advertisement

Alter pensions for police, firefighters

In the wake of the Great Recession when economic woes continue to hit home for local governments, it should come as little surprise that overwhelming numbers of voters in 45 suburban communities expressed support on Election Day for pension changes for police and firefighters.

A handful of suburban mayors took that outcome and used it to lobby legislators in Springfield this week for some changes in state law that will ease the budget burden befalling local governments as they struggle to fully fund pension accounts for those who serve and protect us all.

We hope the legislators listened and will study possible changes, just as we urge them to study further fixes to the state's pension funds.

One of the significant accomplishments of last spring's legislature was its lightning-fast move to alter pension rules for future state workers. Those changes take effect for those hired after Jan. 1. New teachers and state and local government workers, except for local police and firefighters, will be required to work until age 67 to get full benefits rather than qualifying for full benefits at 55, as is the case for current workers. Another significant change enacted was to base pensions on the highest consecutive eight years out of the last decade of work, rather than the current highest four years of work.

Any and all similar proposals for police and firefighters also should be considered. Several suburban mayors are pushing for a change that would require police and firefighters to work until age 60 before qualifying for full benefits, rather than the current 50. And employees would need 35 years of service for a full pension.

Critics suggest it might not be safe to have 60-year-old firefighters and beat cops. That might be true, but police and firefighters already are required to meet fitness standards, and if those are properly enforced, our safety shouldn't be compromised. This should be studied and discussed with police and fire representatives.

What often happens in practice now is that many police and firefighters retire in their 50s, collect a pension and then take a high-paying, taxpayer-funded job somewhere else. That's a problem that also should be addressed by legislators. We don't begrudge anyone continuing to work as long as an employer finds him or her able, but taxpayers should not have to pay for a pension at the same time they're also paying for a salary somewhere else. No one who still has the benefit of a pension should be allowed to collect it while working full time. A pension is supposed to be for retirement, as in, when someone quits working. Mayors who are lobbying for changes also want pensions based on average salary levels rather than final salary levels.

These ideas and any others should be studied. We value the work of those who protect us, but changes need to be made. It's clear we no longer can afford the lucrative pensions of the past.