STUMP » Articles » Public Pension Watch: On Paying Pensions to State Employee Sex Criminals » 28 March 2015, 01:06

Out of Washington State, there is an illustration of why public employee unions are a problem.

Sex predator teachers to have pensions yanked….if the teacher union gets out of the way:

“A pension, in a lot of ways, is regarded as a reward for a job well done,” said Anne Marie Gurney, of the Freedom Foundation. “I think we would all agree that raping children is not a job well done.”

Gurney, a researcher for the libertarian think tank, compiled a list of 130 Washington state teachers who lost their licenses. Twenty-two of those former teachers are felons who are still costing taxpayers $2 million a year for their pensions.

……
The Washington Education Association has defended the pension payments, arguing that the criminal justice system should have no bearing on a public employee’s retirement benefits. Some state lawmakers are reluctant to take pensions away.

“We would have to be very careful that the sanctions were targeted against the individual that committed the crime, not unconnected parties that have a vested interest in that benefit such as spouses and dependent children,” said Timm Ormsby, a Democrat in the Washington state House of Representatives.

So, if said felon doesn’t have any spouse or dependents, it’s okay to yank the pension?

And doesn’t it also hurt a spouse and dependents if a person is in prison and not receiving a salary? Does the state have to keep paying the salary, because it would be unfair to the felon’s family that no salary is being paid?

There is little difference here.

Look, if the case were that the felony had nothing to do with their job, then fine. The union would have something of an argument in such a case. If the teacher had robbed a bank, not using their position as a teacher to commit the crime, then they don’t necessarily need to forfeit the pension (other than to pay back the bank.)

But the problem is that sex predators get jobs as teachers because they get access to their preferred victims. Lots of access.

It’s the felons’ own fault if their families have to go without a breadwinner because they committed a felony.

I have a modest proposal — if the teachers union is so concerned about the felons’ own children and spouses, then why do they not start their own fund to provide?

This often happens for other public employees who have a sudden death on the job (I’ve often seen such fundraising for cops and firefighters.) Their comrades pass the bucket around to set up a trust for the families of the fallen.

I have a feeling the teachers union would find extremely few people to pony up their own money in these cases.

The state should not be giving money to people who used their state jobs to commit the crimes they were convicted for.

This is not a difficult concept, unions.

If you want to actually to continue to exist, you need to realize that you are not called upon to try to get money for criminals, even if they are members of your union.