Rich DeColibus: An Open Letter to Bob Stein
From Rich DeColibus, September 29, 2009
Subject: An Open Letter to Bob Stein
Dear Mr. Stein,
In case you have been unavoidedly distracted elsewhere, most retirees who follow the STRS follies (regrettably few) are less than pleased by your recent vote to shell out $3.4 million in bonuses to employees
for doing what they are already salaried to do (and, to be sure, very nicely salaried). Imagine our surprise, given you were primarily elected to advocate for the elimination of the PBI. Not to unfairly tar you with your own brush, but here is the quote from your campaign web site:
"I would have voted to eliminate
the current PBI plan but I would also seek to eliminate the process that created it in the first place. The current plan was ill-conceived and the board should have known as much at first reading."
Gosh, that seems clear enough: the PBI program stinks like road kill
and the board members are stupid for voting for it. Of course everyone is entitled to change their mind; it's just that if you say one thing begging to get elected, and then do the exact opposite after winning, people tend to never believe anything you say, ever again. I think the issue is called "Trust." Why do you think we voted for you?
In a recent letter to one of the members, you state:
"The processes that created a 2009 plan that was apparently not well enough understood by the membership have not been completely addressed -- but those processes were not part of the PBI motion. The misunderstanding about the 2009 PBI plan also might be as simple as a collection of oversights by the membership -- not realizing that the stock market could go down or that STRS had exposure in that area."
First of all, if you can find me one member who doesn't understand the stock market sometimes goes up and sometimes goes down, I would be truly astounded. Most of us didn't graduate from college with degrees in basketweaving. Secondly, allow me to clarify your thinking: the major problem of the PBI program has nothing to do with the process that created it, the problem is the program exists at all. So there is no misunderstanding on your part, allow me to state, with as much crystal-clear intent as I can muster, what we want: WE WANT THE PROGRAM ELIMINATED. If there is some uncertainty in your mind
about the specific meaning here, get back to me and I will clarify the clarification. There is no conceivable reason to pay grossly inflated bonuses to already overpaid investment counselors, whether the market goes up or whether the market goes down. They have a job to do, they get a salary to do it, and if that's not enough for them, they are free to seek employment someplace else. That is how you and I worked most of our lives, and if that's good enough for us, it's good eno
ugh for them. We founded this country on the idea that an elite class of "betters" was a bad idea. It does not matter to us if you are always outvoted; we will eliminate the PBI-lovers slowly but surely over time. To reiterate, it's one of the reasons you're on the Board now.
As for the nonsense of, "Oh my god, they could sue us!" the fact of the matter is anybody can sue anyone at any time for any reason. If STRS lost a similar case, they must have been using ten-dollar-an-hour attorneys from lawyers-r-us
on defense. The root of the problem is the PBI program exists; the board created the "they could sue us" problem in the first place by allowing the program to exist. No program, no suit. See, simple. It is utterly disingenuous to create a bonus program and then continue it on the excuse "They could sue us if we don't continue it." Hello. It states in no uncertain terms in the program itself that the board can eliminate the program at any time for any reason, or no reason at all. Geez, is there something in the drinking water down there that robs people of their sanity?
Dissemble all you want, as far as I am concerned you voted to throw 3.4
million bucks of my money down the drain for as much good as it will do me or STRS. You need not respond, and I'm a forgiving person, so this is only strike one; you get one more freebie, and then your third bad vote is strike three. However, you've got almost four years to go, so use your freebie carefully.
Rich DeColibus
[Former president of the Cleveland Teachers Union]
Subject: An Open Letter to Bob Stein
Dear Mr. Stein,
In case you have been unavoidedly distracted elsewhere, most retirees who follow the STRS follies (regrettably few) are less than pleased by your recent vote to shell out $3.4 million in bonuses to employees
for doing what they are already salaried to do (and, to be sure, very nicely salaried). Imagine our surprise, given you were primarily elected to advocate for the elimination of the PBI. Not to unfairly tar you with your own brush, but here is the quote from your campaign web site: "I would have voted to eliminate
the current PBI plan but I would also seek to eliminate the process that created it in the first place. The current plan was ill-conceived and the board should have known as much at first reading." Gosh, that seems clear enough: the PBI program stinks like road kill
and the board members are stupid for voting for it. Of course everyone is entitled to change their mind; it's just that if you say one thing begging to get elected, and then do the exact opposite after winning, people tend to never believe anything you say, ever again. I think the issue is called "Trust." Why do you think we voted for you? In a recent letter to one of the members, you state:
"The processes that created a 2009 plan that was apparently not well enough understood by the membership have not been completely addressed -- but those processes were not part of the PBI motion. The misunderstanding about the 2009 PBI plan also might be as simple as a collection of oversights by the membership -- not realizing that the stock market could go down or that STRS had exposure in that area."
First of all, if you can find me one member who doesn't understand the stock market sometimes goes up and sometimes goes down, I would be truly astounded. Most of us didn't graduate from college with degrees in basketweaving. Secondly, allow me to clarify your thinking: the major problem of the PBI program has nothing to do with the process that created it, the problem is the program exists at all. So there is no misunderstanding on your part, allow me to state, with as much crystal-clear intent as I can muster, what we want: WE WANT THE PROGRAM ELIMINATED. If there is some uncertainty in your mind
about the specific meaning here, get back to me and I will clarify the clarification. There is no conceivable reason to pay grossly inflated bonuses to already overpaid investment counselors, whether the market goes up or whether the market goes down. They have a job to do, they get a salary to do it, and if that's not enough for them, they are free to seek employment someplace else. That is how you and I worked most of our lives, and if that's good enough for us, it's good eno
ugh for them. We founded this country on the idea that an elite class of "betters" was a bad idea. It does not matter to us if you are always outvoted; we will eliminate the PBI-lovers slowly but surely over time. To reiterate, it's one of the reasons you're on the Board now. As for the nonsense of, "Oh my god, they could sue us!" the fact of the matter is anybody can sue anyone at any time for any reason. If STRS lost a similar case, they must have been using ten-dollar-an-hour attorneys from lawyers-r-us
on defense. The root of the problem is the PBI program exists; the board created the "they could sue us" problem in the first place by allowing the program to exist. No program, no suit. See, simple. It is utterly disingenuous to create a bonus program and then continue it on the excuse "They could sue us if we don't continue it." Hello. It states in no uncertain terms in the program itself that the board can eliminate the program at any time for any reason, or no reason at all. Geez, is there something in the drinking water down there that robs people of their sanity? Dissemble all you want, as far as I am concerned you voted to throw 3.4
million bucks of my money down the drain for as much good as it will do me or STRS. You need not respond, and I'm a forgiving person, so this is only strike one; you get one more freebie, and then your third bad vote is strike three. However, you've got almost four years to go, so use your freebie carefully. Rich DeColibus
[Former president of the Cleveland Teachers Union]
posted by Kathie Bracy at 6:57 PM
<< Home