The federal constitution protects public-employee pension obligations, and many states provide additional protection -- which is all to the good. But California goes overboard.
The Supreme Court just decided a compulsory union dues case. You'll never believe what happens next!
The opinion striking down California teacher tenure and seniority statutes is badly reasoned and will probably be struck down on appeal.
My Reason.org blog post on how the federal and Michigan Contract Clauses, and the Michigan Pension Clause, may affect the validity of the Detroit bankruptcy.
What about a cigarette?
My blog post on Reason.org and op-ed in the Los Angeles and San Francisco Daily Journal.
It's a harder question than you think! I think comparable work is compensated more highly in the public sector than in the private sector once you take non-wage benefits, job security, and extra leisure into account, but these comparisons are necessarily tricky and there aren't easy answers.
Possible ways around the California rule, from constitutional amendments to flexible pension rules to privatization; with a discussion of the Pension Reform Act of 2014.
The "California rule" for public-employee pensions may be legal, but it's a bad idea.
Here's what California courts say about the constitutional protection of public-employee pensions. Is it right?