Molly Janczyk to STRS Board: Older retirees would not survive this kind of blow

From Molly Janczyk, September 25, 2006

Subject: STRS BOARD: AGE RATING

Please advise me on how seriously STRS is considering this issue. I realize it has been put off for a bit but 2 yrs. comes fast.

This seems a blow to 1/4 your membership that is barely able to pay for its HC now. It punishes further those of us with spouses who only did what we were advised: Choose the best HC plan for your family. With STRS touting itself as 'HC second to none' with no need to purchase outside HC which would erode pensions, of course, we chose STRS.

Spouses already pay 100% of premiums. How can we possible pay even more? This is cruel and a continued effort to heap the burden onto the backs of retirees for solutions. Can you? Yes, obviously, but it will absolutely drive more of us out of the ability to pay for ourselves and our families and cause us to wind up in ER rooms for our only HC. Already many with HC problems are refusing treatments and meds. How can anyone on this board possibly consider doing this to those of us already so burdened and who have no choice.

2 yrs. sounds like Dyer telling us to find ways to adjust. We have no ways already using resources meant for retirement and those able back to work. WHEN DO CURRENT RETIREES EVER GET GRANDFATHERED FOR ANYTHING? We are so worried about time for everyone else to adjust or to be equitable but NEVER CURRENT RETIREES who cannot afford one more kick in the face for serving their communities.

If changes must be made, make them far enough out for those still with choices to make changes. But, please tell me, WHAT ADJUSTMENTS DO WE WHO HAVE BEEN HOLDING THIS HC TOGETHER HAVE LEFT TO MAKE AFTER SELLING HOMES, REFUSING TREATMENTS, HOLDING OUTSIDE JOB(S) AND REFUSING OR HALVING OUR MEDS?

ARE WE JUST EXPENDABLE?

This is beyond comprehension that any could consider this and I have learned the hard way once it is considered, the red flag better rise cause it most likely will occur. Raise retirement requirements by a couple of years. At least it won't KILL anyone. This is as depressing as when I heard spousal coverage was dropped and retirees having to scramble to find ways to survive. We are out of choices on that issue. Just shoot us. It would be kinder.

Devastated at my STRS Board, once again. I'd like an answer on this issue.

I understand the concern for a contingency plan. However, we need to survive day to day since STRS did survive 9/11 and has a record of surviving ups and downs. If such a disaster should occur that threatens our pensions, yes, we need to have a plan, but again, to plan ourselves out of HC for older retirees for present day to day living, creates far beyond that catastrophe for them NOW. They will NOT survive such a blow.

Molly Janczyk