One thing that hasn't been mentioned about both state and federal workers is the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP, that has been in the works for a number of years, would possibly help the cost of living adjustments.

If you work for an employer who does not withhold Social Security taxes from your salary, such as a government or state agency or an employer in another country, the pension you get based on that work may reduce your Social Security benefits.

The Windfall Elimination Provision affects how the amount of your retirement or disability benefit is calculated if you receive a pension from work where Social Security taxes were not taken out of your pay. A modified formula is used to calculate your benefit amount, resulting in a lower Social Security benefit than you otherwise would receive.

I just signed such a petition just today by the JCTA. It also has some effect on railroad retirement.

It does not effect other pensions outside the state and federal government.
Here's a link explaining the whole thing:

http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10045.html

This looks like a good start to curing the pension woes.

As a state employee I feel that the retirement system for state employees needs to be shored up. I feel that the changes being made are for the common good of all state employees and I am glad he is preposing the changes for new employees and not seasoned veteran employees. I feel that the changes that he is proposing are within the general guides of todays industry for most employees. I believe that "hazardous duty" employees such as correctional staff are shorted due to the fact that their pay does not match with hazardous jobs in the general public. The people that put their lives on the line and are in a very stressful job need and deserve a pay increase to match the pay of other states. Correctional staff are at the industry low for the United States. Correctional Officer are still called "gaurds" but deal societies worst individuals. Correctional officers deal with rapist, murderers, thieves, alcoholics, mentally ill, burglars, assaultive people, drug addicts, dealers, molesters, stalkers on a day to day basis. Increase their pay so that they can provide a living for their families without getting second and third jobs.

I agree that something has to be done to fix the current crisis in the retirement system.

However, as a participant in the hazardous duty system, I feel that the state should begin properly funding the system and make up for what they have not been putting into it for years.

The retirement fund system has been treated as a "piggy bank" for years, which has led to the current crisis.

The Cities and other agencies that pay into it can't afford to keep getting hammered with increases each year because the state doesn't and hasn't wanted to properly fund this. The employees, both current and future, shouldn't be penalized either for the states lack of funding this system.

I am a retired employee from Corrections. I worked for 21 years. There are alot of issues involved in what is proposed. My first concern is making the COLA 1.5% each year unless the Legislature states otherwise. Legislatures want this so they dont have to make a decision anymore and can look like they are doing something if they give a COLA past 1.5%. However, current law states that COLA's are based upon the Annualised Cost of Living for urban consumers, and that COLAs are subject to 2 restrictions: 1.) the COLA must be approved by the Legislature during the budget process; 2. That if the legislature does not approve or disapprove a COLA, whatever is determined by the US govt as the meets the Annualised COLA of Urban consumers is automatically given up to a MAXIMUM of 5%. The last time a COLA was over 4% was back in the late 1970s/early 1980s. All this legislation is doing is reversing the process. If legislators are too afraid of doing their job now in setting a COLA, why should we expect they could do any better by reversing the process?
The current financial situation has been due to the Commonwealth of Ky failing to meet their statory obligations in funding Retirement. Currently retirement is set as a separate entity protected from being systematically raided for funds. So unlike some comments the legislators cant just take money from Retirement. They can and have restricted what was sent to Retirement. Employee pay deductions are sent. The state's portion, that the state indicates on the new payroll system checks issued to state employees back in 2004, indicates what is supposed to be hidden expenses of employees. However, the part about retirement never makes it to Retirement. Instead when the Legislators meet they determine via the budget how much to send. The amount based upon percentages and amounts on record should be what the Retirement board recieves. It is not. Go to kyret.com and look at the acturial reports. Ky has underfunded the program for years. True losses in financial markets have hurt in the short term but long term gains are still made. The true loss is supporting a growing number of retirees on the same amount of money. If WHAS takes money from your check for a retirement plan or 401 and they agreed to match say 5% of your income as a retirement incentive, you would expect to see that indicated in your account. Vesting and other matters aside. What if instaed of the $2000 they were supposed to put in (for exmaple) in 2007 they only deposited $1000 and said we will make it up later? the problem is that the $1000 will not grow over time as the $2000 would have, including losses. That is how the state has underfunded and ignored their retirement obligation.
I cant argue with altering what incoming employees are to recieve for retirement but for those that retired such as myself there was a contract that was executed. the state by it's Governor's have always said they would take care of their obligation to retired employees. Poor excuses for mismanagement.
When hazardous duty retirement was offered to Corrections and other employees in 1990, it was followed up in late 1990s (about 1997/98 i believe) was an adjustment to retirement calculations set to take effect January 1, 2009. those calculated changes for both Hazardous and Non Hazardous retirement were set to reflect a change in retirement of 25 years hazardous and 30 years regular service. However, continuing the legislators trend of non action, those changes to retirement were never followed up. Employee handbooks were not altered and no one was informed, they just let it drop. There is a bill now to allow an extension of the 2009 changes to those who qualifed for it in 2008 to keep it even if they decide to retire later. KyRet.com has their new newsletter out talking about this legislation. Even KY RET indicates this would have little effect whether it was passed or not.
The current laws place work if the legislators bother to follow them. Changing the laws or recreting them only undermine the whole process. As far as having over sight over funds in the KYRET control, by law they are required to undergo fincial review and assessment by an independant agency that KYRET has to pay for. I wouldnt trust a state oversight into what stocks to put funds into. We might end up will all the money in E-on stocks (ie KU, LGE) or some horse farm in Lexington. I dont want to see a Kentucky Central failure with KY RET money.
My suggestion would be for the state to try actually using legislation in effect instead of passing new legislation. They want to weaken the system even more.
May god have mercy on us all.

Well Well Well!
has anyone seen HB 600 yet? Go to the lrc website for the legislative record. The HB on extending the retirement calculation so employees dont have to leave this year will be moot if HB 600 passes. OH btw HB 600 is the governors bill mentioned in this article and in email to state employees. It seems a few pieces of information were omitted in both those. HB 600 will be a wake up call for anyone working on the state trying to decide to retire or not.
ttfn