Myths about public sector pension plans
Me
about public sector pension plans
FSNA qualified as "incomplete and unprofessional" a report issued on
January 17, 2007 by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business
entitled . "Canada's Pension Predicament: The widening gap between
public and private sector retirement trends and pension plans" .
http://www.cfib.ca/research/reports/rr3028.pdf
The report characterizes public sector pensions, among other things,
as generous, often under funded, relying on taxpayers to make up any
funding shortfalls, prone to increasing benefits during periods of
surplus and not subject to the production of periodic actuarial
reports.
FSNA sent a letter to the Federation inviting it to initiate another
study to look at all dimensions of pension arrangements available to
employers and employees in Canada.
http://www.fsna.com/PDFdocs/pensions/CFIB_let_10606_Jan07.pdf
This topic was posted at the request of RonH.
Me
others see or think they see.
On Feb 11, 11:15 pm, "Me" <fsnakings...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FSNA reacts to report perpetuating myths
> about public sector pension plans
>
> FSNA qualified as "incomplete and unprofessional" a report issued on
> January 17, 2007 by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business
> entitled . "Canada's Pension Predicament: The widening gap between
> public and private sector retirement trends and pension plans" .http://www.cfib.ca/research/reports/rr3028.pdf
>
> The report characterizes public sector pensions, among other things,
> as generous, often under funded, relying on taxpayers to make up any
> funding shortfalls, prone to increasing benefits during periods of
> surplus and not subject to the production of periodic actuarial
> reports.
>
> FSNA sent a letter to the Federation inviting it to initiate another
> study to look at all dimensions of pension arrangements available to
> employers and employees in Canada.http://www.fsna.com/PDFdocs/pensions/CFIB_let_10606_Jan07.pdf
Surfer
Dear Sir,
I am writing in response to your request for additional information in
Block 3 of the accident report form. I put "poor planning" as the
cause of my accident. You asked for a fuller explanation and I trust
the following details will be sufficient.
I am a bricklayer by trade. On the day of the accident, I was working
alone on the roof of a new six story building. When I completed my
work, I found that I had some bricks left over which when weighed
later were found to be slightly in excess of 500 lbs.. Rather than
carry the bricks down by hand I decided to lower them in a barrel by
using a pulley, which was attached to the side of the building on the
sixth floor. Securing the rope at ground level, I went up to the roof,
swung the barrel out and loaded the bricks into it.
Then I went down and untied the rope, holding it tightly to ensure a
slow descent of the bricks. You will note in Block 11 of the accident
report form that I weigh 135 lbs. Due to my surprise at being jerked
off the ground so suddenly, I lost my presence of mind and forgot to
let go of the rope. Needless to say, I proceeded at a rapid rate up
the side of the building.
In the vicinity of the third floor, I met the barrel, which was now
proceeding downward at an equally impressive speed. This explained the
fractured skull, minor abrasions and the broken collar bone, as listed
in section 3 of the accident report form.
Slowed only slightly, I continued my rapid ascent, not stopping until
the fingers of my right hand were two knuckles deep into the pulley.
Fortunately by this time I had regained my presence of mind and was
able to hold tightly to the rope, in spite of beginning to experience
pain. At approximately the same time, however, the barrel of bricks
hit the ground and the bottom fell out of the barrel. Now devoid of
the weight of the bricks, that barrel weighed approximately 50 lbs.
I refer you again to my weight.
As you can imagine, I began a rapid descent, down the side of the
building. In the vicinity of the third floor, I met the barrel coming
up.
This accounts for the two fractured ankles, broken tooth and several
lacerations of my legs and lower body.
Here my luck began to change slightly. The encounter with the barrel
seemed to slow me enough to lessen my injuries when I fell into the
pile of bricks and fortunately only three vertebrae were cracked. I am
sorry to report, however, as I lay there on the pile of bricks, in
pain, unable to move, I again lost my composure and presence of mind
and let go of the rope and I lay there watching the empty barrel begin
its journey back down onto me.
This explains the two broken legs.
I hope this answers your inquiry.
Kind Regards,
Ronnie
Me
The article with this headline, "Expert witness says public pension
plans have assets" can be read at this URL
http://portal.pipsc.ca/portal/page/portal/website/issues/pension/pensioncase/Pension%20trial%20bulletin%20no.%201%20-%20Expert%20witness%20says%20public%20pe
Interest may increase as the trial progresses.
On Feb 12, 12:15 am, "Me" <fsnakings...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FSNA reacts to report perpetuating myths
> about public sector pension plans
>
> FSNA qualified as "incomplete and unprofessional" a report issued on
> January 17, 2007 by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business
> entitled . "Canada's Pension Predicament: The widening gap between
> public and private sector retirement trends and pension plans" .http://www.cfib.ca/research/reports/rr3028.pdf
>
> The report characterizes public sector pensions, among other things,
> as generous, often under funded, relying on taxpayers to make up any
> funding shortfalls, prone to increasing benefits during periods of
> surplus and not subject to the production of periodic actuarial
> reports.
>
> FSNA sent a letter to the Federation inviting it to initiate another
> study to look at all dimensions of pension arrangements available to
> employers and employees in Canada.http://www.fsna.com/PDFdocs/pensions/CFIB_let_10606_Jan07.pdf