You mean, like those jaw-dropping pensions public sector workers get? Those seem bizarre too. Seems petty to slag others’ benefits. https://twitter.com/markasaurus/status/1021986162414632960 …
-
-
I encourage this sort of argument that
@kimmaicutler is making, which points toward raising the bar for everyone, not maligning contracts that appear more lucrative than others' as the OP does. -
I stole it from Jean Fraser, who used to run the San Mateo County health system.
- 12 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
That went away.
-
When? Looking at details now: https://sfdhr.org/benefits-overview … seems like you get access to city plan but no contribution and then full contributions after 20 years?
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
That sounds like an amazing deal
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think it was changed to 15(?) years maybe 10 yrs ago, but point well taken. Also agree with your comment below about SF being a "special snowflake" (my words) due to its robust economy, near city-state status & tourist hotspot. The state needs to start taking 15% of its rents!
-
Corrected. This is from City's webpage: If you have 5+ years of service you receive health benefits. How much the City contributes depends on how long you work for the City. 20+ years of service = 100% 15+ = 75% 10+ = 50% 5+ = access to coverage, but the City doesn't contribute
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Now civil servant a only get 25% at 5 yrs. Also, we have to buy our own coffee.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Doesn’t that 5-year vesting also apply to state employee health benefits?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.