Lawmakers target double- and triple-dipping

TALLAHASSEE — A bill that would eliminate triple-dipping and place new restrictions on public employees who try to double-dip won approval Wednesday from the House Council on Governmental Efficiency and Accountability.

Acting just a week after a Senate committee killed another effort to limit double- and triple-dipping, the House bill would close several loopholes that have allowed thousands of public employees to "retire" and return to work at the same job, collecting both a salary and a pension.

Rep. Robert C. Schenck, R-Spring Hill, introduced the bill (H1405) after reading about double- and triple-dippers in stories published by the St. Petersburg Times.

Council Chairman Frank Attkisson, R-St. Cloud, supports the bill and said he hopes to get it out of the House and into the Senate before the session ends May 2.

During debate Wednesday, Schenck defended the bill against complaints from several lawmakers who wanted to exempt all elected officials from a provision that would force public employees to forfeit their pensions if they were being paid more than $100,000.

Another provision would make members of the Florida Retirement System, most state employees and more than 900 local governmental agencies ineligible for a second pension once they have begun collecting retirement benefits and return to work. Under current law, there is no limit on the number of pensions a public employee can receive.

Public employees can retire, take 30 days off and return to work at their old jobs if supervisors approve. The House bill would extend the 30-day hiatus to 12 months, making it substantially more difficult to "game the system," Schenck said.

Those voting against the bill were Reps. Carl Domino, R-Jupiter; Joe Gibbons, D-Pembroke Park; Matt Meadows, D-Fort Lauderdale; Franklin Sands, D-Weston; and Geraldine Thompson, D-Orlando.

Meadows and Thompson are among the 15 legislators who collect a $31,000 salary plus pensions they earned in other jobs covered by the state retirement system. Lawmakers working to fix loopholes say the number of their fellow legislators who are personally collecting two checks has made change difficult.

Schenck's proposal would not affect any of the lawmakers because they don't collect more than $100,000 a year for their part-time lawmaking duties.

Domino, one of the wealthiest members of the Legislature, said he collects a U.S. government check for his military service. His pension would not be affected by the bill, but Domino said he is concerned that the restriction would keep some good people from seeking elective office.

Last week, Sen. Mike Fasano, R-New Port Richey, wanted the Senate Governmental Operations Committee to approve a bill that would have limited re-employment pay to $30,000 a year once a public employee has retired and started collecting a pension.

The committee voted 4-1 against the measure. Senate President Ken Pruitt said Wednesday he was disappointed and hopes some members will have a change of heart and eliminate double- and triple-dipping.

Comments on this article

by Angela	Apr 20, 2008 10:24 AM
It is just not right that double dippers are returning to the workforce while some of us retirees are having to suffer and pay the high health insurance premiuns each month. Family coverage will be $1,015 a month. That's a whole chek for some.

by Betty	Apr 18, 2008 10:09 AM
Lucy - I bet you are double dipping too! Didn't you retire from the SPT and get a pension and are still working for them?!

by patricia	Apr 18, 2008 10:04 AM
I can not hardly believe that in the midst of cutting health benefits to the poorest of the poor (Medicaid) these blood suckers continue to be self serving. WoW really good people.

by Luke	Apr 18, 2008 9:40 AM
This is these peoples money, they invested, the state takes a cut, the bottom line is nothing will be saved, this will cost more. Disability pension are gone now due to drop.

by Bonnie	Apr 17, 2008 5:36 PM
Isn't it a conflict-of-interest to vote on a bill of which you will personally benefit? Where are the ethics committee members?

by Jenny	Apr 17, 2008 3:18 PM
Most state employees that come back after retirement come back at base pay. The higher ups (elected and appointed positions)are the ones that come back at the same pay and get retirement on top of that.

by Mike	Apr 17, 2008 3:17 PM
If these people are so valuable, let them go to the private sector and quite feeding at the public trough. The same for the teachers. If they think that they don't receive sufficient compensation, they should take their skill-set to private

by ed	Apr 17, 2008 3:16 PM
read somewhere that there are 131 double & triple dippers-LETS JUST PUBLISH THEIR NAMES & THE JOBS THEY HOLD-YOU WATCH HOW THEY RUN FOR COVER LIKE SEN. LYNN DID-IT MAY BE LEGAL BUT THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT RIGHT!!!!!

by john	Apr 17, 2008 12:05 PM
Im sure this attempt excludes higher ups like judges, and state reps and such...

by Ken	Apr 17, 2008 12:04 PM
A columnist for the Tallahassee Democrat does a good job of explaining why most of the "double dippers" are kept on the payroll. Most of the time no increased cost if their job would be filled anyway and experience retained and used.

by Raymond	Apr 17, 2008 12:04 PM
As long as the "solution" is limited to folks going back to the same job and same employer, it's fine. If someone retires from the police dept, I don't have a problem with them working for the school board or another community.

by retired	Apr 17, 2008 12:04 PM
enough of this Lucy put out the facts! Need to read Bill Cotterell,Tally Dem paper, Fl ranks last in st payroll cost per resident.No raises no med at retirement ect. This option was voted on and passed now you want to make criminals out the employees

by Jeff	Apr 17, 2008 12:01 PM
billy - check the article - it was a majority of DEMS who voted against the changes - know your facts before you spout off partisan rhetoric

by Eric	Apr 17, 2008 12:01 PM
So what if someone decides to retire and work afterwards? Sometimes these people have needed skills and replacemetns aren't easy to find. They contributed to their pensions so they should collect. Then they work so they should get paid for it.

by Dale	Apr 17, 2008 12:01 PM
Billy did you read the article? The two Republicans mentioned in the story supported the bill, while 5 of the 6 representatives who voted against are Dems. Proof that people read what they want to read.

by Holly	Apr 17, 2008 12:01 PM
Since these folks are "elected" by we, the people; it should be our duty to not re-elect them back into office! They do not speak for me.

by donna	Apr 17, 2008 12:01 PM
the florida legislature is always cutting money for the poor, elderly, schools, etc. it's time the politicians cut their pork and give something back to the programs that people really need.

by john	Apr 17, 2008 12:00 PM
Im sure this attempt excludes higher ups like judges, and state reps and such...

by billy	Apr 17, 2008 10:28 AM
there is nothing quite like these "values voter" republicans who see no moral problem in tricking the system to their own advantage. meanwhile, these same folks continue to distract the morons and imbeciles with gay marriage and stem cell

by Rowdy	Apr 17, 2008 10:27 AM
I'm sure most of you would do the same thing,given the opportunity. Then it probably wouldn't be termed 'crooked', but frugal.

by Helen	Apr 17, 2008 10:19 AM
What else would you expect from the Boomers? They're out for number one only, screw social and moral responsibilities.

by jay	Apr 17, 2008 10:19 AM
If you doing a government job then your not retired and shouldn't get a pension.

by Patty	Apr 17, 2008 10:00 AM
If people want to work after retirement, fine, but not the same job/employer. That's totally working the system. I'm frankly surprised more aren't doing it - what a deal!

by Ed Hoener	Apr 17, 2008 10:00 AM
Keep it up. With the terrible schools and crooked politicians more people will leave the state.

by ted	Apr 17, 2008 10:00 AM
SOMEBODY has to do THAT SPECIFIC JOB, right? and somone would still be collecting their pension whether or not they were DOING A JOB they were experienced at, right? IS THERE AN ISSUE HERE, or simply more distractions by the current crop of idiots?

by Robert	Apr 17, 2008 9:59 AM
Should be considered criminal!

by Heather	Apr 17, 2008 9:59 AM
I hope they can stop the double dipping, or just stop hiring people who just left! Hire someone else that NEEDS the Job

by John	Apr 17, 2008 9:58 AM
I'm fine with double-dippers, but not if they return to the same job. Especially for university faculty that really need to move aside and let fresh PhDs come in.

by Chip	Apr 17, 2008 9:58 AM
This is all for show. The legislature is not going to drop the golden omelette on the floor. Lucy Morgan, you are doing great. Keep the pressure on. Maybe cross reference what other measures they have voted against that would have helped taxpayers.

by Jon	Apr 17, 2008 9:58 AM
Except for the people returning to the same position what is the bid deal. These people have earned each pension they collect. FRS is the most solvent govt pension in the country with over 38 billion (with a B) in assets.

by David	Apr 17, 2008 9:58 AM
Look at local judges and Pinellas County Sheriff. Hope nobody is looking forward to upward mobility in those offices. Not sure the people are to blame if the system allows them to take it.

by Dr_Dug	Apr 17, 2008 9:58 AM
About time someone stood uo for the Voters!! Great Job!!

by Anne	Apr 17, 2008 9:58 AM
DROP has been a wonderful incentive to keep great teachers in the classroom. It is a win win situation for schools. I hope they will not take the program away. Teachers retirement benefits aren't enough to live on.

by Know Your Type	Apr 17, 2008 9:58 AM
If these bills do pass, other loopholes and exploits will be found. It's the norm, a tag team of greed and most of their time is spend honing these skills. Stay in your rocking chairs and give the younger generation the employment opportunitie

by Ron	Apr 17, 2008 9:57 AM
Sounds like a good bill. The DROP saves employers money because they don't pay the 20-22% retirement premium while employees are in it. Once people DROP, however, they should move on.