The Sun-Times Sensationalizes State Pensions

In what they call a "a first-of-its-kind Sun-Times analysis," reporters Tim Novak, Art Golab, and Chris Fusco have unearthed some eye-opening statistics about the "17 largest retirement plans for government workers in Chicago, Cook County, and the state of Illinois." According to their research, 3,958 retired politicians, judges, school administrators, and other government employees have pensions that pay them at least $100,000 a year. Some big names are cashing in too, including Sen. Roland Burris, former Gov. Jim Thompson, former State Comptroller Dawn Clark Netsch, and former State Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka. The report points out that, in aggregate, pension payments cost state and local governments $800 million a month. (See update below.)

The piece certainly highlights some problems with the system. One example is the generous retirement packages that state lawmakers bestow upon themselves. After 20 years of government service, members of the General Assembly -- who make at least $71,000 a year for the part-time work -- can collect a pension based on 85 percent of their highest  salary (compared with 75 percent for most other government workers). According to an AFSCME analysis of State Employees Retirement System data, the average monthly payout for beneficiaries of the General Assembly Retirement System (GARS) is $4,003, even though the average length of (part-time) service is only 14 years.

That being said, the article's lede -- "Want to retire with a fat pension? Get a government job in Illinois" -- is totally over the top. While those 4,000 pensions may be too large, it's important to remember that they represent slightly more than one percent of the 374,041 retirement accounts reviewed by the paper.

Indeed, the truth is that the overwhelming majority of government jobs in Illinois don't leave you with a fat pension. As we've noted before, those enrolled in the State Employees Retirement System of Illinois take home, on average, $20,436 in retirement for over 24 years of service. When you combine workers in all five pension plans, the average retired Illinois state worker gets just $17,112 a year.  Of course, these figures appear nowhere in the Sun-Times piece.

The article also fails to mention that 75 percent of Illinois workers (most of whom are teachers) don't pay Social Security taxes while employed, therefore they don't get any Social Security benefits when they retire.

The problem with the pension system, which we've explored repeatedly, isn't necessarily that the packages offered are too generous -- it's lawmakers' bad habit of borrowing against the funds to cover other expenses (and avoid raising the income tax). On that note, state legislators ought to look to their own generous benefits calculations before pushing teachers and other moderate-income state employees into a two-tiered system.

Apparently, today's Sun-Times article is the first in a four-part series.  It would be nice to see them call out lawmakers' pension-relate gimmicks and double talk more explicitly in future installments.

UPDATE (4:45 pm): After a back-and-forth with Anders Lindall at AFSCME Council 31, we now realize that the $800 million per month figure flaunted by the Sun-Times is misleading as well. It seems the paper conflated the total of all benefits paid out each month to the 374,000 beneficiaries with the amount that must be covered by state and local taxing bodies. The pension systems generate revenue through three sources -- employer contributions, employee contributions, and investment gains.The latter two don't cost the state any money. As such, that total cost is inflated.

Comments

I ran across your comments by accident. Great points about rank-in-file gov workers and what their pensions really are. Most tax payers however can't contenance the obscene pensions lawmakers and well connected people get. There should be legislation for a cap on all future gov pensions of $55,000 (median income) no matter what anyone makes. The bigshots mentioned in the article should be shamed into giving back anything over this cap and all Illinois pols should be made to take a pledge never to take more than that when they retire . The integrety and sustainability of the system is what's at stake.

My $20,000 a year retirement from the auto industry after 35 years of 6 and 7 day work weeks and never seeing the light of day working overtime some days don't seem fair? Something’s wrong here and it's not the overpaid auto worker that paid his taxes every year.

Joe Merriman
Belleville Illinois

It is ridiculous to use a straight percentage no matter what the base pay. It should be like 100% for at least up to the poverty level and then 95% for up to twice that and 90% for three times and so forth with like a minimum of 50% lets say. Additionally the actual figured retirement income could be capped at 10x poverty. Poverty is currently like 10K which no one could get by one but you would not hit 50% until you made 10x that or 100K and if you made an more than 200k then your total retirement would be capped at 100k. It does not need to be that but some sort of metric where low wages are 100% and high wages are capped.

Just a heads-up. In your update you state: "The pension systems generate revenue through three sources -- employee contributions, employer contributions, and investment gains.The latter two don't cost the state any money." It's actually the employee contribution and investment gains that don't cost the state any money. And to expand on that, studies have shown that for every benefit dollar paid out, the employer cost is only 23 percent, the rest being employee contributions and investment gain.

In the update I see 4 sources for teachers: employee contributions, district contributions, state contributions, and investments. The problem is that the state keeps making partial payments every year promising that they will "catch up" some time. If only we could all do this with our bills.

Anon 15:05

You're correct about the employee contribution. That was just a typo on my part. It's been corrected. Thanks for the close read.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Progress Illinois' intention is to foster community and to maintain a comfortable and constructive blogging environment. While we encourage and appreciates different points of view, we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.

Discussion on this site is moderated. All comments submitted will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.

We will not publish comments that we consider:

  • off-topic
  • long-winded or containing excessive text from another source
  • inflammatory
  • commercial promotion

Please leave a name or nickname when commenting, as it makes it easier for others to respond directly.