Who gets the better deal?

Look at the difference between union and non union pension requirements

NON UNION EMPLOYEES-->TriMet provides a defined contribution pension plan to non-union employees. TriMet deposits the equivalent of 8 percent of a non-union employee's base pay into an investment account each pay period. The employee also has the option of contributing up to 15 percent of his/her base pay pre-tax to the account each pay period. The employee directs the investment of the employee's individual account. The employee is vested in the account after three years of service.


UNION EMPLOYEES-->Employees with ten years of service are eligible for a defined benefit pension, which is funded entirely by TriMet. (actually I thought the defined pension was history but according to a recent job posting description by Trimet it's not)

We know this much, any union employee who works less than 10 years gets zero. After ten years of full time employment the employee will get aprox $750/mo. Since the 'golden health care' is a thing of the past health care etc are deducted from that amount.

A non union employee who works 3 years will get something. In the case of an executive making 100k who works for 3 years he will walk away with an additional $24k in retirement savings if they put zero into that account themselves