Ted joined Cat Petersen to discuss the impact FTX’s collapse may have on Illinois pensions, the need for pensions funds to be more transparent about the risks they take, and the impact Amendment 1 will have on the 460 teacher union/school board contract negotiations that will happen over the next two years.
Read more from Wirepoints:
- Over 460 soon-to-expire teachers union contracts and the ‘Workers’ Rights’ Amendment make Illinois’ April school board elections critical.
- Electric Vehicle Makers ask Pritzker To Outlaw Their Competition
- New jobs data release: Illinois unemployment rate worsens to 4.7 percent, now nation’s 2nd-worst
- 1,000 days: Pritzker’s Emergency Declarations kill jobs, increase Illinoisans’ dependence on government.
with regards to teachers unions contracts. Maybe this is a complete in outer-space question— with passage of Amendment 1, do unions have to still collectively bargain with school boards? Or with passage Amendment 1, who are unions legally obligated to bargain with? grab your ankles folks, it’s going to be a legal train wreak throughout Illinois and the lawyers associations mother load of all wet-dreams$$$$$$$!!!!
With regards to pensions. Are the 100s of pensions under any legal obligation to disclose to taxpayer public the % of $ they have invested in risky Alt Assets/ Private Equity (crypto, hedge funds, clo’s, etc)? If yes this would make a great wp research piece, probably a ton of work. Nationally the Ted Seidel (who stole my pension) claims the pensions have no idea what the Alt Assets are invested in through private equity because they issue no prospectuses. And even more frightening nobody knows what the returns are because the returns are essentially whatever the private equity fund… Read more »
As a new teacher in the late 1970’s, I was elected the pension delegate for my CPS school. It was a, “give it to the newbie because nobody wants to do it” situation. I read the pension agreement and the annual report. The investment choices were listed and it was a mix of 70% bonds and 30% stocks. The thing that stood out was a provision that reduced the board of Ed’s contribution if the funds overall return exceeded 6%. The stock investments took off during the Regan years, but the fund did not benefit because of this drain on… Read more »
The non-disclosed risk is huge (as big as Pritzker). The pension funds have gone to private equity firms to get higher returns. That is high risk business, sometimes good, sometimes not so good. Always good for the private equity firms, but not always good for the pension funds. The private equity firms have destroyed many private sector businesses for the lust of profit. They can make money by crash and burn the business.
None according to Pensions Paid First. Any shortfall or impairment will be offset by a tax increase.
Yes. Why would pension investment fund managers take on risky investments? The pensioners receive a set benefit, the performance of investments does not matter. The only possible benefit would be to the taxpayers, in the form of potentially lower tax payments. No way union pension fund managers are trying to benefit taxpayers. There is no need to consider a financial risk/reward ratio. The investments are chosen only to make political statements – ESG, divest from Israel (sorry, can’t remember the acronym), climate change, etc. They are using taxpayer money to fund their insane ideology, knowing they will just go back… Read more »
That’s not possible. They could tax at 100% for ten years and not pay off what has already been spent. The pensioners own you (from Florida)