RH Jones re: An OH STRS payback of HC/Rx promises?
From RH Jones, September 22, 2010
To all:
In view of an Alaska Supreme court ruling, 06/13/2003, that medical benefits for retired educators and other public employees cannot be cut, leaves me wondering if the OH STRS could be held accountable and liable in court for having already cut retired member HC/Rx benefits? And could STRS possibly have to pay back to the retired members all of their increased costs since the time of the said cut?
The Anchorage superior court judge ruled that the Department of Retired Benefits (DRB) violated the constitutional rights of public retirees by cutting medical benefits. The plaintiffs were NEA-Alaska, NEA-Alaska/Retired, along with several individual plaintiffs. These plaintiffs were granted authority to represent PERS and TRS retirees.
The judge rejected DRB’s arguments and ruled that retiree medical benefits were protected rights, just like the monthly pension check.
This is a brief synopsis of an e-mail that I received from the NEA, 08/19/2003. I assume that the above ruling should be of common knowledge to officials of OH STRS and those of the OPERS, SERS, Police/fire, Highway patrol, NEA/AFT, OEA, OEA-R, NEOEA, ORTA and the locally independent teacher and administrator associations.
The correct and right thing for the OH STRS to do is just to restore at once the retired educator HR/Rx package to the status of the original promise to avoid the possibility of a future complex payback and unknown punitive damages.
Respectfully submitted by
RHJones, a retired OH STRS teacher member
To all:
In view of an Alaska Supreme court ruling, 06/13/2003, that medical benefits for retired educators and other public employees cannot be cut, leaves me wondering if the OH STRS could be held accountable and liable in court for having already cut retired member HC/Rx benefits? And could STRS possibly have to pay back to the retired members all of their increased costs since the time of the said cut?
The Anchorage superior court judge ruled that the Department of Retired Benefits (DRB) violated the constitutional rights of public retirees by cutting medical benefits. The plaintiffs were NEA-Alaska, NEA-Alaska/Retired, along with several individual plaintiffs. These plaintiffs were granted authority to represent PERS and TRS retirees.
The judge rejected DRB’s arguments and ruled that retiree medical benefits were protected rights, just like the monthly pension check.
This is a brief synopsis of an e-mail that I received from the NEA, 08/19/2003. I assume that the above ruling should be of common knowledge to officials of OH STRS and those of the OPERS, SERS, Police/fire, Highway patrol, NEA/AFT, OEA, OEA-R, NEOEA, ORTA and the locally independent teacher and administrator associations.
The correct and right thing for the OH STRS to do is just to restore at once the retired educator HR/Rx package to the status of the original promise to avoid the possibility of a future complex payback and unknown punitive damages.
Respectfully submitted by
RHJones, a retired OH STRS teacher member
posted by Kathie Bracy at 12:15 PM
<< Home