The ORTA problem (again)

From RH Jones, April 27, 2010
Subject: An unhappy STRS retired person e-mails Hanning & a Cc. to McGreevy

To Ann Hanning, Jim McGreevy and all:

You will find the "unhappy STRS retired person's" letter to ORTA's Director, Ann Hanning, below and Ann Hanning's response.

Personally, I have some problems with Hanning's response. As you all probably know her ORTA salary is $50,000 + and expenses. She, also, receives a STRS retired member pension. Therefore, can she afford to take some cuts in her pay and pension? From her lack of actions on the part of retirees, I would say probably.

An authority tells me that AARP has been indicted due to getting "kickbacks" from selling insurance. About 30-years ago, or so, an OEA Director was indicted for accepting "kickbacks" from insurance companies. He was found guilty and was fined, removed in disgrace from office. Therefore, OEA, ORTA, and OEA-R should be aware that association officials can be held accountable in the court system if they are found guilty of accepting "kickbacks" from insurance companies that they associations sponsor. They all spend too much time promoting insurance and should focus only on representing the membership in negotiations that improve our lot.

From Ann Hanning's response to the 3% COLA, she does not seem to be aware of the 1970 inflation that rose to 14%. Multi-billionaire, Warren Buffet, currently says that America, for a variety of reasons, will be hit soon with very serious inflation. Buffet, as a modern master in making money, should not be ignored. To keep STRS retirees abreast of inflation, the STRS board must not understand that they are authorized by law to issue a 13th check whether it is just for $1 or $1000. The calculations determined by units that is the most fair of inflation fighting legal decision they can make. As one of the few powers the board has to fight inflation for those of us who are retired, they can be lenient here.

There have been no ORTA inquires into how STRS Director Nehf comes up with the huge retiree COLA figures he says impacts so greatly on the STRS general fund. Retirees are dying off everyday, how can he, therefore, justify those outlandish figures. My opinion is that, he must be carrying out those figures into eternity rather than a realistic calculation as he appeases the ORC with a play on words; or is he responding to a political fact that actives educators are more numerous than retired members? Because of this, should the oldest 1/3 of retired educators are impacted the most? I think not!

Further, in trying to get a greater employer contribution, where has ORTA been for the past 20-plus years? And, where was ORTA when the STRS board lowered the 4% employer HC/Rx fund contribution down to only 1%. ORTA could have supported a march on the OH capital building on this but instead chose to be "milquetoast". Is it no wonder retirees are so easily victimized by the officialdom at STRS and in statehouse? Also, has ORTA discriminated against men when she mentioned a 3% COLA for those over 80-years of age and 0% for all the rest -- women outlive men, and therefore, there are more women over 80. And there was no mention of ORTA trying to keep the older 1/3rd of retirees with any kind of inflation catch-up. Do they take a stand on anything, I wonder? As the hired ORTA leader, has Hanning ever contacted her legislative ORTA committees? As a member of the SummitCTRA legislative CMTE, I, nor the Chair, have received any directive leadership memos. I have been told that Hanning has a renewed contract to serve for another 3-years. May I ask for what? To continue to just sit on her hands at STRS board meetings and say or do nothing?

As educator compensation becomes monetarily competitive with other professions, will America stay competitive and survive in the 21st century? Without education, there is no prosperity.This writer is a happy STRS retiree who wishes only to keep STRS, and my country, moving forward in providing a proper retirement for the most important profession: teaching.

RHJones, a SummitCTRA legislative committee member

From___
Subject: Fwd: unhappy STRS retired person

Bob, I sent Ann Hanning an e-mail stating my opinion on the current changes being considered on our pension, especially the COLA. This was her reply.

Note: name withheld by me for privacy reasons .

From: Ann Hanning (ahanning@orta.org)
Subj: RE: unhappy STRS retired person

I’m sorry that you are an unhappy retiree. We continue to work with STRS & our Coalition partners to address the issues that you have raised.Unfortunately, the 13th check which many STRS retirees have never received will probably not return. The rising costs of HC for everyone continues to be addressed at all levels (local, state & national). We have yet to learn what impact or effect the national HC program will have on STRS & our retirees. As you know, the pension systems are not required to provide a health care program. However, it appears that members of the ORSC & other legislators are encouraging the systems to continue to offer it.

Your original pension benefit & any increases you have received since 1989 will not be affected by any proposed pension solvency plans or legislation. At this time, a decrease (from 3% – 2%) in the COLA has been proposed. As the 3% simple COLA is currently guaranteed for all 5 Ohio public pension systems, it is likely that any legislation will provide a uniform amount or percentage for all public retirees. Note: one system has proposed having a COLA based on the CPI, which was negative in the last national reports. Also, due to the CPI negative members Social security recipients had no COLA this year & SS is suggesting no COLA will be forthcoming in 2011.

There have been many discussions at STRS & among Coalition groups on the COLA. It has been suggested that only retirees 80 years & over continue to receive the 3%; others receive 0%. It has also been suggested that there be a flat COLA (ie $250) for everyone. Some have suggested that COLAs only be given on the 1st $20,000 of everyone’s pension.

Do you support any of these suggestions? If you have specific suggestions to address the concerns you’ve expressed, I’ll be happy to share them.

Ann Hanning

From___
To: jmcgreevy3338@gmail.com; Ann Hanning Cc: rjones002@neo.rr.com
Subject: unhappy STRS retired person

Cutting our COLA? Increasing our health care costs? Paying people to make bad investments? Rewarding those who were not good stewards of our funds? Ignoring the plight of retirees who are having to make do with less and less funds while costs continue to rise. If we cannot count on you to protect retirement benefits, to whom do we turn? Delaying the reduction of our COLA (which should not even be consideration for current retirees) would be a move that would not drastically impact their financial situation.

Since having to retire for medical reasons in 1989 I have had my pension benefits reduced by losing the 13th pay check, rising health care costs, and increase in health care premiums. Next I and many others STRS retired people are facing the same dilemma by having our benefits curtailed.

Has ORTA stood up for us? I have not read anything that tells me they are!

Name withheld for privacy reasons