tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1317770170474039861.post9085974100779097925..comments2024-03-28T08:29:56.313-05:00Comments on Jeff Bergosh Blog: Judge Fulford FRS Ruling + Milli Vanilli Chest Bump = FEA Celebration Tonight!Jeff Bergoshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12638001957494810839noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1317770170474039861.post-14314981889251659972012-03-18T16:40:07.920-05:002012-03-18T16:40:07.920-05:00Gee, you may know a lot about Milli Vanilli, but y...Gee, you may know a lot about Milli Vanilli, but you obviously don't know much about law. The judge ruled based on LAW, not politics or the whim of the Idiot In Control. Sadly, you are typical a lot of school members all over Florida who know nothing about education. YOU and your kind of are root of screwed up budgets. YOu might want to get out your Kleenex, because the Fl Supreme Court will uphold the ruling, as it is based on the LAW.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1317770170474039861.post-42969848673463614332012-03-08T09:20:53.661-06:002012-03-08T09:20:53.661-06:00Anonymous—of course I read it, I was one of the fi...Anonymous—of course I read it, I was one of the first to read and post it, and I have a plenary understanding of the meaning of this document. I believe that before the law was conceived and passed, a thorough research of the implications under Florida’s constitution and laws should have been undertaken and I’m not sure it was. This said, what has happened has happened and we are where we are. <br />Now, the idea of employees paying something into their own pensions is not a radical one; let’s be clear on that. Therefore, I’m not celebrating this ruling as a victory nor am I lamenting it as a loss. I support public sector employees having some skin in the game and paying some small, reasonable portion of their income into their own pensions. But I do worry that if the left-leaning, social activist wing of the Statewide teacher’s unions go about issuing thunderous proclamations of victory over this initial ruling-- as they are doing currently, by the way-- that the legislators will go after DROP next—a very sound and revenue neutral program highly beneficial to state employees. (Could this be considered retaliatory? I think not, but really that depends upon one’s perspective.) <br />So, the big picture as I see it is that the unions should get the hell out of the way, pull this out of court voluntarily and stop parading around beating their chests as if they have singlehandedly saved the planet by having the FRS ruling go their way. These unions ought to sit down and collectively bargain a statewide MOU/MOA with Governor Scott to voluntarily contribute toward the pensions, while advocating the maintaining of DROP program for their members as a part of the deal. Collectively bargain statewide over two big, important issues—what a concept! Then, individual jurisdictions could hold local ratification votes, and everyone could then join hands and sing “kumbaya” like in the hippy Coca-Cola commercials from 1975.<br />Because state Employees like DROP; they don’t want to lose it. If the unions push the legislators by rubbing their noses in this initial court defeat over the 3% mandatory contribution, and subsequently DROP goes away—who will the winner be at that point? I can tell you who the losers will be-- the unions and hard-working, dedicated state employees who have in many cases staked their retirements on the idea that DROP will be there for them in their golden years.Jeff Bergoshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12638001957494810839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1317770170474039861.post-59104495945362981852012-03-06T20:15:08.238-06:002012-03-06T20:15:08.238-06:00Did you actually read the judges full pronouncemen...Did you actually read the judges full pronouncement? <br /><br />There was not/is not now an issue with the solvency or strength of the state employees' pension plan. The judge clearly states that this was an attempt by the state to balance the STATE budget on the back of one portion of the state's population.... its public employees.<br /><br />Please research you position before you make such specious claims.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com