RH Jones speaks out on ORSC report

From RH Jones, March 3, 2010
Subject: Re: the ORSC report of 02-17-2010 & our HC/Rx, 13th ck, & COLA

To all:

In particular, pages 28 concerning our 13^th ck, and page 32 that concerns our COLA. First, this is the page 28 quote: “ORSC staff made a number of recommendations.” · “That the statutory authority to grant an annual lump sum supplemental benefit check (i.e., 13^th check) be repealed in STRS and that ad hoc posts be enacted on an as-needed basis by the legislature.” Over the years, I have sent enough e-mail to write a book in support of the 13^th ck and explaining the fairness of it to all; that includes it being fair to the STRS retired teacher earmarked funding allocations. In one of ORTA’s few, and far between, STRS public speeches to the STRS Board, on 10-19-2001, ORTA President Dave P. Travis said in the last paragraph of his speech supporting the13^th ck: “Even with an actuarial rate of return of 6.7% which is not up to the actuarial assumption rate of 7.5%, you as fiduciaries of what we all like to refer to as the ‘Premier Pension System’, can be fiscally responsible in granting a benefit this year. I urge you to do so.” To see the fairness of the 13^th ck go to ORC Sec 3307:1-601 -- the STRS sometimes, at years-end, called it “the clean-up” formula.

Secondly, this is the Page 32 quote: “Annual 3 %COLA - In its analysis of H.B. 157 (eff. 2-1-02), which provides for an annual 3% COLA in all five retirement systems, regardless of the actual percentage change in the CPI-W, the ORSC staff recommended against the COLA changes under the bill and suggested that ‘any additional resources of these retirement systems be allocated to the provision of discretionary retiree health care benefits that are neither taxable nor subject to Social Security offset and/or the provision of ad hoc increases, such as a ‘purchasing parity’ adjustment of some target ratio of either 75% or 85%, to retirees whose benefits have been eroded the most by inflation over the years.’ The ORSC rejected the staff recommendation and recommended instead that the legislature approve H.B. 157. Between 1992 and 2006, the CPI-W has increased by less than 3% in 12 of those years.” Personally I do not think that using the year’s 1992- 2006 is not done properly or in an unbiased manner.

While employed, educators sacrificed wages in order to win STRS paid retiree healthcare/Rx. Decisions not to adequately pre-fund were made by politicians. They have the responsibility for making good on their obligations by increasing the revenues that are needed. Un-funding future responsibilities happen in other state government obligations such as Medicaid and prison costs. Why single out our retired educators?

At the time we decided to retiree, if we had known our deferred compensations that including HC/Rx, the 13^th ck, and the flat 3% COLA would be so easily threatened we would have stayed on-the-job longer, at greater expense to our employers and would have negotiated even for more deferred compensations such as dental/eye-care and a compounded COLA. Speaking as one retired teacher, I encourage the STRS officials, the ORSC, and the ORSC staff to not be so hard-hearted and, in all finitude: be aware of the retired teacher’s rights under the Untied States of America Constitution. We are protected.

Respectfully submitted,

Robert H. Jones, retired teacher OH STRS stakeholder