If you read my last post, about proposed reforms to the Kansas City, MO, government pension plans, you know that I referred to the pensions that retired firefighters and other city employees get as “lavish.”
That comment prompted a critical comment from a person using the handle “Old Reliable.”
Here’s what O.R. had to say:
“From the last couple of comments, I get the impression you folks seem to know A LOT about the city employee/firefighter pension plans….In order for me to make a more informed decision about who is really getting screwed here, perhaps someone would like to give us some actual details as to these ‘lavish’ pension plans. I have a neighbor who is a recently retired KCMO firefighter and he is far from living high on some fat hog from his retirement…So, do tell, please!”
Thank you, O.R., for pushing me to get the facts. I probably should have done that in the first place!
Thanks to Rick Boersma, director of the city’s retirement systems, I got plenty of information about the firefighters’ pension plan and the plan that covers most other city employees.
Let’s look at provisions of the respective plans…
Firefighters:
:: Are eligible, regardless of age, for full pension benefits after 25 years of service. They become vested — eligible for some pension benefits — after 10 years of service.
:: Receive a pension of up to 80 percent of the average of their two highest years of base pay.
:: Get a health insurance subsidy of $240 a month. (To that fund, the city contributes two percent of firefighter base salaries, and the employees contribute one percent.)
:: Get a 3 percent, annual cost of living increase in their pensions.
Most other city employees…
:: Are eligible for full pension benefits at age 65, or when the sum of their age and years of service equals at least 80 (provided that they have worked at least 10 years). They become vested in the pension plan after five years of service.
:: Get a pension of up to 70 percent of the average of their two highest years of base pay.
:: Get a health insurance subsidy of $200 a month.
:: Get a 3 percent, annual cost of living increase in their pensions.
Either way you go — firefighter or other — it pays handsomely to be a retired Kansas City employee.
There aren’t very many private businesses — and I would suspect not one non-profit operation — where you can retire with 70 to 80 percent of the average of your highest two years of pay…plus a health benefit.
The average firefighter pay is $56,000 a year. Eighty percent of that is $44,800.
…When I retired from The Star in 2006 at age 60, I had 36 years and three months of service. My pension is $891.23 per month, or about $10,700 a year.
Don’t get me wrong; I’m not complaining. I had a great career and knew that I wasn’t going to get rich on my salary and that my pension wasn’t going to be anything to brag about.
I think it’s certainly fair to say, however, that, when compared to mine, a pension of $45,000 a year is, indeed, “lavish.”
What do you think, O.R.?
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
Firefighters do not receive SS benefits when they retire. Please report all facts when reporting the story.
‘Lavish’ is probably the wrong word. Compared to yours, the city’s pension is ‘generous’, and in my opinion more in line with what yours should have been. If yours is the standard, we’ll never be able to ‘retire.’
Pat — I think that on the arc of pension systems, firefighters, police officers, teachers and federal employees are at the top end and newspaper employees are near the bottom.
I’d be interested to see a comparison of KCMO with other similar size cities as well as other city and county agencies in the metro area. Also, let’s also compare what some of the professional staff (like engineers, architects, IT etc) could be making in the private sector. Many forgo more lucrative salaries for what used to be be better benefits (including pensions) and job security which are now under fire or already gone.
Govt employee: If you will pay me a handsome commission — say, $891.23 — I’ll be happy to undertake the study that you propose. Otherwise I’ll continue shooting from the hip, as many unpaid, former journalist-bloggers do.
HHHMMM lets see…People who put their lives on the line and are responsible for educating our future leaders and running our government make more in retirement than someone that reports, not makes, the news…I don’t see the problem here.
Forgot one other thing. You were all ready to heap on $1,500 a month for our SS. But in your calculations you didn’t add any for you so your really at $891.23 + $1500.00, which equals $2,391.23 a month. These city workers get $45,000 divided by 12, or $3,750 a month.
Would you risk your life day in and day out for a mere $1,358.77 a month, which is the difference between your retirement and theirs? If so, I guess you would have been a fireman or cop or teacher. How much as a percentage of income did you put into your retirement? Police put in 10.55%, Fire approximately 9% and that’s much higher than most any private pensions. How much of your personal income did you put into individual retirement accounts while you were working to prepare for retirement, knowing you would only receive 891+ SS a month in retirement? Sounds like people are also mad because they failed to pre-plan for their retirement. I didn’t get that so no one else should.
I believe that the work schedule for firefighters is “24 hours on, 48 hours off.”
Due to this work schedule, most firefighters are employed elsewhere, be it a regular salary job or self-employment. In either event, Social Security is paid and the firefighters will receive Social Security benefits in addition to the lavish city pension.
Good job if you can get it.
Good debate here; it’s good to get the views of some firefighters. I certainly appreciate what you do; you’re indispensable to a city’s well being. At the same time, I don’t want the U.S. to end up like Greece — a basket case. We cannot let public pensions run our governments into the poorhouse. Defined pension plans are fast becoming a thing of the past; we need to go to 401(k)-type plans, which force people to plan for their retirements.
Maybe you too should get several jobs to support your family then maybe you will have enough at retirement. There is nothing like working 3-4 jobs to make ends meet then listen to people bitch because you have more than them.
I asked my neighbor if he gets a pension at 80% pay out and he just laughted! At the time he retired, the plan would have paid him at 80% if he had worked 40 years. As of this date, it would take 32 years, but that is one of the items that the City Council is desparately trying to change on them. Hey, Jimmy, how physically demanding was your job on you? These firefighters may not work every damn minute they’re on the clock, but when they do…they earn the money they make and their bodies pay for it over time. He also said there’s not too many who can physically make it to 32+ years on that job if they have any plan whatsoever of trying to enjoy some retirement years. And I personally know that SS from part time employment won’t buy groceries for two for a single month. I’m really tired of the bashing and bad-mouthing spewing from the crybabies on here who still do not have sufficient facts to convince me that firefighters and city employeers are robbing our tax payers and making out City go broke! I can think of a lot of bullsh*% spending from CIty Hall that is causing that !!!!
My apologies for the typos…couldn’t find my readers…but I really wanted to respond.
Oh, and Phil R. get a life!!! Many FFs work other jobs to make ends meet because they don’t bring home a lot of pay because a sizeable chunk goes towards their pension!!!!! Duh!!!!! That’s one reason they should be entitled to more when they retire!!!! They put it there all along! Sounds to me like you applied for a position, but obviously never made it…..are we bitter or jealous now?!?