hurts.
Good job, Mr. Webster. Finally somebody with enough brass to step up to the plate and stop a practice that has been going on for many, many years.
The
majority of highly paid staff in the Augusta office of Employee Relations have
been double dipping for many years.
So that makes it OK?
Well then they also should be STOPPED. Not only are they keeping people away from getting these jobs that would certianly help our unemployment stats, but they seem to believe they are actually entitled to it. No wonder people cannot find jobs, when people that are collecting a retirement are taking them and double the pay.
Watchout the professional education hacks will be coming for you…
According to the new law, it would be financially beneficial to re-employ a retired employee, even in their former position. By law, they are prohibited from making more than 75% of their previous salary for 5 years. So, in effect, retirement would save the schools 25% immediately. Since most people only work for a few years after their first retirement, I don’t see the superintendent’s argument as being valid.
I retired from a state that does not furnish health insurance for retirees. Since I am only 62, I must pay for my own health insurance for at least 3 more years. That is the reason that many government employees go back to work.
There is also the benefit of someone who is familiar with the job. Hiring retirees, especially at 75% of their previous salary is a bargain. This superintendent is putting his personal bias up against what is essentially a money saving practice.
Oh well, he is entitled to his own opinion! Even wrong as it may be!
not to mention the cost of retraining.
Doesn’t the new law only apply to new hires?
Only in the world of public employment would someone argue that paying someone up to 50% more for doing the same job would save money. I guess the pension money comes from the state and they get it from the money fairy. Man you just can not make this stuff up!!
Remember the superintendents being rehired are the ‘Olympians’ of School administration, with long histories of excellence; so when a small ‘troubled’ school union needs a real pro and can find one who agrees to take a low salary…why not do it, esp. if the hire agrees to mentor someone to take over after a year or two. Such a deal, now just suspend a second pension!
Olympian of school administration??? You mean the guys who give us meaningless high school diplomas and students unprepared for college?
Sorry, but the ones I know have sterling reputations…one was so good he was even able to ‘walk into’ a job as a town manger. He was able to hold a budget with 20+ classroom sizes in the H.S., and address all segments of the student body….anyway, your negative view is contradicted in my experience.
The pension is payment for services already rendered. It’s cheaper to continue to employ the pensioner because taxpayers do not bear the cost of his benefits. No money fairy is required, just an ability to do the math.
I believe that state retired teachers, and maybe other state employees, do not have to contribute to MSRS after they retire and work elsewhere under the state. so that saves more on the employers end as far as health ins, life ins and pension contributions. please correct me if I am wrong.
They may save the local government, but the state taxpayers are picking up the difference that is taken from the underfunded state pension system. There is no free lunch, and there is no money fairy that conjures the 50% extra pay out of thin air.
didn’t the state borrow money from the MSRS years ago? if so, was it ever paid back? (yeah, right!)…just like the feds “borrowed” from the social security trust funds?
it is very clear you do not understand the system at all.
stop making yourself look like a fool.
You are the fool. There is no money fairy. You must be a product of the Maine public education system.
A new employee would be hired at far less than 75% of what a guy was making at retirement. Even adding the new guy’s benefits would probably still make it less.
Not too surprising to hear the Supers are the ones doing the most double dipping as if you’ve ever met one personally you’d know for sure where the name dip came from. I wonder if Mr. Cormier, Mr Wall or Mr. Connors ever considered giving back a little double dipping cash in order to hold on to a few teachers or aids in their districts that they’ve tossed out of work over the last few years? Naw, they’ve been thinking about what’s best for the kids, don’t cha know.
What state did she move to? I put my house up on the market, but it is a poor market right now. I would LOVE to move out of this state. I have been here for almost 40 yrs, and am so done with all the laws and restrictions, like the windfall tax. As soon as I can sell, I am thinking of Virginia, where my daughters live.
Virginia is a beautiful state. I lived there for 7 years and loved it. Living seemed to be cheaper all around. Would move back in a minute if I was able to.
Nice job, Bill. I totally agree!
thats a hard one for me, your the one that rehired them first off, second, aren’t they doing the same job they were doing before they retired, why should they work for lower pay?so you either pay them or a newbe, whats the difference , you needed to fill the position, why not fill it with an able bodied person who can do the job efficiently, any skin off your *** if this person gets her just retirement that is due her and decides to go on and work a bit longer to make a lil’ more and perhaps enjoy the good life after having endured all the years of dealing with kids and staff?who are you to say they can’t, Is this a Law in the books?you need more then word of mouth to change this i’m afraid, and good luck with it….
Yes, SS is a federal system, but the state of Maine opted in for the windfall tax, along with a dozen other states. They didn’t have to. It helped the state’s pocketbook, but devasted individuals, like myself. And it is truly brutal towards women, as teachers are women. I also know a man, a state worker (they are also subjected to the windfall tax), whose wife died of cancer, right after she retired from school teaching. He is able to receive her Maine state retirement in full, along with his state retirement check. How’s about that for fairness? So, this man, right down the street from me, is able to collect on 2 retirements, which I think is correct, and me, in a similar situation, can’t collect a dime.
I am the beneficiary of my dead husband’s SS!!!! Who is getting it? Not me! It is mine too. SS is so generous, with its payouts, but brokered a deal with greedy states like Maine, all to the detriment of old women. I have no idea if I will get Medicare at this point, due to my husband;s SS. It would be nice, since I have none now. But, to be honest, I doubt I will. I don’t trust govt at all. I was originally told I would receive $350 of my husband’s benefits, when he died. When I was old enough to collect, I got a totally different story. I even had Snowe’s office work on it, to no avail. Maine needs to wake up! They have created a class of welfare dependents; retired school teachers, mostly women. It is unbelievable!! I call it discrimination.
I don’t understand why you can’t collect your husbands benefits. It is disgraceful that you are in such straits.
When Congress passed the Social Security Act in 1935, it excluded federal, state, and local government employees from mandatory coverage. The exclusion for state and local public employees was based on constitutional concerns about whether the federal government could impose taxes on state governments. In the early 1950s, Congress passed a law that allowed state and local government employees to be covered if they voluntarily chose coverage in a referendum. The then-members of the Teachers’ Retirement System voted against joining the Social Security system. In 1959, at the request of the Connecticut Education Association, the General Assembly prohibited TRS members from holding another referendum (CGS § 5-158(d)). The ban on Social Security coverage for Connecticut teachers remains in place. Don’t blame the State.
Can you change this via legislation? …what is the Union’s position? AARP’s? or have these institutions become part of the problem?
….thanks for the example; I had no idea how the system as set up affected retired female teachers.
Blame this problem on government, promising money to employees 25 years down the road with no clue where it will be coming from. These government pensions are better than having a million in the bank. The gov $ just keeps on coming!
Not only the teachers who do this. Many state/city retirees do it.
Do like they do with other pensions once you make over 13,000 you lose 2 dollars for every dollar you make
I am in these straits due to the Windfall tax penalty, that disallows double dipping from Soc Security, and a state retirement (bad thing, yah know, to work so hard, as it will discourage working). Probably the states who became involved (a dozen or so), did not realize the unintended consequences. Or maybe they did, and just don’t care. Either way, it is disgraceful. I knew I would not be able to collect my own ss, which is small, but I was shocked to learn I could not receive my dead husband’s, since I am the beneficiary!!!! It was his earned monies, and he chose to have it go to me, of course, I was his wife of 33 yrs. I did get differing amounts, with quotes, but when I actually went to draw on it, I was informed, I got nothing, nada. It was a huge blow, as I was getting by on take home retirement of $1100. I was forced to give up my medical insurance, as the premiums were going up way too much, with fewer benefits, and I simply needed that extra $400 in my pocket book. I was not getting by well at all, and I was working as a substitute teacher, the only job I could get!!!
So, misfortune occurred with the early and sudden death of my husband, but alas a state that is greedy did not help my situation out at all. AND, many retired women, either divorced or widowed share the same fate in this state. This is not just me. Women teachers, heed me well – leave this state ASAP! Find a state that is kind to women, who will allow your ss and state retirement. Teacher retirements, at least in this state, is one of the lowest, due to the raiding that took place many years ago. I always told my student teachers (and this was long before my husband died) to go to another state. This state is terrible for retirees. Like I said many times, I would have been MUCH BETTER OFF FINANCIALLY, if I chose to waitress til I was 65, vs teaching school. I thought I was smart, being a teacher and all, so how humbling to see waitresses and maids doing much better in retirement than I. The joke is on me!!!!!!!!!!
When Congress passed the Social Security Act in 1935, it excluded federal, state, and local government employees from mandatory coverage. The exclusion for state and local public employees was based on constitutional concerns about whether the federal government could impose taxes on state governments. In the early 1950s, Congress passed a law that allowed state and local government employees to be covered if they voluntarily chose coverage in a referendum. The then-members of the Teachers’ Retirement System voted against joining the Social Security system. In 1959, at the request of the Connecticut Education Association, the General Assembly prohibited TRS members from holding another referendum (CGS § 5-158(d)). The ban on Social Security coverage for Connecticut teachers remains in place.
There are 14 State’s that still do this.
Now would someone be telling me, that, why is it that if a person retires from teaching, gets a pension, then, gets rehired with a paycheck, that it cost any more then if the teacher retires, they hire someone new who gets a paycheck, that it cost any more??
A strong economy is when people have money to spend, I have always felt that when you became 62 one should be able to collect SS, and keep working, so you could build up a little money before you had to live on SS. What do we want to do, keep everybody in the depths of poverty?
To simply answer your question about why it is usually more costly to hire retired people: rehired-retired educators are generally more expensive because they are at the top of the the salary scale. Hiring someone with fewer years of experience would cost less.
Wrong. Higher benefits costs for the new hire. Training costs for the new hire. Loss of an experienced employee costs efficiency and productivity. P.S. For State employees unless you are rehired as a contractor your pension stops while you are earning a salary so there is no double dipping.
Rehired/retired educators DO receive their retirement benefits as well as their full salaries. They actually receive more of their salaries than traditional employees because they stop contributing to the retirement system. I do not know how it works for other state retirees, but this is for educators. And training costs for new educators are minimal so the amount is really a non-factor in the cost comparison. I am sure that is not the case for other state workers.
I am not speaking either for or against the practice. There are benefits for each side, many of which cannot be measured in straight dollars. I was just trying to answer a question that someone had.
I guess I am saying, Bill Webster, get off the case.
Double dipping…just one more service brought to you by those dedicated, hard working public employees in the state of Maine. This is what happens when the legisvermin are beholden to the union for reelection.
The rich get richer but when some middle class slob tries it, Bill Webster will roadblock him. Thanks a bunch, Bill. Loser.
And to those who say they only object to this because its taxpayer money…How the heck do you think the wealthy elites who run this country (and the tax code) did it? Bigger brains???? Wake up, sheep.
You have to blame the superintendents and school boards for that practice….If you are retired, you are retired..
Thanks for pointing out the lies that Mr. Webster tells.
State employee pensions are funded mostly by state employee contributions. The pensions cost the state far less than Social Security would. That is called saving money for the pension haters out there.
They have worked 20 years and retired. Shows he is either ignorant about state pensions or purposely lying. At one time it was 25 and out ONLY if you had reached 60yrs old. Then 62, Now 65, does he want retirement age to be 72?
You retire and get your SS denied, the COLA has been first frozen for 3 yrs. then reduced to 1/2 or less of inflation by our GubNah to fund tax cuts for the rich guaranteeing that if you live long enough your pension will be worthless.
Some companies had pensions and went bankrupt. Yeah, they sure did after looting the pension funds the same way as Mr. Romney and our state legislature did to thousands of retirees.
It sounds like Mr. Webster is double dipping, running schools and being a spokesman for ALEC.
So tell me again why our Gov. will be able to collect SS and a State pension, why our legislators in Congress can get military, SS, 401K, Federal Employment pensions, Cayman island pensions and we still pay them to be in congress?
Thank you for finally shining a light on this! If you want to come back to work, do so. Your pension credit will probably increase while you are working again, but your pension payments stop immediately.
If I understand the retired-rehired process, the educator goes back on his/her salary step (top of the scale), but the educator and district no longer contribute to the retirement system. This saves the district money, BUT it not healthy for the retirement system. There is now someone working at the top of the scale who is drawing a pension but no longer contributing to the system. That hurts all of those who are part of the pension plan. If this position was filled by a person who wasn’t retired, then there would still be contributions to the retirement system. Maybe I am misinformed, but I think this is the way it works.
I have a friend who was asked to retire from teaching and that if he did they would hire him back at double his current salary as a contract teacher. He loves his new job as a teacher.
What are friends for.
EVERY new hire in this country should be enrolled in Social Security. No more special interest-my job is more important than your job-groups distorting and corrupting the market place. I’ve been self-employed for a lifetime and have gotten so tired of subsidizing the other person’s retirement/healthcare plans. With liberty and justice for all.
Including the Senate & Congress!!!!
Most particularly those two-faced twits.
The problem with that idea: it would cost MORE money. Although the state is currently paying more than their usual rate into the Pension fund (catching up for decades of underpayment, a practice that was stopped in the 90’s), they would end up having to pay as much into SS as they are obligated to pay into the Pension. Then of course you will have to create a 403B matching program. On top of that, one of the reasons the state gets a bargain on public employees is the concept of deferred compensation. Get rid of the Pension and you will have to pay more in salary to make the job more attractive. Even now in the waning years of the recession teaching has an unemployment rate of less than 5% (4.27) There just isn’t a line of people lining up to do the job, and it is about to get MUCH worse. The average age of a teacher in Maine is 55.
Teaching, for all the difficult perceptions, is still a popular profession. Inquire with your local school board about applicants per job offer. You’ll find that there are many applicants for each job offer. Last time I inquired about a high school English opening, there had been over 100 applicants. Are there exceptions to this observation? Of course, but the central premise is that teaching in Maine is a pretty good gig. Where else can one get a years income working 185+/_ days.
During this hiring season, I have seen schools post the same job 2-3 times (not all schools). That means that they aren’t getting hundreds of applicants. In fact I know of several schools that have not received a single applicant for a job they have posted. This is during a time when unemployment in this country is high. It depends on where you are applying and honestly how much the school system pays. Bangor will certainly get more applications because they pay a decent wage. Rural systems oftentimes receive none. It’s simple supply and demand.
UMO74, and when was this “last time” you inquired about the hs English opening? the 185+ days is a fantasy carried on by jealous people. Teachers need to stay accredited, work longer than 8 hours day, evening conferences, parent teacher meetings, grading homework and preparing lesson plans on their own home time and on weekends, keeping up with the demands of state and federal government red tape, having to cow-tow to incompetent administrators who are only interested in “data”….dealing with difficult, mentally ill students who come to school hungry, angry, homeless, abused, ignored….shall I go on?
The mill in Bucksport has 12 hour shift workers who work 183 days a year.
I pay more for my pension than for SS. The State pays LESS for my pension than SS. Is that to challenging an idea to understand?
It is legal for people to band together in unions and collectively bargain the price of their labor.
You are self employed and you set your prices, are you the only person who has that right?
… and while you have been self employed you have never taken money under the table and you have never under reported your income ever, correct?
When are the American people going to wake up and take a hard stand? The State and Federal employees have it made with health care, pensions and salaries! The also are protected like they are an endangered species. They are greedy, self concerned Hippocrates that do not care about the people they are supposed to be working for, us.
A Hippocrates’s oath for public sector executives that covers double dipping…hmmmm.
p.s. it’s hypocrites.
I pay more for my pension than for SS. The State pays LESS for my pension than SS. Is that to challenging an idea to understand?
If you have a job opening SOMEONE will be hired. Why not hire a former employee who will not need additional health ort retirement benefits. A case can be made that it is cheaper to allow double-dipping (a negative term dredged up insult ambitious folks) than to hire, train and probation a new employee.
Oh my, a common sense superintendent has been allowed to speak by the Liberal establishment…I’m shocked!!
I hope EDWEEK writes this up like they did Arkansas’s famous ‘frugal superintendent’, Charlie Adair:
“Harrison, Ark.
Charles Adair, the superintendent of the public schools here doesn’t mind being called frugal. In fact, it’s something of an honor in these parts to be considered thrifty, particularly when you’re in charge of a $9 million annual budget. To save on the electric bill, Adair turns off the lights when he leaves his office for lunch. For years, he had an agreement with a nearby district to buy its school buses after they’d been used for five years. “They were in good shape,” he told me, “and about a third the price of new ones.”
In 1992, when a snowstorm caved in the roof of the district’s administration building–a former school erected in 1915–Adair used the insurance money to rebuild rather than construct a brand-new facility, which would have cost the taxpayers $200,000. “We saved money,” he said, “and we…http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/1995/09/20/03ark.h15.html
Where is the common sense in spending more money to NOT hire a retired employee?
There isn’t any, if I understand your comment correctly; because one would hire a retired super. with a great reputation at less cost than a new one……however, there are many criteria for hiring a new superintendent of schools.
The few I know excel at making convincing presentations before groups…teachers, parents, community leaders, students, you name it, they get the applause every time and know they can do whatever job and problems they get handed to them. KUDOS!
One I know drives a Mercedes sport’s coupe and lives a ‘good’ life; he earned it but at public expense…and then the taxpayer in me says, ‘don’t you think it a bit immoral to un-retire and still collect’? Well, maybe the Legislature can decide this in public debate next session.
Don’t count on the legislture doing anything.
Many legislators play games with the state retirment system by racking up years as legislators (they get credited with a full year towards retirement for every year they serve even though they work much less than half the year) then getting a high paying executive branch appointment for at least 3 years.
Their retirement payment is based on the 3 highest years of pay plus number of yrars credited.
Many legislators also play the retire and come back to work game (see Sawin Millet as an example).
They will not end a practise that benefits so many of them so much.
Sawin Millet is a widely acknowledged public finance ‘expert’; pick another example of where we got screwed with a rehire.
Lets be clear about this — a state government pension is what social security is to the private sector. There are no 401K at the public level. Public employees have deferred compensation programs which are NOT contributed to by the public sector. Only the employees make contributions. The present private sector companies contribute to social security and to the 401K so in actuality they are contributing more. And, in the past private companies contributed to pensions for their employees, but the employees did NOT contribute one cent.
The Maine system does hurt more females than males, as most public school teachers are females. However, male teachers, and male state employees are also affected, just like women. It just affects vastly more women. The vast majority of elementary teachers are women. In many schools, it can be close to 100%!!!!
Snowe and Collins, and many other state senators have attempted to change this horrible penalty, which affects millions. It is also in a few big states like California. And we hit a deadlock,time and time again. States who are in this, do not want to give this up, as they would lose money. But in effect, they have put this back on individuals in the state. Many retired teachers, older women, and a few men, are living hand to mouth, on welfare. Amazing for people who went to college, embracing one of the most important professions in the world, educating our young, only to be screwed in old age. For me, and many like me, I will have to work until I drop dead. No choice. I have to make money. I do not want to take any welfare, so I will work. My name is in at Walmart as a greeter. It use to be a joke for teachers, if they lost their jobs, but now, it is no longer a joke. And ironically, most retired teachers make a tad bit too much to qualify for any type of welfare. So, I know of some, who do live very very poorly, live in cold homes in the winter, live without their meds. And these are retired state workers. Shame on the state of Maine!!!!!!
—–
Double dipping & exorbitant pension packages are causing some California towns to declare bankruptcy. Good job, Mr. Webster. If only more people in power had some ethics.
This practice is also alive and well in the Corrections dept as well. Right Jeff Merril?
Why are the lower paid public employees like teachers villified for this when very highly compensated folks like our Secretary of State and our Finance Commissioner are collecting retirement from one government job while getting full pay for another?
So what do you have against Baldacci…Maine Legislature, US Congress, Governor, and now DOD?
But i can’t double dip on my pension from the Government ?
“The highest-paid on the list were school administrators.”
Gee whiz, I thought consolidation was supposed to halt that kind of hoodwinkery.
What a fine job it’s doing aye? (sarcasm filter off).
Actually, in many states, consolidation eventually led to higher paid and larger school bureaucracies. New Mexico and several other states eventually ‘de-consolidated’ to save money and introduce more local democracy.
Yep and that’s exactly what people who were against consolidation tried to say, but fear of the unknown won out in the end.
What a mess.
Human Resources at the State house has been doing this for years, why not go after them also.
If you think the legislature or other elected officials, who earn an annual “retirement” income after far fewer than 20 years, won’t jump on this like hoarders to yard sales, guess again. While it does seem a bit much for someone who retires to get re-hired, usually with a wink and nod, just to double dip, it is legal. Amazing that some of these people don’t see this as a type of welfare. I thought that pensions were to help you get though your golden years, not make you golden. 9 years till I can do this.
Congratulations to Mr. Webster for pointing this
double-dipping out at a meeting of some existing and potential future
double-dippers. In pre-RSU Searsport/Stockton Springs/Frankfort and in
Orrington Union 91, as examples, there have been multiple double-dipping
superintendents. (Orrington had a tradition of them; one recommending the
next.) Note that in those districts, and many others, the teachers were not
permitted to double-dip by the same superintendents who were doing so. Supers
get their social security, too, unlike teachers. Supers can buy retirement
credits under a plan that is not open to teachers. There are other perks. It is
a good-old-boys club. LePage went after the teachers and teacher retirees
pensions and health care benefits as great cost savings opportunities; he
succeeded and hurt teachers emotionally and financially because the
superintendents stood with him. Baldacci tried to lessen the top heavy,
administrative costs by creating RSU but the superintendents fought him,
usually subtly and quietly behind the scenes and thwarted any possibility of
the RSU program’s success. They fed the fear of loss of local control, far flung
transportation of students and government take-over…none of which had to be a
part of RSUs. It’s a large problem made worse by self-promoting administrators
and tea-party black & white mentality.
You were doing great until you threw the Tea Party into the mix. Although I’m no Tea Party member, I know that their philosiphy would never support double-dipping into the public treasury. Also, not mentioned in the BND piece is one of the most blatant examples of double dipping is the superintendent of the Presque Isle school system.
Guess I just couldn’t help the tea party reference. So many criticisms of teacher pay and teacher pensions comes from the venue of those praising the tea party and complaining that unions have provided this exquisite bed-of-roses for teachers. I’m not neurotic; they do not intentionally support double dipping but they are unwittingly aligned with those wealthy and powerful such as the Heritage folks. Historically, the right wing only comes into power through a partnership with an angered portion of the proletariat to whom the simplistic argument of “they have more than you and don’t deserve it” is appealing. Even when that argument is advanced by those who are powerful and wealthy beyond belief, part of the proletariat follows the lead. The tea party was fine in its roots, just like the Occupy Wall Street, but it quickly lost its way.
The most difficult thing is to get these stuffed shirts and politcians to understand we need to change the way we fund schools, we need a one percent sales tax, then, towns in a RSU would send that money to each RSU with what towns it has, this would be a more steady income, and takes some burden from the property tax payers.
Bill Webster is a hypocrite and the BDN is covering for him by removing comments. He was our Supt. once and he penned a lovely editorial about parents not disciplining their children and teaching them to be accountable…and then his kid got caught boozing it up in high school while he was supt…Guess who didn’t get punished, unlike the other kids with her…HYPOCRITE. C’mon BDN…gonna delete the TRUTH AGAIN????
What convoluted logic. The teachers didn’t make the rules, why punish them? I would rather have a “time tested” educator teaching my kids. Nothing against the younger generation, in fact they could benefit from observing these folks. This guy is way off base.
Why would that surprise me, that Congress is NOT effected by the Windfall???!! They should be subject to the same laws they pass for the masses. I thought we once fought a revolution to rid ourselves of the aristocracy!!!
Many retired state employees do the same thing
AWESOME! A man with integrity, a rare thing in this “modern” society.
Imagine, someone with integrity. How about running for Governor, Senate, Congress or President ?
I don’t get what’s so bad about double dipping. As I understand, your pension isnt somnething given to you but rather money taken out of your paycheck and stockpiled over time…in that case it IS your money isn’t it?
its about time….
Mr. Webster …. how about running for the Senate ????
Thank you Mr. Webster! I wish our Governor and the Legislature would do the same. Double dipping prevents many of Maine college students to leave our great State. There are many jobs in the school systems and throughout State Goverment that are being tied up by greedy double dippers, some have been holding up jobs for decades. If they choose to retire they need to leave. It is mostly teachers but if you look at the list it ranges from some who have worked in clerical positions, Employee relations management positions (who helped form the rules to their advantage) the Colonel of the Marine Patrol to the commissioner of administration.If the Governor wanted to he could insist that his department heads make changes, especially in the education arena or those who are in appointed positions. You are a good man, thank you for standing up for what is right.
How could any State agency allow double dippers? Just ask the MDOC!!!!! They are EXPERTS at carrying Olddddddddd double costly double dippers. Just ask Central Office in Augusta how much money they have coughed up. I applaud the school system for showing the balls to say no. Maybe MDOC could have had the staffing at CCF to avoid the boys little vacation from the hill and a black eye for the commissioner and by the way, the emperor does not have any clothes on but dont tell the commissioner this.
I don’t care for the double dipping system but it does make sense to hire retired teachers at a lower pay. If the school system hires a new teacher, say one just starting out then they have contribute to the teachers retirement and health benefits and so the vicious cycle begins again. People may not like but it does make sense. Police have been doing it for years.
I’m not an accountant, but it seems to me to be a bit of sour grapes. If a person earns his or her retirement and then goes back to work for a school in the same capacity….big deal. They would have to pay someone anyway, and someone with experience would be a valuable asset to the school….. OH Wait, this is probably like Hamden Academy which thrives on hiring young teachers, paying them scraps, and then firing them after two years. Now I get it.
Windfall Tax on Retirement Income
Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you’re so darn stupid that we’re going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That’s what the Speaker of the House is saying. Read below……………
Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren’t going to believe this.
Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas, it is true – all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities!
This woman is frightening.
She quotes..’ We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn’t Marx say something like this?), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.’ (I am not rich, are you?)When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:’We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities.Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as ‘Americans’.’ (Read that quote again and again and let it sink in.) ‘Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it’. Send it on to your friends. I just did!! This lady is out of her mind and she is the speaker of the house!
Activerain.com
I have no problem with a teacher/administrator double dipping……BUT….No teacher or administrator should feel or be guaranteed a job when they retire. I don’t like school districts rubber stamp somebody for a job who has just retired from that position. From what I understand (and I could be wrong on this), when a teacher or admin is hired (who had retired), that person no longer contributes to Maine State Retirement but they also pay their own healthcare (that could be thousands a year).
Seeing somebody retire and then 4 weeks later magically get the same job again is on the school boards, not the superintendent. The superintendent recommends people to hire, but school boards do the hiring (unless they give the superintendent power to do so….typically during the summer months).
Of course it makes sense that this “double dipping” nearly always is something administrators do:
2 reasons in my opinion:
Administrators are getting harder and harder to find
If a teacher retires, they are higher up on the pay scale. Those teachers getting those jobs back (when school districts could hire somebody with much less experience and save thousands of dollars) is harder for superintendents to do, budget wise (especially these days with the budgets being hit).
Administrator salaries are not set up like teacher salaries (they may not fluctuate 20-30K from a 1st year admin to an experienced admin so the cost to the district of hiring a “double dipper” admin is not an issue, fiscally.
Some are rehired the next day….all over State Goverment!
Thank you, Mr. Webster. Now, can you teach that difficult concept to the rest of the state? No wonder education is so expensive, if the taxpayers are paying double for their employees.
In the private sector, the NLRB frowns on such rehires. Most big companies at least becasue of this will not rehire retired employees for a period of time (half to one year) and then only as a consultant (which is part time contract with not benefits). Even so, they play games since money paid to consultants comes out of different pot than the SWB paid to full-time employees.