If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
On 2020-04-08 13:24, Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , says... some police/fire/transport workers earning $200K+ a year Bus drivers in the US earn 200K$ per year - seriously? I didn't say bus drivers. I said transport workers. For example commuter train operators. At the end of their career, they have a wide range of options that allow them to cook the system for huge payouts. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if some bus driver's in NY and some other cities are going well over $100K when they pack all the options wisely. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
In article , Scott Schuckert
wrote: Bus drivers in the US earn 200K$ per year - seriously? Not around here they don't. I sell cars, and the credit applications I see from them usually state high $20's to mid $30's. IMHO, not bad for the job. dunno where you are, but that's rather ****ty. https://www.comparably.com/salaries/...driver-in-san- francisco-ca The average Muni Bus Driver in San Francisco, CA makes $79,617, 51% above the national average Muni Bus Driver salary of $52,730. This pay is 23% higher than the combined average salaries of other metros Washington, DC, Denver and Atlanta. https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Chicago-T...ries/Bus-Drive r/Chicago-IL Average salary $46,670 per year https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Mbta/salaries/Bus-Driver Average salary $51,652 per year https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Wmata/salaries/Bus-Driver/Washington-DC Average salary $65,978 per year https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Mta-New-Y...ries/Bus-Drive r Average salary $71,207 per year https://nypost.com/2016/03/13/nycs-h...r-doubled-his- salary-with-ot/ New York¹s highest-paid bus driver, Jeffrey Birch, 60, collected $153,173 last year, more than doubling his $67,462 base salary, MTA payroll records show. .... The minimum salary for bus operators is $20.97 an hour, but veteran drivers earn $31.79 per hour before overtime. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
In article , nospam
wrote: The average Muni Bus Driver in San Francisco, CA makes $79,617, 51% above the national average Muni Bus Driver salary of $52,730. This pay is 23% higher than the combined average salaries of other metros Washington, DC, Denver and Atlanta. Sorry, I misread - I was thinking SCHOOL bus drivers, a whole 'nother thing. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
Scott Schuckert wrote:
nospam wrote: The average Muni Bus Driver in San Francisco, CA makes $79,617, 51% above the national average Muni Bus Driver salary of $52,730. This pay is 23% higher than the combined average salaries of other metros Washington, DC, Denver and Atlanta. Sorry, I misread - I was thinking SCHOOL bus drivers, a whole 'nother thing. But its still closer than what Alan was alluding to. Specifically, he's trying to use an example of where there's been a longstanding "broken" pension system for a few segments of public workers - typically just Police & Fire - that he's using to broad-brush condemn all public workers. Many/most other public workers don't have the same formula as Police/Fire to be applicable - - just as how they also don't have mandatory retirement at age 55/etc. FYI, this 'broken' system is typically a mechanism where their retirement benefit is defined as a percentage of their last year's pay, with said pay _including_ overtime. What then happens is that for these workers is that when they're in their planned last year of work before retirement, they try to rack up a ton of overtime, because of how it adds to their pension. For "transit", there are "transit officers" which are basically police that are specialized in working just on the transit system; they can be under the same 'broken' retirement as their non-transit police officers. But that's not the bus driver or subway/train conductor. FWIW, there's a lot more to this, as governments doesn't have the same budget flexibility as private enterprise such as to increase pay in the short term. As such, the backroom negotiations may agree on a (say) +5% raise, but if they only have enough cash in this year's municipal budget to increase pay by +2%, the balance gets shoved down the road as a deferred benefit (such as retirement). FYI, private industry's benefits used to be better than public, but they found that with the decline in unions, new hires weren't paying attention as much to anything other than the current salary, so benefits is where they chose to cut their labor costs. TL;DR: its all a classical "pay me now or pay me later" paradigm. -hh |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
Savageduck wrote:
-hh wrote: Scott Schuckert wrote: nospam wrote: The average Muni Bus Driver in San Francisco... Sorry, I misread - I was thinking SCHOOL bus drivers, a whole 'nother thing. But its still closer than what Alan was alluding to. Specifically, he's trying to use an example of where there's been a longstanding "broken" pension system for a few segments of public workers - typically just Police & Fire - that he's using to broad-brush condemn all public workers. Many/most other public workers don't have the same formula as Police/Fire to be applicable - - just as how they also don't have mandatory retirement at age 55/etc. For California State Health & Safety employees, which include State Law enforcement, and State Firefighters the earliest retirement age is 50 at 2% of final year’s salary for each years service, then pro-rated to 3% for each year of service at 55. Those are not mandatory retirement ages, just minimums. I retired at 60 with 25 years service in a State of California Law-enforcement agency. My last 15 years were served as a Lieutenant. KISS summary: the 'broken' pension system that I was acknowledging does not apply to your California district. FYI, this 'broken' system is typically a mechanism where their retirement benefit is defined as a percentage of their last year's pay, with said pay _including_ overtime. For California Health & Safety...Overtime is not included... Overtime isn't included in my own pension plan either. But unfortunately, that's not universally true across the entire USA for all pension plans of municipalities. What then happens is that for these workers is that when they're in their planned last year of work before retirement, they try to rack up a ton of overtime, because of how it adds to their pension. That is not what happens... in California. But the history in the Northeastern USA has included this, which was what I was acknowledging. What does happen, is some Health & Safety workers will ‘burn’ leave they have accumulated, not working for their final year, and then retire. A payout at retirement separation results in a considerable tax hit. That was my experience when I cashed out about 1200 hours of sick,& vacation leave. I think you misphrased that? I'm aware of two approaches that people consider when 'unused' hours' are (or aren't) included in some fashion in one's pension calculations. A) when unused hours get some form of retirement credit, an optimization strategy is to seek to maximize said hours to maximize the payout. Forms of credits can include being paid out as a lump sum (thus, the tax hit), as a credit which increases the length-of-service, etc. B) when unused hours aren't given a credit (or aren't "good enough"), an optimization strategy is to use them (aka 'burn') them while still at regular pay. Can be an effective 'retire early', etc. There are others who will plan for promotion and retire once they have a year at the top step of the pay range for that rank. Another personal optimization. My program looks at what they call "High 3" pay averaging in their formula, so this sort of optimization approach means that they'll take that promotion and then stay for 3 years before retiring. The other group are those who will claim on the job injury, and take a medical retirement earlier than age 50. Those folks do not usually fare too well as their disability is evaluated, and paid as a percentage which is not taxed... Including when the media gets a tip and sets up a camera... For "transit", there are "transit officers" which are basically police that are specialized in working just on the transit system; they can be under the same 'broken' retirement as their non-transit police officers. But that's not the bus driver or subway/train conductor. Not my area of expertise. My point was just that 'transit' doesn't automatically mean a job as a {vehicle} driver as was being inferred. -hh |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
On 2020-04-08 20:44, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 April 2020 15:08:31 UTC+1, Alan Browne wrote: On 2020-04-06 19:49, Whisky-dave wrote: On Sunday, 5 April 2020 20:10:17 UTC+1, Alan Browne wrote: On 2020-04-04 20:47, Whisky-dave wrote: Formula 1 cars have manual gears Double clutched automatics that change gears very fast - all the driver does is pull a an "up" or "down" shift control. If you call that "manual".... Yep because the driver decides, not the car. They have 8 gears IIRC why not just have fast and slow options. ? Optimize engine-RPM-torque to wheel-RPM-torque for the desired conditions. So. It's still the driver that decides when to change gear. One day it might be done in car or even remotely by those monitoring the systems. Maybe even AI or machine learning for each section of track, then you'll be getting closer to driverless car F1. But presently the driver performance does seem important to the results of the race. F1 rules keep adjusting to make sure the driver is part of the talent pool involved in winning. At one point skirts were used to create a low pressure area under the car. That made cornering at higher speed much easier. It also made it very dangerous if the car hit something (debris, another car, curb, etc.), lifted, destroying the vacuum and the cars went airborne. Turbos have come and gone and come again. IIRC turbos are now compounded with electric motors (but I might be confusing that with something else). Cars now have a required hybrid electric energy storage requirement and caps on how much of that energy can be drawn back (IIRC on a lap by lap basis and other requirements/constraints). |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
Seems that people working for the private sector in the USA get
much less. I know a guy from Texas, regional Americas head for a large multinational corporation. He is well above 60 and continues working because he can't afford to retire. -- Alfred Molon Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at https://groups.io/g/myolympus https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
In article , Alfred Molon
wrote: Seems that people working for the private sector in the USA get much less. no. I know a guy from Texas, regional Americas head for a large multinational corporation. He is well above 60 and continues working because he can't afford to retire. that could be for any number of reasons, and one story means nothing anyway. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
On 2020-04-09 12:31, Alfred Molon wrote:
Seems that people working for the private sector in the USA get much less. Depends what you do and who you do it for. If you're unionized and working for government in a large city, most provinces / states and the federal government, it can be very cushy as you get past 20 - 25 years of service - and harder and harder to be removed for performance issues. (Why governments attempt to offer early retirement incentives). Management (civil) service can cover a massive range of salaries and conditions depending on many variables. Private sector all over the place at both ends. I know a guy from Texas, regional Americas head for a large multinational corporation. He is well above 60 and continues working because he can't afford to retire. Could be he's overwhelmed by debt. Too many Americans (and Canadians) over extended themselves with second and 3rd wives (usually not at the same time), McMansions, luxury vehicles, boats, 2nd homes, vacations and so on. A good way to get into a pickle (esp. in the US) is to send 3 kids to the best schools at $100 - $200K each for a mere bachelor's degree. Hopefully they get a job too... Such an executive earning $150,000 - $200,000 would find life tough at 60 unless he hit his bonus levels every year for some top ups. At least, if he works for a good co., he'd have a good medical plan. Not sure if that's a tax hit? (No need for such in Canada other than dental and drugs.) QUOTE The median household income hit $61,372 in 2017, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. That's almost $20,000 more than it was in 2000. But the typical American household now carries an average debt of $137,063. The median debt was only $50,971 in 2000. ENDQUOTE |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Film camera
On Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 3:12:07 PM UTC-4, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2020-04-09 12:31, Alfred Molon wrote: Seems that people working for the private sector in the USA get much less. Depends what you do and who you do it for. If you're unionized and working for government in a large city, most provinces / states and the federal government, it can be very cushy as you get past 20 - 25 years of service - and harder and harder to be removed for performance issues. (Why governments attempt to offer early retirement incentives). I'd revise 'cushy' to 'comfortable', as the question is how prepared one is for retirement, and in that regards, the public sector has generally had its retirement plans cut less than the private sector typically has, so it makes for a more favorable retirement prospect without having to work until you're 100/whatever. Even so, it comes back to also how well one has done with managing one's budget and expenses over the prior 25 years. Management (civil) service can cover a massive range of salaries and conditions depending on many variables. Private sector all over the place at both ends. I know a guy from Texas, regional Americas head for a large multinational corporation. He is well above 60 and continues working because he can't afford to retire. Could be he's overwhelmed by debt. Sounds likely. Too many Americans (and Canadians) over extended themselves with second and 3rd wives (usually not at the same time), McMansions, luxury vehicles, boats, 2nd homes, vacations and so on. .... & season tickets to professional sports (Dallas Cowboys), premium cable TV, cellphones for the entire family ... A good way to get into a pickle (esp. in the US) is to send 3 kids to the best schools at $100 - $200K each for a mere bachelor's degree. Hopefully they get a job too... As well as private school before college. Such an executive earning $150,000 - $200,000 would find life tough at 60 unless he hit his bonus levels every year for some top ups. Or at even higher income levels. At least, if he works for a good co., he'd have a good medical plan. Good, but not necessarily cheap. Companies have been getting squeezed here for years and doing things like going to 'high deductible' plans. Not sure if that's a tax hit? (No need for such in Canada other than dental and drugs.) Probably not. -hh |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Old Film Ricoh SLR Camera | Jack Glidden | Digital SLR Cameras | 4 | July 28th 07 04:31 PM |
Any camera/film stores carrying 120 film in or around Hilo, HI | Norm Dresner | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 22 | April 11th 05 07:56 PM |
Any camera/film stores carrying 120 film in or around Hilo, HI | Norm Dresner | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 0 | April 8th 05 07:10 PM |
Advice for camera bag, film developing and film choice | JZ | 35mm Photo Equipment | 4 | August 24th 04 08:56 PM |
Looking for a digital camera with wide angle lens (equivalent of 28mm on a film camera)... | Doghouse Riley | Digital Photography | 34 | August 10th 04 08:55 PM |