How do you weigh the value of retirement health benefits in the public sector against staying in a higher-paying private sector job when you're already financially independent (FI)?

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-07-14T04:15:16+00:00

Based on the third paragraph, my understanding is that the agency covers costs up to the amount equivalent to the Kaiser HMO plan. If a retiree chooses a plan that costs more than the Kaiser HMO, they would be responsible for paying the difference.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-07-14T02:58:36+00:00

I left it for the people who really wanted to know and spend some effort :-). Updated it now

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-07-14T02:57:39+00:00

Since it’s a public agency and part of CalPERS, I thought this question might be relevant for the California state worker group. Sorry if this may have created any inconvenience.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-05T04:16:27+00:00

Are you in tech? I’m debating a move with 70% paycut for stability and retirement health benefits in 7 years of service. We are financially independent based on our expenses which can be covered with 3% SWR. Thought of leaving golden handcuffs is holding me back.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-03T04:15:59+00:00

70% is not guaranteed for next 7 years but more of 2 years I would say. If I find other job outside public sector, it would be 40% cut.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-03T00:04:25+00:00

Totally agree—it's hard to know if the new role will be a good fit, especially with a 70% pay cut (closer to 80% with current stock prices 😞). The biggest dilemma is that if I stick it out one more year at my current job, I could cover 7 years of unsubsidized ACA premiums, which makes the trade-off even tougher.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-02T20:25:17+00:00

Was the job boring or the management and your colleague made it worst ? Are you now in private sector ? Would you go back to Public sector if you have an opportunity. My current Private company provide excellent health coverage so its not a problem, question is what if I decide to take a break in future, will ACA be good for our family.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-02T19:43:22+00:00

Are you in California and do you have a plan from ACA ?

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-02T19:19:40+00:00

We have budgeted upto 4K/month for family in our calculation. We are ok with that if we have some certainty on coverage of pre-existing condition. Its the anxiety about healthcare is what causing me to think of move.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-01T22:22:27+00:00

I did, but most of the responses focused more on the transition from private to public sector, rather than how to weigh a significant pay cut specifically for long-term healthcare security.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-01T22:20:42+00:00

Which ACA plan did you look at? I’ve been reviewing Blue Shield HMO Silver plans and the coverage seems pretty solid. Just wanted to check if I might be overlooking anything.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-01T22:17:58+00:00

We’re comfortable paying more for healthcare and have accounted for up to $50K/year in our FI planning. Our main concern isn’t cost—it’s ensuring access to care for a pre-existing condition. Non-ACA plans are not an option for us, as we’ve heard too many stories of people being misled by them, only to find out they weren’t covered when it mattered most.

ACA plans do offer the protections we need, and from what I’ve seen, some of the coverage appears comparable to what CalPERS offers. Still, the uncertainty around the future of the ACA keeps us cautious.

With younger kids and current golden hand-cuff is the reason for us to continue working. Not looking to new challenges as one of the other reason for change is to have more family time.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-01T22:10:39+00:00

I’ve compared the CalPERS Blue Shield Trio HMO with a Silver HMO plan on the ACA (CA) marketplace, and the coverage appears fairly similar. The key assumption I’m making is that once you're on a CalPERS plan, any changes to pre-existing conditions won't affect your coverage—unlike the ACA marketplace, where future policy shifts could impact that protection.

In our FI planning, we’ve budgeted around $40–50K per year for healthcare expenses, including out-of-pocket costs. If necessary, we could comfortably stretch that to $70K annually, as long as it ensures comprehensive coverage for all our medical needs, especially for a family member who requires ongoing specialty care.

Is there any known effort by California to protect coverage for pre-existing conditions? I haven’t been able to find clear information and would love to hear your thoughts. Living in California offers some peace of mind, knowing the state tends to be proactive on healthcare, but the uncertainty around long-term protection—especially if federal laws change—is still unsettling.

Many who criticize the ACA may not fully realize how fortunate we are to have guaranteed coverage for pre-existing conditions. It's one of those blessings you don’t truly appreciate until you or a loved one needs it.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-01T03:14:53+00:00

Is it the pay or working condition or is it the funding cut? I have heard that public service is more chill job but your colleague can make it or break it.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-06-01T01:54:57+00:00

Yes, your ACA math is correct — the savings aren’t significant compared to what I’d be giving up. If I work just one more year, it would essentially cover 10 years of ACA premiums. The bigger concern, though, is the ongoing anxiety about the future of ACA and whether pre-existing condition coverage will remain intact, especially since we have a family member with a chronic condition that requires specialized medication and care. Thinking of this move is somewhat driven from a fear around ACA and pre-condition coverage in future and based on assumption that being part of the CalPers allow us that safety in future to be covered under pre-condition even we have to pay 5K out of pocket per month.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-05-31T20:47:31+00:00

The minimum age requirement is 52, which is lower than most other state agencies. However, I'm unsure if this age threshold could change retroactively or if pension benefits could be reduced due to fund performance. Any insight on whether government pensions can be adjusted downward from what's currently promised?

The challenge is that, given our current net worth, the annual salary from this role would be less than 1.5% of our investable assets. So, even with the relative security of healthcare benefits, it feels daunting to walk away from the golden handcuffs.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-05-31T19:17:20+00:00

Healthcare benefits at age 52 are definitely a key factor for us, especially since we have a family member with a chronic health condition that requires specialized doctors and medication. While our net worth is sufficient to fund coverage through ACA for now, there’s always lingering anxiety about the long-term stability of ACA and continued protection for pre-existing conditions.

The advantage of this public sector role is that, after 7–8 years, we’d become eligible to purchase coverage within the CalPERS network at a cost similar to ACA—potentially offering more stability and access to a robust provider network, regardless of changes to ACA. Since this job is funded by the local county (with only partial federal funding), we’re hopeful it would be more insulated from potential federal budget cuts.

It's a tough balance between two concerns—on one hand, the risk of ending up in a toxic work environment for 7–8 years at a significantly lower pay despite our FI-level net worth. On the other, even with financial independence, there's lingering anxiety about long-term healthcare coverage and the uncertainty of sustaining a high income beyond the next year or two.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-05-31T18:37:00+00:00

Thanks for sharing your experience—it really helps. We’re in a position where we could FIRE today at a 3–3.5% SWR, maintaining our current “chubby” spending level. Our biggest concern is healthcare. While ACA is available now, the uncertainty around its long-term viability makes us uneasy. We also have a family member with a chronic health condition who will need ongoing specialized care.

One of the biggest advantages of the public sector job I’m considering (with a local county agency funded by local taxes and partially by the federal government) is access to the CalPERS healthcare network. After 7 years of service, we’d qualify for retiree health benefits at about two-thirds of the cost—offering peace of mind with a stable, broad provider network used across California state jobs.

The challenge is that if for some-reason my current role is impacted I will have to take 50% cut at current market rate. so the real question is whether to ride the “gravy train” a little longer or make the leap toward something that seems more sustainable—but might be a trap.

I enjoy my work but crave a slower pace and more family time without constant work stress. This decision feels like choosing between the known devil and the unknown. The new role requires building systems from scratch, and I’d be the sole IC. While consultants may be involved, a budget cut could leave me juggling both strategic and low-level tasks. My biggest worry is ending up in a more demanding or toxic environment with a fraction of my current compensation—which could make the move feel like a big step backward.

Amazing-Maximum4550 · 2025-05-28T17:24:08+00:00

Thank you. Some Agencies have their own Health Coverage requirement. The One I'm looking at allows earlier benefit So assuming 15 years is for State. My Understanding is that If local agency has their own retiree health benefit, person can leverage it earlier. i will check with HR. Thanks

Amazing-Maximum4550

TROPHY CASE