Pensions are Earned

United States
April 29, 2016 9:02am CST
When someone goes into a specific line of work, there are procedures and rules. There are rights and responsibilities. There are benefits and disadvantages. If someone follows the rules and does the work, then the benefits are paid when due. I just learned that there is a movement afoot to strip a retired man who turned out to be a monster in his personal life of his pension. Why? He did the work. He earned the pension. He probably paid into the system his entire life, since his career was in the field of education. He is going to prison. That’s enough. His family, and not just the man himself, planned on the pension for their retirement years. That is what people do. His family did not commit the crimes for which he has been found guilty. Why should they suffer poverty in addition to the shame that they now feel? I do not believe that it is just to take away earned benefits when an unrelated crime or situation occurs. Sounds like double jeopardy to me, and is unfair to the family who remains blameless. What do you think?
16 people like this
15 responses
@celticeagle (189820)
• Boise, Idaho
29 Apr 16
I feel that if someone commits a crime related to their work that taking their pension away is alright. I am certainly sorry this is going to affect his family. But, he should have been thinking of his family when doing what he did.
2 people like this
@celticeagle (189820)
• Boise, Idaho
29 Apr 16
@ElizabethWallace ...I understand that. I am just giving you my opinion of when I would think it would be just to not pay a pension.
1 person likes this
• United States
29 Apr 16
His crime was not within the confines of his job. He did his job and paid into the pension plan. Fraud is the only just cause for not paying a pension. He did not commit fraud.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
@LadyDuck (502209)
• Italy
29 Apr 16
I have your same opinion, this is unfair. This man paid and his family did not commit the crime, so they must keep the right to have the pension paid.
2 people like this
• United States
29 Apr 16
I hope this is the final outcome. Think about the ramifications. You could never plan your future. Someone in your family might do something awful, and you would end up ruined. It's bad enough that they have to live knowing who he really was, but this is just wrong.
2 people like this
@LadyDuck (502209)
• Italy
30 Apr 16
@ElizabethWallace This is true, it is not the right way to do.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
@LadyDuck Retirement planning is hard enough without throwing in another wrinkle out of one's control.
1 person likes this
@marlina (154103)
• Canada
29 Apr 16
That is not right, if the crime had nothing to do with the job. And why should the family pays for his crime?
2 people like this
• United States
29 Apr 16
My thoughts exactly. It's tough enough to survive retirement, but to have an earned pension yanked out of the hands of his family, what are they to do now?
• United States
29 Apr 16
's that e'en legal?? no, the family ought not suffer any more due to his actions.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
@ElizabethWallace bit if'n he passed would the wife be entitled to't? i'm jest wonderin' what company would'a put such a clause'n their pension plan.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
@crazyhorseladycx It's education, so it depends upon the payout agreed to at retirement. People can chose to take less and leave some to their heirs, or they take more monthly and leave nothing behind.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
I don't know, but since the pension is in the name of the person who did the work, maybe it is, but it's not right.
1 person likes this
@WorDazza (15826)
• Manchester, England
29 Apr 16
I totally agree. The only way his pension should be removed is if the crimes he committed were somehow related to his job. I'm afraid justice is no longer enough for many people. There has to be revenge also!!
2 people like this
@WorDazza (15826)
• Manchester, England
29 Apr 16
@ElizabethWallace More importantly it belongs to his dependants! And they've committed no crime!!
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
@WorDazza Very true, but seems to be being overlooked. Hope they are not punished any more than by finding out who he really is. So sad for everyone.
1 person likes this
• United States
29 Apr 16
Because his crimes were awful, people lose their minds. They need to stick to the rules. He earned this pension. It belongs to him even if he's a monster.
1 person likes this
@CRK109 (14556)
• United States
29 Apr 16
If that money can help his family, then I do think it should be used for that purpose. So many corrupt people have become rather wealthy because of the work they did in their lives and the money they earned. I don't see why this should be any different.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
Otherwise, they will end up on welfare. They are suffering enough discovering his true nature. So sad.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
@CRK109 I try to avoid bad news like this, but this one ticked me off, because people are making a bad situation worse. It is sad.
@CRK109 (14556)
• United States
30 Apr 16
@ElizabethWallace What a shame! I hear so many sad stories today and it just hurts my heart. :(
1 person likes this
@Marcyaz (35316)
• United States
29 Apr 16
I would have to agree as long as what he did has nothing to do with his job.
1 person likes this
• United States
29 Apr 16
If a retired person commits or committed a crime in his personal life, and not at work, and was convicted of this crime, then being ticked off at the man is not a legal reason to deny him his pension. I agree that he is a monster and should be in prison, but his pension is not tied to his personal life, nor should it be.
1 person likes this
@marguicha (230334)
• Chile
29 Apr 16
I wholly agree with you. Unless the pension was earned in a wrongful way, it should be paid.
1 person likes this
• United States
29 Apr 16
Right. Simple, huh? Emotion should have nothing to do with it.
1 person likes this
@marguicha (230334)
• Chile
29 Apr 16
@ElizabethWallace There are too many things that are asked out of emotion without thinking clearly first.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
@marguicha I think this is why rules should be followed. I think the man is a monster and deserves his prison term, but the pension, and his family should be off limits, since they are not involved.
@TheHorse (238280)
• Walnut Creek, California
29 Apr 16
I'd have to say I agree with you.
1 person likes this
@TheHorse (238280)
• Walnut Creek, California
30 Apr 16
@ElizabethWallace Yes it does.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
Seems logical, doesn't it?
1 person likes this
@KnehKnah (3582)
• Philippines
30 Apr 16
How did he do it? He is a retired educator, what's the crime, my dear Ma'am?
1 person likes this
@KnehKnah (3582)
• Philippines
3 May 16
@ElizabethWallace Oh! I understand, dear Ma'am. If he indeed did such crime, he has to answer to it.
1 person likes this
• United States
2 May 16
Not telling, since to do so would cause the prejudice I wanted to discuss. Suffice it to say, he is a monster who will be in prison for many years.
1 person likes this
@DeborahDiane (40844)
• Laguna Woods, California
30 Apr 16
You make a good point. I know there have been many cases of entire families suffering because one person in their family did something awful.
1 person likes this
• United States
2 May 16
I thought that sort of thing was against the law. Guess not. I suppose we are now guilty by association, marriage and birth.
@DianneN (254949)
• United States
29 Apr 16
I totally agree with you. Pension should have nothing to do with his crime, whatever that was!
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
We all pretty much seem to agree. I didn't mention his crime, because I wanted unemotional thoughts.
1 person likes this
@JudyEv (381904)
• Rockingham, Australia
30 Apr 16
I agree completely. These are - or should be - two separate issues.
1 person likes this
• United States
2 May 16
Right. Lock him up, but don't punish those not involved in his crimes.
1 person likes this
@JohnRoberts (109841)
• Los Angeles, California
29 Apr 16
His family should be able to receive the pension. The pension has nothing to do with his crime. I agree with you.
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Apr 16
I wish the law was clear. Families make decisions about how their money is going to be spent, and not just the individual. What if she didn't work and they planned to live on his pension. Does this mean she should starve? I don't think so.
@rebelann (117211)
• El Paso, Texas
29 Apr 16
I agree with you, it does sound like they're not just punishing him but also his wife and children, that's definitely unfair.
1 person likes this
• United States
29 Apr 16
Because he did not work for the private sector during his career, people think that his pension is theirs. It isn't. It was earned by him and belongs to him or his family. This is a common misconception. People believe government pensions are paid for with their money. They are not. Employees pay into the funds and the amount is sometimes matched (as in private pension funds). It is invested like any other pension fund, and the retirees are paid out of this money.
1 person likes this