Peewee wrote:
Defunding the police is because their pension funds have been stolen. It's happening or has happened in Spain already.
They tried to do it in Chicago regarding their pension plans but the court said, nope, you pay what that cop signed up in benefits.. Change it for the new cops coming in but pay what you owe these already eligible! Rahm and his crooked BS finally hit a wall he wasn’t going to plow through!!!
I sure did love being involved in it too!!!! Talk about justice for all!!! Whooop there it was!!!
Pushed by Mayor Rahm Emanuel and approved by the Illinois General Assembly, drastic cuts to the pension benefits earned by active and retired city of Chicago employees were signed into law by Governor Pat Quinn on June 9, 2014.
The We Are One-Chicago union coalition that includes AFSCME, the Chicago Teachers Union, the Fire Fighters Association, the Fraternal Order of Police, the Illinois Nurses Association and the Police Benevolent & Protective Association immediately announced plans to sue to have the law struck down on the grounds that it violates the state constitution’s requirement that pension benefits cannot be “diminished or impaired.” Click here to read a copy of the complaint:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/250301530/Lawsuit-Chicago-pension-cuts-are-unconstitutionalOn July 24, 2015 the Cook County Circuit Court ruled in our favor (the case now being called Jones v. MEABF). The court found that steep cuts to the pension benefits of active and retired participants in the city of Chicago Municipal Employees Annuity and Benefit Fund (MEABF) violate the state Constitution, which prohibits any measure that would diminish pension benefits already promised to active and retired public employees.
The Illinois Supreme Court heard the City of Chicago pension case on November 17, 2015.
At the high court hearing, a city lawyer claimed that pension cuts are necessary to keep the funds from running out of money. He also argued that because the legislation also requires increased employer contributions, it provides workers and retirees with a "net benefit."
But union attorney John Shapiro “poked giant holes in the city’s argument:"
“Setting aside money to pay what is already a constitutional guarantee is not a benefit, new or net. Funding provisions cannot justify pension benefit reductions in Illinois,” Shapiro told the Court. “The funding mechanism for employer contributions simply has not matched known fund obligations. Now that the result of that disconnect is intolerable, they just don’t want to pay for the benefits. But, that’s precisely what the pension protection clause precludes.”
On March 24 the Illinois Supreme Court struck down the City of Chicago pension law once and for all. While this attempt to attack pensions has been thwarted, Retirees should stay vigilent for furhter attacks in the future.
https://m.afscme31.org/retirees/get-answers/qa-pensions-for-city-of-chicago-retirees