Morty, Dr. Jim, coaches taking pay cuts
- Thread starter lou v
- Start date
It’s far more extensive than that. Significant furloughs of staff - University wide - being implemented today. Very sad day for hundreds of people who have to start navigating the system of unemployment.
According to the Daily, they also suspended contributions to the retirement plan. That's a pretty serious move, but par for the course in the State of Illinois.
https://dailynorthwestern.com/2020/...ticipated-budget-deficit-250-staff-furloughs/
https://dailynorthwestern.com/2020/...ticipated-budget-deficit-250-staff-furloughs/
Good start. These are difficult times. There has been a lot of bloat in administration over the past decade. And the revenue model of housing and food has been upended. Some serious decisions needing to be made, it is best to start now. The world has changed and athletic revenues are highly uncertain in the near and longer term.
Indeed. Kicking the retirement can down the road is a highly perfected version of Illinois football...
Very sad news indeed. Great people hurting through no fault of their own - each did, in his or her own way, some good for the school I love.
Silly question here but you do realize NU's employee retirement plan has nothing to do with IL public sector employee pension plans correct?
Yes. I still can joke about how the State and Private institutions in Illinois like to kick the can down the road though.
I wonder if that means Fitz and Collins, both of which have contracts and can't be forced an involuntary cut unless I guess the season isn't played if their contract has some sorta force majeure. -manure. With everyday recruiting in the revenue sports, it would be very fair to keep revenue sports at their contractual pay imo.
I didn't say they did. What I said was they kicked the can down the road. The State unfunded pension obligation is $137 Billion. Northwestern's halt in funding is tiny compared to what Illinois faces.
I think you’re a bit confused, unless I am misunderstanding it. They’re basically getting rid of their match, so not kicking the can down the road. Just eliminating an employee benefit. It would be nice if the state did the same and tightened the reigns.
Under this scenario you are advocating for the state to pursue would state and municipal employees still be ineligible to participate in the Social Security program? The taxpayers of Illinois can't have it both ways. Those state and municipal employees cannot be ineligible to participate in the social security program and be left with a state pension program that is only funded by their own contributions while receiving no contribution from the employer (i.e. us, the taxpayers). As taxpayers, we can decide to fund contributions for our state and municipal employees to the federal social security program or the state pension plan. Neither is not an option, it's fantasy land.
I would assume NU is defined contribution. About the only entities that have defined benefit plans are state and local governments. Go figure.
The state and local pension plans you refer to require a meaningful annual contribution from the employee and are often in lieu of sicial security and any 401k type plan. It’s not the windfall you make it out to be.
If this is the case why aren't public sector unions pushing for a shift towards 401K type retirement packages instead of the traditional pension. On the contrary the unions seem adamantly opposed to this. Granted in most cases this would require tweaking of the law but I would think states/cities would be in favor.
$136 billion in unfunded state and county benefits for Cook County taxpayers. Somebody is going to get shafted.
Yep, in your scenario, it would be the workers who have contributed to pensions over the years.
So are you proposing that state and municipal employees be asked to work without any social security benefits, pension plan or 401K like plan? Why would anyone agree to work under those conditions when there is no other job in the country where those conditions apply?
The size of the pension liability shortfall is a separate issue. It’s a problem of our making and we’ll have to solve it but no right minded person should expect to solve this by depriving existing employees of a benefit they have been contractually promised and personally contributed to nor should we expect future state and municipal employees to work with no access to a savings plan for their retirement.
Last edited:
This is the case, there is no ambiguity about the facts. I am not sure why. If I were in their shoes, I would certainly prefer a benefits package that included a 401 K plan with an employer match and the ability to participate in the Social Security program over completely relying on a State pension plan that the employees contribute heavily to.
