<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Facing deficit, state may look at retiree health benefits</title>
	<atom:link href="http://inthistogetherct.org/2010/07/facing-deficit-state-may-look-at-retiree-health-benefits/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://inthistogetherct.org/2010/07/facing-deficit-state-may-look-at-retiree-health-benefits/</link>
	<description>For a fair budget and a livable state with great public services</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 18:33:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Foxinn Pak</title>
		<link>http://inthistogetherct.org/2010/07/facing-deficit-state-may-look-at-retiree-health-benefits/comment-page-1/#comment-3585</link>
		<dc:creator>Foxinn Pak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jul 2010 01:49:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://inthistogetherct.org/?p=3150#comment-3585</guid>
		<description>Things will be changing for sure. I&#039;m thinking for the current employees, the reasonable retirement option should be 25 years or more at 55 years of age. This 10 year stuff has to stop. How many of the 42,000 retirees, have less than 25 years of service? If they do, on a graduated scale, they should be liable for some type of cost regarding the health insurance. As for new hires, who have currently less than 5 years service, those pensions should be converted to some type of 401k plan. They have to make changes somewhere, and being loyal to employees and retirees who worked more than 25 years, should be a top priority. Just one man&#039;s opinion.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Things will be changing for sure. I&#8217;m thinking for the current employees, the reasonable retirement option should be 25 years or more at 55 years of age. This 10 year stuff has to stop. How many of the 42,000 retirees, have less than 25 years of service? If they do, on a graduated scale, they should be liable for some type of cost regarding the health insurance. As for new hires, who have currently less than 5 years service, those pensions should be converted to some type of 401k plan. They have to make changes somewhere, and being loyal to employees and retirees who worked more than 25 years, should be a top priority. Just one man&#8217;s opinion&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

