By bobby

May 7, 2010 7:09 PM | Link to this

Many public sector employees have the potential to receive more in retirement than they earned while employed. Eighty eight percent of the income of peak earning years is too much to ask taxpayers to pay, for pensions. School levies failed because people in the private sector are beginning to recognize the disparity between public service workers retirement and the Ponsi scheme called Social Security.

By Sherrie

May 7, 2010 11:01 PM | Link to this

You just gave me a reason to vote against you. I am one of those pond scum public employees who worked for 30 years doing a job a lot of others wouldn’t want to do, but I helped a lot of people. My pension, a third of my working salary, (which wasn’t close to the figures you are throwing around) mostly goes to paying for the taxes and school levies to live in Oakwood. Of course, you would probably like people like me to get out of your town.

By Sherrie

May 7, 2010 11:01 PM | Link to this

You just gave me a reason to vote against you. I am one of those pond scum public employees who worked for 30 years doing a job a lot of others wouldn’t want to do, but I helped a lot of people. My pension, a third of my working salary, (which wasn’t close to the figures you are throwing around) mostly goes to paying for the taxes and school levies to live in Oakwood. Of course, you would probably like people like me to get out of your town.

By Chris Birch

May 7, 2010 11:17 PM | Link to this

Mr. Duncan may be a CPA with much experience working with numbers, but in his article he engaged in a little “playing with numbers.” Specifically regarding Ohio teachers he failed to mention that most fail to qualify for Social Security. Their STRS pension is all there is. Private retirees often receive SS benefits plus a company pension or benefits from an employer matched 401K. Remember also that school districts pay no Social Security for their teachers. Some retired educators like myself do receive a Social Security benefit due to private sector work, much of it as a second job. This benefit, however, is severely reduced to avoid “double dipping.” Mr. Duncan, I’m afraid, did not with his number play give the complete story.

By bobby

May 8, 2010 1:11 AM | Link to this

Self Employment tax = 15.3% of wages to Social Security and Medicare. Teachers, Sherrie, Chris, would you like to trade?

By bobby

May 8, 2010 1:19 AM | Link to this

Self employed pay 15.3% into social security and Medicare. Would anyone from the public sector like to trade their benefits with me?

By Jed

May 8, 2010 4:57 AM | Link to this

Mr. Duncan is a fine example of how CPAs and other finanical “experts” have run this economy in to the ground. He throws out so much information there is not enough room here to refute his points. @bobby - would you like to exchange your self-employment for running in to a building on fire or shooting it out with bank robbers?

By Get a clue

May 8, 2010 6:39 AM | Link to this

“Under Ohio law, local governments have no ability to negotiate with police unions.” One of the top-5 dumbest statements I have ever read.

By Retired Sgt

May 8, 2010 7:55 AM | Link to this

It is MY opinion that the Honorable Mayor has no clue what he is talking about. 14% is what the cities contribute into Public Employees pensions, and the Employee pays in 10%. The general Assembly is currently evaluating a change to increase employee input to 12%. At no time has cities contributed the percentages he is throwing around. In addition, employees have little barganing room in dealing with cities who lie about their finances in negotiations, claiming poverty, to try to decrease amounts paid to employees doign a job no one else wants to do at a lower rate of pay than in the privcate sector. The Mayor is being disingenuous with his “facts”. I wouldnt trust him to be MY CPA, unless of course I wanted audited…Tell the truth Mr. Mayor, you might get farther

By Bob

May 8, 2010 9:16 AM | Link to this

Ask a Miamisburg School teacher how much of their pay is contributed to the teacher pension fund……….answer zero $$ but they can stick an emergecy levy down the throats of residents under threats of student activity cuts. Every other worker on the planet contributes to their retirement DJ is a financial moron

By Bob

May 8, 2010 9:17 AM | Link to this

Ask a Miamisburg School teacher how much of their pay is contributed to the teacher pension fund……….answer zero $$ but they can stick an emergecy levy down the throats of residents under threats of student activity cuts. Every other worker on the planet contributes to their retirement DJ is a financial moron.

By Bob

May 8, 2010 9:17 AM | Link to this

Ask a Miamisburg School teacher how much of their pay is contributed to the teacher pension fund……….answer zero $$ but they can stick an emergecy levy down the throats of residents under threats of student activity cuts. Every other worker on the planet contributes to their retirement DJ is a financial moron.

By tt

May 8, 2010 9:50 AM | Link to this

To Fired Sgt and others, the claim that these are jobs no one else wants to do is poppeycock. Just watch during the next police recruitment drive to see how many hundreds of barely high school educated prospects with no other real employment skill than a dysfunctional passion to carry a gun line up at the trough. The unions “me only” mentality goes: hire more of us but don’t affect my personal continuing excessive raises or perks in the process. That “brotherhood” of the fraternity only goes so far, you know. They think police and fire should be exempt from the financial belt-tightening that their fellow employees and the citzens they serve are experiencing. How quaint. What is truly disingenuous is the union’s incessant claim that cities are not in a financial crisis (gimme a break!) and that they should continue to receive their excessive salaries and benefits. The union elders see that starry-eyed citizens who used to worship at the feet of police and fire as the Great Protectors are realizing more and more that the playing field ain’t quite level during these tough financial times. And they are very afraid.

By Phil

May 8, 2010 10:03 AM | Link to this

Mr. Duncan, I cannot agree with the premise of your article entirely. You are right the State Pension funds are in serious financial trouble without some type of overhaul-change. Raising the contribution the government agencies pay is not the answer; PERS in their infinite wisdom lowered both the governmental agency and employee contributions by 2% and 1% respectively because they believed the ‘HAD TOO MUCH MONEY” in the portfolios. As a result all the career politicians who occupied the seats in Columbus at the time believed they could make political hay, which they did, by enacting these stupid reductions. I worked a job in the public sector for 30 years and my retirement is nowhere near your figure of $50,000. You must be looking at the amounts for former employees of the City of Oakwood. You know the place well, the City that wanted the reputation of paying its city employees the highest salaries in the area. These salaries were approved by former Mayors and council persons who would have never settled for the pay of their public employees. But wait, not you and these same types of individuals are crying foul because your 401’s have tanked and many are unemployed. So what do POLITICIANS try to do to ingratiate themselves with their constituents? They try to change the rules in the middle of the game for the appearance of REDUCING taxes and waste. It isn’t going to work this time Mr. Duncan, long before you came onto the political scene I and many other public employees entered into an agreement with the State of Ohio. We’ll do your dirty work for a lower living wage for a decent retirement, it is that simple. Mr. Duncan, I recommend you work to keep the retirement systems strong in Ohio for the employees who do the work you and your ilk has no desire to perform, otherwise you should be voted out of Office at the first opportunity.

By George

May 8, 2010 10:05 AM | Link to this

The first and foremost change to the retirement systems should be the elimination of the multitude of fraudulent “Medical” disability retirements handed out by Ohio’s retirement systems. All DDN has to do is investigate the Dayton Police Dept. and Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office to discover how large this problem we have. I know deputies who are collected a pension on the backs of their fellow employees who left police work because they were in trouble or wanted a life style change. Over 70% are working other jobs or playing golf every day, and some even make the claim golf is just what the Dr. ordered for their bad back or knee. This is the true injustice and fraud within our Retirement systems.

By Retired Sgt

May 8, 2010 10:46 AM | Link to this

@tt- Bite me you little meleed mouthed munchkin. You have no clue what you are talking about..once again. Yeah, those great salaries, where even under the best of times we were getting 3% pay increases when the private sector was getting much more. Now you want to attack out pensions, after we took less over decades so we could have something in the end, now you want to deny us that too?

By Retired Sgt (the real one)

May 8, 2010 11:05 AM | Link to this

@other Retired Sgt-Please post under another name. Most people here know that I dont talk that way. True, there are some who have abused the pension system. Those are few and far between and certainly are less in quantity than the abuses in the private sector. There are also other truths… 1-The cities have generally not acted fair during negotiations over the last several decades (Dayton that is). The City’s barganing units have acted in good faith and have had to go to arbitration almost every time since I have been with the COD. Historically, the units have taken less, for a better situation in the end at retirement. Most who are complaining about the benefits dont see the the sacrifice the workers have conceeded to over the years. Most private sector jobs dont work shift work, holidays, etc. Time off is generally not denied, while in public sector it routinely is. Overtime in many cases is not compensated. In private sector it is. You really need to look at ALL of the body of work, not just the well deserved pension at the end. While I am speaking for public safety workers in general, private sector jobs generally dont have to worry about coming home in a body bag. These are real possiblilities in public safety jobs. To the tt fellow, While I am not going to take as hard a line as the faux Retired Sgt, I will say this, over the years, when times were good, not many people applied to be public safety personnel. Now, that times are bad, yes, you will see an increase, most of which will not rise to the level of hireability. Those who do, dont let some of these comments from the uninformed dissuade you. We need you, and I for one will thank you for entering in a field where amny complain about you, until they need you.

By tt

May 8, 2010 11:10 AM | Link to this

Easy, Sarge. Don’t taze me, bro. Why don’t you fill everyone in on the additional step increase payments, uniform allowances, unconsciounable overtime payments, 5-7 weeks of accrued vacation/personal leave time a year, the DROP program (talk about criminal!), overly generous health care plans, and other “work related” payments police officers get that no one else does. To continue this charade of painting poor police officers as low-paid, over-worked, under appreciated, saintly, public servants doesn’t work any more. You had it WAY too good for WAY too long, and all of that egregious excess is now coming home to roost.

By Vetteman

May 8, 2010 11:54 AM | Link to this

I personally know afew public-service retirees,and present employees,and they do REALLY WELL!!!! at the tax payers expense. People think G.M.retirees have it Really WELL,not near as good as public-service retirees. Not even close.

By Vetteman

May 8, 2010 11:54 AM | Link to this

I personally know afew public-service retirees,and present employees,and they do REALLY WELL!!!! at the tax payers expense. People think G.M.retirees have it Really WELL,not near as good as public-service retirees. Not even close.

By Vetteman

May 8, 2010 11:54 AM | Link to this

I personally know afew public-service retirees,and present employees,and they do REALLY WELL!!!! at the tax payers expense. People think G.M.retirees have it Really WELL,not near as good as public-service retirees. Not even close.

By Retired Sgt (Real one)

May 8, 2010 11:55 AM | Link to this

Where are you getting these numbers? 1-Accrued vacation-5-7 weeks, I think not, not unless you have been there for over 20 years. 96 hours vacation/yr. is the fact. There are bonus hours for seniority (just like in most private industry), starting at 4 yrs up to 20 years. 2-Generous HC Plan? What do you consider generous? Normal plan, with increasing contributions from the employees are the facts. Most private industry have better plans than what the COD offers. The contributions have been going up each contract. 3-What “Work related payments no one else gets” are you referrring to? You are going to have to be more specific. I have no clue what the hell you are talking about (you probably dont either) 4-Time an a half is what you get for overtime…If you get it. Overtime is almost a thing of the past. 5- DROP. I fail to see your “criminal” association with the program. It allows pensioners to FREEZE their pensions, and continue to work for up to 8 years, banking taxed monies into an account. They dont collect it and continue to work, if that is what you are thinking. 6- If you think it is so lucrative, I suggest you apply to become a PO or FF and see how you like working long hours, low pay, shift work, holidays, worrying about whether or not you will see your family when you get off work, your family worrying about you… These type of arguments are generally aimed at pensioners when somebody sees a perceived slight, yet doesnt look beyond that to what the people receiving the benefits actually have to do to earn it. YOU try going into a house that is on fire because someone fell asleep smoking. YOU try to disarm a mental with a knife/gun who is off their meds. YOU go and try to stop the bleeding of someone who just intentionally cut their wrists, YOU go deal with the broken leg kid, the dead kid, the child that parents throw away, day after day, and do it at 3 in the morning on a cold winter night when everyone else is in bed asleep. YOU get injured while trying to stop a bar fight, or a husband or wife trying to beat the other, you go into a manhole drain and try to pull someone out that has been overcome by fumes.. When YOU are willing to do that, then we can talk about receiving a couple of thousand dollars after taxes/month. Try to get around with your body beaten up over the years and see if that couple of thousand bucks were worth it…For me it was..I was damn proud to be one.

By bobby

May 8, 2010 12:35 PM | Link to this

@ Jed, Courage or compassion is not exclusive to the public sector. Was there any information on my post to refute, or does this discussion end in righteous indignation?

By Mike R

May 8, 2010 12:46 PM | Link to this

@Phil—No one’s “crying foul because our 401K’s have tanked.” If you look at the Pension Plans many of these investments are similar to 401K choices. Neither are doing well. So, please don’t be “feeling good about yourself” because others might be struggling. The real angst is that the tax payers will be obligated to pick up the tab for the pensioners, but nobody is going to help the people that worked in the private sector. And @ Retired Sgt (real one), There are many, many salaried workers, managers, etc., who do NOT get overtime. They are paid to do a job and there are people working 50 or more hours a week and they are not getting time and a half.

By Retired Sgt

May 8, 2010 12:46 PM | Link to this

Just FYI Bobby, the Ohio Pensions systems ALSO pay into medicare. The amounts paid in by the Ohio Pensionersemployee are equal to that of a private industry employee, we dont pay into SS, but we dont draw it either.

By Dave

May 8, 2010 1:08 PM | Link to this

Mr. Duncan, you state that you advise clients not to allow an accountant to run their business, but you run the city of Oakwood. Are you going to resign or are you just another politician talking out of both sides of your mouth?

By Retired Sgt

May 8, 2010 1:22 PM | Link to this

@Mike R And that is the perils of working on a salary. HOWEVER, as you know, there are Perks to salaries too. I have worked both…

By bobby

May 8, 2010 3:03 PM | Link to this

Correction: Ponzi

By CalvinJ

May 8, 2010 7:08 PM | Link to this

I know if Mr. Duncan were my accountant, I would go somewhere else after he talked about the incomes of those for whom he does taxes. He misuses data by talking about the average social security amounts but talks about only the highest rates for those in public retirement systems; why didn’t he talk about the average received amount there. Typical misuse of data. Public employees mostly do not get social security. Therefore They don’t get medicare without paying. People in the private system get their pensions, social security, medicare, raises semiannually, cars, long vacations, all kinds of perks along with their 401Ks. People in the public system are not allowed to strike, they have lower pay to compensate for the perks they don’t get. And Mr. Duncan has nerve to criticize most of the public workers. IF he’s trying to smear everyone to get back at police and fire fighters in warm and cheerful Oakwood, he should stick to talking about his employees only. That will make it easier when it’s negotiations time for them. Hee hee.

By George

May 8, 2010 8:42 PM | Link to this

@Ret. Sgt. I agree with most of what you said but you are disingenuous if you will not recognize the fraud that goes into the countless “medica” retirements. I know a ton from both DPD and MCSO who are on the gravy and mashpotato train.

By Mike R

May 8, 2010 9:48 PM | Link to this

People in the private system get their pensions, social security, medicare, raises semiannually, cars, long vacations, all kinds of perks along with their 401Ks.<< Whoa, there CalvinJ! Not sure where you’re getting your information, but you are greatly misinformed. Civil Employees can start a Roth 40lK, there’s no law saying they can’t save for their own retirement (which would be wise). 99.9% of employees in private firms DO NOT have company vehicles! Long Vacations? c’mon. The average employee in the U.S. has less than 2 weeks of EARNED vacation time/year. Semiannual raises??? Seriously, you just lost all credibility with that statement. All kinds of perks, huh? Well, I guess if you consider bailing out civil employees who didn’t save a dime, plan for retirement, or put a little money aside for a rainy day, then I guess you can consider it a “perk.”

By Retired Sgt

May 9, 2010 6:18 AM | Link to this

“Bailing out civil servants..” No, we just want what was negotiated in a long arguous process where concessions were made on our part to guarentee a meager retirement income in the future. Most in the private sector dont: work shift work (in fact, outside of civil servants, only 12% of the population works shift work), holidays, long hours, hazardous duties (for those in public safety). Not only that, but research shows that the average life expectancy of those in public safety (depending on the study you view) are between 10-17 years SHORTER than that of a private citizen. This means IF you make it to retirement, you dont get the benefit of a long retirement. Typically, when a government finds itself in fiscal dipsair, instead of looking at the REAL reasons why they screwed up their money management, they put the blame on the backs of the employee and the retirees. and @George, if you would re-read my lengthy earlier post, I acknowledged there are SOME people who may have taken advantage of the system, but UNLESS you are their DOCTOR, you can not say with ANY credibility that their injuries are or are not career ending. AS YOU KNOW, people who go out on a disability have a lengthy process of examinations from both their own private doctor AND the doctor from the pension board, who BOTH submit reports. The pension board then takes all reports into account and make a ruling. If the person is faking, as you allude they are doing, then they have to fool a lot of Doctors. It’s not like they just say “I cant work anymore, give me a pension…”

By bobby

May 9, 2010 11:42 AM | Link to this

@Sgt., Please elablorate on the REAL reasons why govt. managers screw up their money management.

By George

May 9, 2010 12:27 PM | Link to this

You and I both know there are many unscrupulous doctors and attorneys working around here who will sign anything for the bucks that is a fact. Career ending injuries, give me a break, all you have to do is look at all the frauds who have left the Sheriff’s Office and DPD over the last 20 years and 70+% are working other jobs or playing golf every day. PERS doctors will not go against the findings of one of these sham doctors for fear of lawsuits, PERIOD! The process only has the review of 2 doctors, one for the faker and one for PERS. You are also very wrong when you assert some of these frauds don’t say, “I don’t want to work anymore”, that is exactly what they say when they are facing termination, demotion, etc… So these type of losers MOD is to immediately go off on sick leave, never to return to work, run to the unscrupulous attorney, get an appointment with a doctor who will sign anything and run off to Columbus file their paperwork and wait the 8 to 12 months the process takes and woola, a “disability separation” benefit retirement is awarded for the rest of their life and scamming their former fellow employees and taxpaying citizen. I heard yesterday the Sgt. from the Sheriff’s Office who was charged and convicted of a sex crime against a minor and is a registered sex offender was recently awarded his “disability separation” retirement. Once the system stops these scammers and makes the frauds of the past pay back their take, then maybe the systems will be more solvent.

By null

May 9, 2010 3:01 PM | Link to this

what about all the people screwing social security on tax payers dime its not just cops

By null

May 9, 2010 3:01 PM | Link to this

what about all the people screwing social security on tax payers dime its not just cops

By null

May 9, 2010 3:02 PM | Link to this

what about all the people screwing social security on tax payers dime its not just cops

By He is right

May 9, 2010 6:30 PM | Link to this

Well it is true. I earned so much more on PERS, medical reimbursement accounts and other fringes I did not even know about than I could have anywhere else. Most public employees can tell you their retirement date. It is what they live for. Maybe if we paid more in terms of a weekly pay check and less in retirement, it be a better deal for all concerned.

By George

May 9, 2010 7:20 PM | Link to this

@Ret. Sgt., my comment above was directed at you.

By Mike R

May 9, 2010 8:42 PM | Link to this

Retired Sgt., my dig at perks was more directed at ClavinJ. None the less, as I eluded to in a different thread, there’s a difference in attitude between civil service and people with Social Security “retirements.” The difference is people in the private workforce have long-ago figured out Social Security wont be there when we retire. Even with modifications to S.S. (which will be needed to keep it solvent past 2017) we might, might get back 72 cents for every dollar paid in if we’re lucky. Thus, many people in the private sector have made other arrangements and planned accordingly for their golden years. Issues with S.S. are nothing new. Neither are the issues with Civil Servant Pensions. In fact, it is well documented, over the past couple of decades, that pensions are underfunded. However, it appears that many civil servants did an “ostrich” maneuver and put their head in the sand and didn’t want to accept that fact. That’s the difference. Both are broke, or going broke, and that’s the fact. So, additional taxes on the working person aren’t going to fix either system and you’re not going to get 100% of the retirement the gov’t promised you and neither am I.

By Retired Sgt

May 10, 2010 5:50 AM | Link to this

@George, Perhaps you can enlighten us on the identities of the “unscrupulous attornies” you allege file bogus disabilities. Perhaps you can enlighten us on all the medical records you examined of the various pensioners who retired on disabilities. Are you a doctor? So now you say we have a system that has unscrupulous attornies and doctors who are employed by the pension system, working in concert, to screw the pension system. What benefit would there be for the pension system to hire doctors who are working against their best interests? What benefit would there be for the pension system to award pensions to people who dont deserve them? you say to stave off lawsuits. I say you are full of…BS As I said, there will always be a small percentage that get around the system, but that is a small percentage. Most do have actual incurred injury that prevents them from being able to work in the public safety field. Believe me, I have done hundreds of hours of research on this topic. I am not throwing out blanket allegations as you are. Unless you are prepared to present evidence of: unscupulous Attornies and names, unscrupulous doctors and names, the medical records of those you allege have gotten around the system and why your doctorial experience trumps theirs, then I suggest you keep your allegations to yourself..

By George

May 10, 2010 8:17 AM | Link to this

@Ret. Sgt. Sorry I must have hit the “disability separation” nail on the head with you. Are you a fraudelent medical Sgt. Is that why you want me to keep my allegations to myself? You sure sound like one. Give me a break, where have you done your HUNDREDS of hours of research on this topic. You are either an incompetent investigator or a liar. Pers is well aware of these unscruplous leeches who bilk the system. Pers has neither the resources alloted, enough investigators to research these frauds dispatched in the field or the stomach to file the appropriate charges and the ensuing migration through the court system. It is perceived as “cost of doing business” that given the plight of our system is beginning to catch up with them. If, and I use if lightly, you are truly a retired sgt. from area law enforcement you know what i say is true whatever type of retirement you are out on. The rest of your bantor is Bls*.

By Retired Sgt

May 10, 2010 9:41 AM | Link to this

Nope George, I did my 25 and got out. No fraud here. HOWEVER, unless you are able to cite FACT instead of OPINION, then really you are full of BS. In your OPINION, those who retire on a disability should not be able to seek employment after retiring…WRONG. Many disabilities that disable those in public safety jobs are not totally disabling, but ARE disabling from doing public safety work. (ie: cardio, legitimate back, neck, respritory, Knees and Ankle, Stomach, diabetes, to name a few)These injuries/Illnesses are not necesarily disabling in the normal sense, but can disable those in public safety from perfoming that job function. They can certainly do other jobs after their retirement, just not Police, Fire and EMS. Since most pension systems allow for employment after retirement after duty related injuries, as long as those duties dont conflict with the ailment determined, the pensioner is allowed to work. (Example: A PO who retires on a disability is prohibited from performing other police, investigator or law enforcement jobs, as they would conflict with the disability claimed. this would not prohibit them from working a computer programmer job or the like). If however the pensioner is found working a job in conflict, then their pension could be foreited. This has happened to 43 pensioners over the past 10 years. Your blanket statements about pensioners going out on disabilities are frauduent just isnt true, and unless you are able to cite FACTS, well then again, you are full of BS. You may THINK their ailments are bogus, but until you get that Doctorate, it is really just your OPINION. Sure, I have seen injuries/ailments that people have retired on and shook my head, but those are in the minority. What I have seen in more case are officers who should have retired on a disability, worked longer and the injuries got much worse to the point where the officer was now in a really bad situation instead of listening to medical advice and retiring. Now, I have done about a hundred injury investigations over my 10 years as a Sgt. and worked over 25 years total. How many have YOU done Doctor George? Once again I will say, unless you can cite facts, you have nothing but opinion.

By George

May 10, 2010 2:14 PM | Link to this

Poor Ret. Sgt., you rant on just like one of those Frauds. I would bet a bunch you are one. It isn’t worth arguing with you anymore. Too bad we will never know who you “really” are, I only care to prove my point.

By Amazed

May 10, 2010 2:46 PM | Link to this

I agree totally with Ret. Sgt. He knows what he is talking about and not cciting random facts. I can speak from experience having been forced to retire on a disabilty under PERS. Many retirees are made to undergo yearly medical exams by PERS. If they are found fit, the disabilty is stopped and they are ordered back to work. Thats a fact.

By George

May 10, 2010 9:32 PM | Link to this

Give me a break Amazed, I know at least 40 cops out on b.s. medicals working other jobs, some involving a lot of physical labor, most play golf 3+’s a week all the while ripping off the taxpayers and employees paying their way for a service retirement. I also know the yearly evaluations are joke too as most utilize a couple of sham doctors in the area. It is part of cycle. Check out the recent Sgt. from the Sheriff’s office who wants to change his plea involving a sex offense after his conviction. He claims the boy he had sex with was actually 16 instead of 15, it is reported he received a “disability seperation” after getting caught and going on sick leave. You and retired sgt. can save the B.S. for those who have no clue!

By pops

May 10, 2010 10:54 PM | Link to this

Argue all we want about numbers which can be skewed to represent one’s position. However, there is one fact which I can’t understand and one which I vigously detest — how can the taxpayers afford to pay a public employee’s retirement starting at age 48, 50, 52? That is not only financially irresponsible, it is morally reprehensible.

By Retired Sgt

May 11, 2010 10:21 AM | Link to this

@George, Once again, unless you can cite facts, al you have is opinion. AS Amazede said, retirees who reire on disability pensions go throuhg yearly physicals to maintain the pension or they are deemed fit to work. That means that your “unscupulous” doctors woul;d be far and wide, as the pensioner would have to fool, or work in concert with the doctor ove a period of Years and decades. Notlikely. you can “Say” you have seen this or that, but once again, you have no facts. All you are are a BS artist. And as I said before, I did my 25 and then a little more and decided to go on to another career. I feel sory for those like you George, you have no facts to back up what you say, yet keep trying to convice those that what you say is right. Perhaps a career in Politics is for you?

By davidss2

May 11, 2010 11:04 AM | Link to this

Clearly the author Mr. Dunham intends to foment hatred toward public domain workers. Let’s ask what his retirement setup is? What benefits does he get from working for Oakwood? How much money does he earn every year? ——————-Looking into the author’s record will make clear what his goals are for himself and for the City of Oakwood. Really, I think Oakwood folk shouldn’t have to pay for those retirements and those high salaries for the public police, firemen, teachers, cafeteria workers, people running the city building, providing city services. Just fire all of them.

By Insider

May 11, 2010 2:40 PM | Link to this

I know for a fact that the mayor of Oakwood receives $30 a month for his service, and absolutely zero in retirement benefits. That’s it. One can hardly get rich off that.

By George

May 11, 2010 11:30 PM | Link to this

Ret nothing, I am right and you know it, most likely from first hand experience. I will give you a little help, this should be easy for someone who has conducted hundreds of personal injury accidents. Do a public records request from PERS and Police and Fire for the number of “disability seperations” for the last 5 years. Even a historical revionist like you will be shocked.

By Retired Sgtl

May 12, 2010 10:15 AM | Link to this

Once again George, unless you are able to cite FACTS, you know what those are, FACTS? Those are things that can not be disputed. As I explained, just because a pensioner retired on a disability, doesnt mean they are DISABLED in the normal sense of the word, but they are disabled from doing POLICE, FIRE, or EMS work, (or what ever field they worked in) due to any injury or illness that prevents them from working in that field. Since obviously you have no clue about how Disability pensions work, I suggest you read up a little instead of speculating how people retire and the reasons why. Once again, you only have OPINION, while I have FACTS backing me….And once again, I retired after 25 years, 3 months and 17 days in LE to pursue other ventures. I think I am allowed to do that..

By George

May 12, 2010 10:23 PM | Link to this

Ret nothing, I know the facts too, if you think I would put it out here on a stupid blog page it’s no wonder you left the dept. early. Everyone know a 25yr ret. only yields 60% in your system. I KNOW why people retire early on fraudulent “disabilities”, I have explained them to your slow mind before. You are a kool aid drinker and ignore the facts when they are right there in front of you. If you are into another venture as you state then you should change your U.N. to your new profession.

By Retired Sgt

May 12, 2010 11:30 PM | Link to this

25 years is the minimum for a service pension George. Not only that, but I can actually write a sentence that makes sense. george, you are clearly devoid of any rational thought, therefore any further debate with you is fruitless. You are wrong, you are clueless, you have no inkling of how pensions are distributed.

By Les

May 13, 2010 8:10 AM | Link to this

I took a medical retirement from police and fire.I pay no taxes and make more money than when I worked and paid taxes. I got into the field because of the job i liked and the benifits which we all have earned and was promised when we signed on.

By George

May 20, 2010 9:44 PM | Link to this

@Ret nothing, How’s this for a sentence. You are one of those losers who took a fraudulent retirement.

By Retired Sgt

June 10, 2010 4:53 PM | Link to this

Still slinging unfounded accusations George? See, since you have continually avaoided FACTS, you continue to sling OPINION. 25 years George…25 years…