Readers React: More public-employee pension nonsense in California

To the editor: An oxymoron is a figure of speech producing an incongruous, self-contradictory effect, as in “employee retirement contribution.” (“Pension spiking could cost CalPERS nearly $800 million,” Sept. 9)

State Controller John Chiang’s audit says 97 local governments are paying the “employee retirement contributions.” The California Public Employees’ Retirement System insists it is “only 24.” This large discrepancy is a serious concern.

Of even greater concern is why is the “employee” contribution being paid by the employers (that is, taxpayers) anyway? I can’t be the only one who thinks this is ludicrous.

Pensions ought to be based, at most, on the base pay for a normal work week, period. No bonuses, overtime, sick pay, vacation pay or so-called employee retirement contributions should ever be included.

Heddy Niemeyer, Long Beach

..

To the editor: Please remember that the name of your paper is the Los Angeles Times. That means that many of your readers are from that area and probably a fair number actually live in your fair city.

So when you do an article about civil service pensions, please remember to mention that Los Angeles has its own retirement system and is in no way associated with the state system. Your article on pension spiking could easily be read, by uninformed readers, to apply to the city of Los Angeles as well.

Luther Einung, Palm Desert

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion