The University of California, facing an estimated $20-billion deficit in its retirement plan, released a proposal on Monday to reduce the amount it spends on employee benefits. The deficit at the 10-campus university system is a severe example of the pension crisis that threatens public colleges across the country. The proposed changes would reduce benefits for new employees starting in 2013, raise the minimum retirement age from 50 to 55, shift some health-care costs to employees, and sharply increase employer and employee contributions to the system’s struggling pension plan. Mark G. Yudof, the system’s president, is expected to send a revised set of recommendations to the Board of Regents in November.
RSS
Follow The Ticker through your favorite RSS reader.
4 Responses to U. of California Proposes Steep Cuts to Reduce Retirement Costs
sharonmurphy - September 1, 2010 at 10:18 am
Minimum retirement is 50??!!! Do they pay ANY of the health care costs?
cwinton - September 1, 2010 at 10:28 am
My reaction exactly … retire at 50 or even 55? Is this without reduction of benefits? I’m also amazed at the implcation the retirement plan is covering health insurance. That’s a prescription for unsustainability as their enormous deficit is demonstrating.
bjackerson - September 1, 2010 at 11:07 am
At the University of Illinois (where we have significant cash problems) individuals can retire at age 50. This applies to anyone in the State University Retiremetns System (not just UI). In order to retire with full benefits, including health insurance, at age 55 they must have worked 30 years. Inidividuals with at least 10 years work in the system can also retire, but health benefits are reduced proportionately. SO, age 55 is not an uncommon age but one needs to look at the details. I doubt many faculty have 30 years at their institution by age 55, but f they do why begrudge them full retirement? The bigger issue is the deplorable retrenchment of retirement benefits in the private sector and the underfunding of pension systems.
susanfrice - September 5, 2010 at 6:07 pm
Heavens, 50. Why not 70?