Shirlee Zerkel to Mike Nehf and STRS Board: Others are making cuts; why isn't STRS?

From Shirlee Zerkel, August 18, 2009
Subject: A plea for fairness in your recommendations to the legislature for STRS changes

Dear Mr. Nehf and the STRS Board.

I retired in 2002 at the age of 60 and 27 years of service. I have noted the discussions between the STRS staff and Board during this rough economic time. I have heard much talk about how reductions for members both active and retired can save millions and millions for the system. I realize that cutting members benefits saves large amounts of money, but some serious talk of reducing staff benefits would go a long way in the since of fairness and those cuts could save a few million also. But I have heard of no such suggestions to the Board by the staff, nor have I heard the Board bring up those issues either.

You have already voted to push the over 65 Medicare A and B members to the Aetna Medicare Plan (Advantage Plan). When you did that, you threw away the members who cost you the least in health care dollars. I and many others have yet to meet even your $500 deductible for 2009.

This week you will be voting on recommendations that will go to the legislature next month. Some of those recommendations include changing calculation rules for final average salaries, increasing the minimum retirement age, raising the rate of contribution for the actives and the school boards, eliminating the short-sighted 35/88 rule, and seeking negative changes in our COLA. I ask you not to recommend a change in the COLA for those already retired. We now have almost nothing left of the promises we were given when we retired. Yet, one of you Board members stated in reference to the investment bonuses that the Board should not break a promise to the staff. The change in number of hours ( 37 1/2 to 40) worked by staff is not to take effect until sometime next year in order to give employees time to adjust. We retirees were never given time to adjust when cuts were made to our benefits. Please consider us now. How much more do you expect the retired who receives under $25,000 in annual pension to give up? Many retirees have little ability to earn more money. In my opinion retirees making less that $35,000 a year in pension should be grandfathered and be able to keep their 3% COLA.

I ask you, once again, do not cut our COLA until other cuts in operations are made. I have yet to hear discussion of a reduction of staff. A head count freeze is not a reduction; there is no savings there! I have yet to hear discussion on a wage reduction; a wage freeze is no savings! I have yet to hear discussion of increased insurance premiums for the staff; continuing on is not a savings! Spending 3.4 million on bonuses in September is not a savings! Giving yearly service awards and reimbursing for unused sick leave for all staff is not saving money! Other public and private organizations are cutting staff, giving unpaid furloughs, reducing wages, and lowering other benefits. Why isn't STRS?

Treat us the retirees and actives as you do your STRS staff,

Shirlee Zerkel