s

Tag Archives: benefits

CalPERS CEO Issues Statement on Governor's Pension Reform Proposal

 

CalPERS CEO Issues Statement on Governor’s Pension Reform Proposal

SACRAMENTO, CA – Anne Stausboll, Chief Executive Officer of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), today issued the following statement in response to Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr.’s 12-point pension plan:

“CalPERS is closely involved in the pension policy dialogue that will affect our employers and members in the State, schools and local government. We encourage discussion between all parties to ensure that public employee retirement plans are sustainable, secure and cost-effective.

CalPERS pensions have provided retirement security for California’s hard-working State and local public employees for nearly 80 years. Retirees with a dependable income contribute to stimulating our economy. In 2010, CalPERS $12 billion in monthly pension checks resulted in more than $26 billion in economic activity throughout the State, including $14 billion in business revenue and more than 93,000 jobs.

In today’s fragile economy, many employers are facing budgetary challenges and have already made changes to their pension systems. We have observed more than 175 cities, counties and local governments negotiate changes to lower near-term and future costs by increasing employee contributions, modifying benefits for new hires, or both. Changes in the State plan that have already occurred will result in significant savings of about $13 billion over the next 30 years. Some of the Governor’s proposals may require constitutional changes, while others may require collective bargaining.

At CalPERS, we believe that defined benefit plans are an important cornerstone to adequate and secure retirement. Pension change dialogue should focus on the critical policy issue of how to provide adequate and secure retirement income for public workers in a cost-effective way, while honoring vested rights for existing employees. We are committed to serving as an honest broker of information and an expert in pension administration as all parties work together on pension solutions. As the pension policy discussion progresses through the Legislative process, CalPERS can assist with information on costs and potential savings over time to facilitate lawmakers in a fully informed discussion.

CalPERS provides retirement benefits to 1.6 million State, public school, and local public agency employees, retirees, and their families, and health benefits to more than 1.3 million members.

CalPERS Pension Quick Facts (as of June 30, 2011)

Average monthly service retirement allowance for all retirees: $2,331
Average monthly service retirement allowance Fiscal year 2010-11 retirees: $3,065
Average years of service for all retirees: 20.3
Average years of service for Fiscal Year 2010-11 retirees: 21.2
Average monthly service retirement for school miscellaneous members: $1,250
Average years of service for school retirees: 16.9
Average monthly service retirement for State members: $2,597
Average years of service for State retirees: 23.2
74 percent
of all service retirees receive $3,000 a month or less.
86 percent of CalPERS retirees, survivors, and beneficiaries live in California.
$12 billion in pension payments in 2010 resulted in $26 billion of economic activity in California and 93,651 jobs.
$22 billion of CalPERS assets are invested in California.

CalSTRS Response To Governor Brown's Pension Reform

CalSTRS Response: http://www.calstrs.com/Newsroom/whats_new/pension_reform_response.aspx CalSTRS appreciates that Governor Brown has taken a very important step in addressing the critical and complex issues facing the state’s public pension systems. We look forward to receiving more detail on the proposal and having the opportunity to review it in depth. The most important reform CalSTRS needs is a plan of action to address its long-term funding shortfall, which only the Legislature and Governor have the authority to implement. We will continue to work with the Governor, Legislature and our stakeholders to develop a plan that includes contribution increases that are gradual, predictable and fair to all parties. It’s important to note that some provisions of the Governor’s proposal, such as board governance and health care costs, do not apply to CalSTRS. Moreover, since CalSTRS contribution rates are set in statute by the Legislature, our contribution structure is extremely predictable and has not experienced pension “holidays.” CalSTRS members contribute 8 percent of salary to fund their pension, while their employers contribute 8.25 percent. These rates haven’t changed since 1972 and 1990, respectively. The State’s contribution of 2.541 percent was reduced from 4.607 in 1998. CalSTRS administers a hybrid pension system consisting of a mandatory traditional defined benefit pension and a cash balance plan which is similar to a 401(k). CalSTRS also offers its members a voluntary defined contribution supplemental savings program such as 457(b) and 403(b) plans. A look at the average CalSTRS member who retired in 2009-10 further illustrates the unique aspects of CalSTRS: • Retired at age 62 • Performed 27 years of service • Earned a pension that replaces nearly 60 percent of salary • Receives approximately $49,000 in earned benefits annually • Does not earn Social Security benefits for their service • Does not receive employer-paid health care benefits after age 65

Main Points of Governor Brown’s Pension Reform Plan

Main Points of Governor Brown’s Pension Reform Plan

 1. Equal Sharing of Pension Costs: All Employees and Employers

2. “Hybrid” Risk-Sharing Pension Plan: New Employees

3. Increase Retirement Ages: New Employees

4. Require Three-Year Final Compensation to Stop Spiking: New Employees

 5. Calculate Benefits Based on Regular, Recurring Pay to Stop Spiking: New Employees

6. Limit Post-Retirement Employment: All Employees

 7. Felons Forfeit Pension Benefits: All Employees

 8. Prohibit Retroactive Pension Increases: All Employees

9. Prohibit Pension Holidays: All Employees and Employers

10. Prohibit Purchases of Service Credit: All Employees

11. Increase Pension Board Independence and Expertise

12. Reduce Retiree Health Care Costs:

State Employees Savings will be in the neighborhood of $900 million per year to the State.

PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATIONS NEED TO CAREFULLY CHOOSE THEIR MESSAGE IF THEY HOPE TO KEEP THEIR CURRENT PENSION BENEFITS

 As the movement for pension reform gains momentum in Sacramento and throughout California public employee organizations need to carefully look at their message, much of which has not changed in many years. First, public sector employees should be sure that their message or argument is accurate. Next, does that message make sense to the voter? In other words, will that argument persuade the voter to vote against drastic pension reform measures? Public employees should stay away from some of the mythical arguments that national and international unions have traditionally made. These arguments have become a part of the very fuel of the pension reform movement. Here are a few of the classics that, believe it or not, I have recently heard from union leaders:

Old School Union: Public Employees Are Taxpayers Too and Basically Pay for Themselves.

Try It This Way: Public Employees Provide the Essential Services to Keep Our Communities Running.

The old school union argument enrages pension reform activists. Of course most public employees pay taxes, just like everyone else. But the fact is tax revenue generated by public employees only pays for a fraction of their cost. Depending on the study, tax revenue generated from public employees only covers between 8% and slightly over 10% of their costs. It takes many private sector taxpayers to pay for one public sector employee. The old school union argument misses the point entirely. The focus should not be on the actual taxes paid by public sector employees. Rather, the focus must be on the value of the services provided by those employees. For example, most communities would not be desirable places to live without services such as police, fire, parks and road repair. A community without a high level of these services begins to look like a third world country.

Old School Union: Payment of Pension Benefits Stimulate the Economy to Such a Degree That California’s Economy Will Fail Without Them.

Try It This Way: Pension benefits are an investment in the future of our communities.

 According to the California Public Retirement System expenditure of pension benefits by CalPERS retirees generates about 26 billion dollars in economic activity in California. That represents less than one half of one percent of California’s overall 1.2 trillion dollar economy. The economic footprint of pension benefit expenditures by CalPERS retirees is inconsequential to California’s overall economy in a pure economic sense. However, public sector employee organizations must focus on a different type of benefit that stable pension benefits provide the community. Stable and attractive pension benefits attract a high quality, committed employee. California public employee organizations need to focus on the overall benefit to the community and not boil it down to economic analysis. Stable pension benefits are the foundation to a stable workforce. In many ways, 1.9 trillion dollar California economy is not possible with a relatively inexpensive stable public sector workforce to support it.

Old School Union: Public Employees Could Easily Make a Lot More Money Working in the Private Sector.

Try It This Way: Public Sector Employees Have Chosen the Path of Public Service, are Valuable, and Should be Recognized.

While historically public sector jobs tended to pay lower salaries than their private sector counterparts recent studies show that is no longer the case. Over the last fifteen years public sector base salaries have increased dramatically, in some cases more than 100%. Those gains have far out distanced their private sector counterparts. Today, in many jobs the public sector employee actually makes more money than a similarly situated private sector employee. What public sector employees have done is make a choice of public service. Many public sector jobs take extensive training and years of experience to master. A community as a whole benefits from this experience. By making a commitment to public service, the public sector employee has undoubtedly sacrificed career opportunities that existed in strong economic times. And those times with return. The skill, expertise and experience of the public sector employee should be recognized and respected by their private sector counterparts.

Old School Union: We’ve Earned It. The Rich Taxpayer Is Just Going to Have to Figure out a Way to Pay.

Try It This Way: The Payment of Wages and Benefits To Quality Public Sector Employees is an Investment in Our Community’s Future.

Believe it or not, the “just tax the rich” argument is still commonly made around the union boardroom and enrages pension reform activists. Again, the focus of the union’s argument should be the value the public employees provides to its industry and the community as a whole. For example, teachers’ unions should focus on school reform and ways of making our schools more effective educational institutions. The primary tool for reform in the schools is a highly skilled, motivated teacher. That teacher will make the real difference in the classroom.

Movement to End Collective Bargaining in CA Gains Momentum

The Sacramento Bee recently reported that a group, looking to abolish collective bargaining rights for all of California’s public sector employees, filed three ballot initiatives this week. The group is called the California Center for Public Policy and arrears to be led by a UC Santa Barbara economic lecturer named Lanny Ebenstein. Mr. Ebenstein’s group has started fundraising to begin a signature campaign to get the initiatives before the voters.

The three initiatives are focused on both public sector employees and retirees. The first measure would ban recognition of all public sector labor unions to prevent government from collectively bargaining with them. The second measure would impose a higher tax burden on pensions paid through CalPERS or CalSTERS for retirees who earn an annual pension of over $100,000.00 per year. The Third measure would raise the retirement age of state employees to 65 and, and public safety workers to age 58.

The most troubling aspect of the news was the initial reaction from representatives of public employee groups. Steve Maviglio, of a group called Californian’s for Retirement Security, responded by saying “these will end up in the same trash bin as the proposal to require Christmas music in public schools. These proposals are wildly out of synch with California; fortunately there is a $15 million dollar gap between dumb ideas and the ballot box.”

Let’s hope Mr. Maviglio’s comments are not shared by a majority of public sector employee organizations throughout the State. Californians and members of public sector employee organizations should take these measures very seriously. Many voters, especially those who work in the private sector would view positively some, if not all of the element s of the measures. Union recalcitrants, inflexibility and lack of creativity is exactly the posture that lead to the abolition of collective bargaining in other states, including Wisconsin. The public sector employee union can no longer used tried and true methods like strikes, picketing, or PR smear campaigns to meet their objectives. The world out there is much more complicated now and requires an entirely different and smarter approach. The public sector employee unions need to position themselves as partners with a solution and regain the trust and respect of the citizens of California. Mr. Ebenstein is quoted in the Sac BEE article by saying, “[g]overnment does not exist to provide compensation and pensions for government workers. Government exists to provide good public services at a reasonable cost.” A vast, vast majority of California voters would agree with this statement. Unions need to incorporate this message in their strategy and convince the public that the good public service Ebenstein references depends upon hiring and keeping skilled and motivated government workers. Remember, the California private sector employees out number public employees over 25 to 1 at the ballot box. California’s public sector employee organizations would be wise to take seriously the three initiatives filed by Mr. Ebenstien and similar ones that have already been filed or will be filed in the coming months.

If you would like more information from us, regarding how you can craft a message of cooperation and partnership, please contact Jennifer at the Firm.

GOVERNMENT AS USUAL IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY

Sacramento County has given us yet another piece of evidence that certain elected officials and managers of California government entities have devolved into nothing more than their own personal existence justification system. Over the last three years we have repeatedly seen government managers go to extraordinary lengths to protect themselves and their friends.

On Wednesday, May 26, 2010, the Sacramento Bee reported that during 2009, the number of Sacramento County’s highest paid employees significantly increased. Yes, that’s right, increased. During the worst fiscal crisis in Sacramento County’s history the number of Sacramento County employees making over $100,000.00 a year in base salary increased. Remember, for the last three years Sacramento County has had budget deficets over $100 million.

Sacramento County officials were quick to defend themselves by saying that the salary increase were the result of collective bargaining agreements they have no control over. However, what is clear is Sacramento County leaders and most government officials do not want that control. They do not want to make hard decisions that are necessary in today’s economic climate. Government officials are quick to slap a band-aid on the severed artery by furloughing employees, laying off some of the lowest paid employees and attempting to freeze wage or benefit increases. Government leaders hold on from one pay period to the next, use smoke and mirrors to pay their bills, all while fending off difficult questions as to why they are making the decisions they make. Here is what drives them: Sacramento County officials and most government leaders first and foremost want to protect themselves and their closest allies and friends. In Sacramento County’s case that starts with supervisors and goes to the County Administrator’s office. They refuse to recognize the obvious solution which is significant parts of their governmental empires have to permanently go away. A massive restructuring of California government must occur so that these government entities can provide the basic, fundamental, and indispensable services they are required to provide.

I for one want more government workers on the streets doing the actual work and less bureaucrats thinking of ways to justify their existence. Some form of real leadership needs to arise arises in California state and local governments for it’s fiscal problems to be fixed.