Here’s a proposed edit of Trip’s rebuttal argument against Proposition H.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
The proponents argument for Proposition H cites a higher risk for cancer among firefighters that’s been known for years, but fails to make the case for giving them even higher pensions when they’re already better compensated than their peers.
San Francisco firefighters are the highest-paid in the Bay Area, and work the fewest hours, according to a 2023 survey of 13 jurisdictions in which the average annual firefighter salary was $127,654, compared with $136,656 in San Francisco.
Cancer is the second-leading cause of death in the United States, so clearly not all cancers among current or former firefighters are work-related. According to national data, only 4% of incidents to which firefighters are called involve fires; most are medical emergencies.
The statement that “those hired after must wait until 58” to retire is misleading at best. Clearly firefighters can retire earlier if they choose, and there’s nothing unfair about their current retirement eligibility dates. Those hired in 2012 or later were informed about the pension rules as they now stand.
Supervisors carrying water for the powerful firefighters union are pushing a measure that would create more inequality. This attempt to undo an important reform passed by voters would make the pension system more unsustainable again, jeopardizing the pensions of future retirees and increasing current and future tax burdens.
Everyone loves firefighters, but there’s no reason to exempt them from pension rules covering all city employees. Proposition H is a disservice to future employees and the public. Vote No.
Libertarian Party of San Francisco
LPSF.org
The proponents argument for Proposition H cites a higher risk for cancer among firefighters that’s been known for years, but fails to make a case for giving them even higher pensions when they’re already better compensated than their peers. San Francisco firefighters are the highest-paid in the Bay Area, and work the fewest hours, according to a 2023 survey of 13 jurisdictions in which the average annual firefighter salary was $127,654, compared with $136,656 in San Francisco. makes bold claims and presents data without any backing demonstrating the statistical significance of that data. In the absence of proving statistical significance, a causal link cannot and should not be established.
Cancer is the second-leading cause of death in the United States, so clearly not all cancers among current or former firefighters are work-related. According to national data, only 4% of incidents to which firefighters are called involve fires; most are medical emergencies.
[Moved paragraph up]
The statement that “those hired after must wait until 58” to retire in the proponent argument is the most misleading at best. Are they stating that SF firefighters cannot voluntarily save money in addition to their pensions enabling earlier retirement? This statement is either true implying super controlling local government or it’s false and makes our heads spin via word whiplash. Clearly firefighters can retire earlier if they choose,
There is and there’s nothing inequitable unfair about their current retirement eligibility dates for San Francisco firefighters. Those who were hired in 2012 or later and beyond knew what they were signing up for and were informed about the pension system as it presently stood rules as they now stand.
The city is Supervisors carrying water for the powerful firefighters union are pushing a measure that would attempting to shove create more inequality upon its citizens using Proposition H. Prop. H This attempt to increasing financial obligations thereby undo an important reform passed by voters would make the pension system more unsustainable again, jeopardizing the pensions of future retirees and increasing current and future tax burdens. Money does not come out of thin air nor does it grow on trees.
SF firefighters perform a wonderful service to our communities. Everyone loves firefighters, but there’s no reason to exempt them from pension rules covering all city employees. The proponent argument for Prop H performs is a disservice to our citizens, our taxpayers the public. Vote No.
Libertarian Party of San Francisco
LPSF.org