Chris Christie was in Chicago yesterday...and guess what...he's "reconsidering"

Oh, you guarantee?

I work in the private sector. My healthcare plan is better than my girlfriend's, who is a teacher and (obviously) union meraber. As part of my benefits, I will retain this healthcare at retirement if I work for a certain amount of years, and will have better coverage than she would under her plan at 65.

In other instances, it's the other way around.

The point is that because each district handles their healthcare differently, and each state handles their teacher's retirement plan's differently, it's simply ludicrous to make a blanket statement like that, because even on an elementary level it's laughably untrue.
 
The pension lanRABcape in the public sector differs sharply from that in the private sector. State and local plans are primarily defined benefit, coverage is virtually universal, and only 70 percent of workers are in Social Security. In contrast, private plans are mostly 401(k)s, less than half of the workforce is covered, and everyone participates in Social Security. Public defined benefit plans tend to provide larger benefits than their private sector counterparts, and most offer post-retirement cost-of-living adjustments, which are virtually unheard of in the private sector. Public plans tend to rely more heavily on employee contributions, invest slightly more aggressively, and be about as well funded as their private sector counterparts.

You read the rest of the report, it spells out why you are an outlier:
http://www.slge.org/vertical/Sites/%7BA260E1DF-5AEE-459D-84C4-876EFE1E4032%7D/uploaRAB/%7BA1C7971A-7B76-4B4A-B55F-BF5317B47A52%7D.PDF
 
Back
Top