Conversely, it's a means to eliminate the desire to constantly seek a better offer, allowing you to invest yourself with an organization more fully. It's also the norm for many city, state and municipal jobs. Plus, it's nice having a promised* income after retirement without being subject to market forces and hedge fund managers.
A smart person doesn't rely on one thing, though. In addition to my pension, I have a bit of money piled up in two different 401ks, long term savings, dividend based equites and more. My plan is to convert my 401ks into something I can contribute to in addition to my pension so I have both fixed and guaranteed income plus investments I controlled. My goal is to allow me to fully enjoy my retirement with my wife while still enjoying the same quality of life and having freedom to sock away money for my kids instead of every dollar being focused on my own personal retirement.
And it's no secret that the pension contributions from the government I work for are far more generous than anything offered in the private sector. A 401k match feels like an insult compared to this.
*not to be confused with "guaranteed, actually will happen, the value we tell you now absolutely will exist 20 years from now! we totally swear it because we absolutely can achieve 20% year-on-year growth for 30 straight years!
....to be taken with a grain of salt. I think the converse is true about a pension removing the desire to constantly move which, I agree, should be a good thing. I think of it more as a dishonest trap, because the type of growth promised in pension plans is just absurd in the reality of today's world.
EDIT: Oh, cushy gov't pension. Yeah, you'll be fine.
But like you said--relying on one plan is absurd. I do have a teeny tiny pension from a previous job (7 years vested, lol: that supposedly nets me ~$600/month when I turn 70, or $80k ), but that doesn't even exist in my planning.