Friday, March 05, 2010
COLA CUTS - $$$$$
From Mario Iacone, March 5, 2010 The Colorado pensioners have filed a class action lawsuit because,
COLA CUTS are a
SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN PENSION BENEFITS
$300 COLA CUT
10 yr loss of income would be $16,500
20 yr loss of income would be $63,000
$600 COLA CUT
10 yr loss of income would be $33,000
20 yr loss of income would be $126,000
$900 COLA CUT
10 yr loss of income would be $49,500
20 yr loss of income would be $189,000
PLEASE REVIEW THE CHART (Click to enlarge)
A STRS retiree receiving a $900 COLA benefit would be cut $300 yearly if COLA is reduced to 2%.
$450 yearly if COLA is reduced to 1.5%
$600 yearly if COLA is reduced to 1.0%
$900 yearly if COLA is eliminated
Lifetime income is substantially reduced with any yearly reduction in COLA.
To obtain, contact information for your State Representative or your State Senator, click on the following link:
They sure don't represent us!
Subject: Fw: Emailing: ORTA Position on the Long-term Solvency Plan of STRS
Re: Service to ORTA members
CORE to meet March 18, 2010
Thursday, March 04, 2010
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
RH Jones speaks out on ORSC report
Subject: Re: the ORSC report of 02-17-2010 & our HC/Rx, 13th ck, & COLA
In particular, pages 28 concerning our 13th 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 · “That the statutory authority to grant an annual lump sum supplemental benefit check (i.e., 13th check) be repealed in STRS and that ad hoc posts be enacted on an as-needed basis by the legislature.”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 13th 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 the13th 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 13th 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 13th 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.
Robert H. Jones, retired teacher OH STRS stakeholder
The document that nobody seems to want to discuss...STRS in the basement with a 60% funding ratio
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
RH Jones re: Retirees suing over Colorado state pension changes
Subject: Fw: Business Insurance News Story: Retirees sue over Colorado state pension changes
More info re: Colorado COLA cut and class action suit challenging it....
INDenverTimes.com, February 26, 2010
Want to read the class action lawsuit by Coloradoans to halt the COLA cut?
Mario Iacone: COLORADO PENSION FUND
From Mario Iacone, March 2, 2010
COLA REDUCTION $$$$$
COLA CUTS ARE a SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION in Pension Benefits.
Colorado Retirees estimate that a 1.5% Reduction in COLA will cost them more than $165,000 over TWENTY YEARS!
The entire article follows.
"The attorneys said some retirees will lose more than $165,000 over the next two decades because the legislation reduces the annual cost-of-living raise from 3.5 percent to 2 percent annually, with no increase this year."
Jim Stoll: Independent thinker, tireless worker and candidate for Active Seat on the STRS Board
Support Jim Stoll
Stop The Rampant Spending!
And The Cutting of Our Pension Benefits!
Join us on Facebook:
Click: Jim Stoll for STRS
In the past two years, over 1,400
· I ask for your support in the upcoming STRS Board Election which will begin on
· Every teacher deserves the right to retire under the current rules which have governed for the many years which we've paid into STRS. However, STRS now proposes dramatic cuts to our pension benefits because of their own mismanagement.
· If you think it is unfair for STRS to tell all teachers who have less than 25 years in the system that they NOW must teach for 35 years or until age 60 before retiring, and at the same time tell you to contribute more, then I need and want your vote.
· If you want to stop the drastic and unfair changes proposed by STRS before the Ohio Legislature votes on them next year - then I need your vote.
· I have worked in the past year with
· If you are unhappy with the proposed changes to your retirement system then you must vote for a change to the current Board and its status quo. The current STRS Board has obviously not served you well in protecting your retirement investments and benefits. Stop The Rampant Spending – Support Jim Stoll!
· I will protect the COLAs (cost of living adjustment) for retirees and work to preserve the Health Care Fund that is critical to all teachers upon their retirement. All teachers should realize that a retirement without Health Care is no retirement at all.
Active teachers: On
Vote for James A. Stoll for the Active STRS Board Seat.
About Jim Stoll:
Jim Stoll is the Director of Athletics at
Jim is also a successful business owner who in the summer months founded a company called ProCamps, www.procamps.com, which puts on youth sport camps for professional NBA and NFL athletes around the country. Knowing full well the diligence, hard work and sacrifice required to succeed in business, Jim has fought hard against the outrageous spending practices and incredibly huge bonus awards for STRS investment staff that continue unchecked while the STRS pension fund lost almost 33 Billion dollars of its assets (your dollars) in 2008 and 2009. In turn, this has led directly to proposed drastic and undesirable changes in your pension benefits.
This is what Jim Stoll intends to change. (Posted 3/2/10)
RH Jones: A plea to ORTA and OEA-R
Subject: Can they legally reduce your pension benefits once they are vested? A class action lawsuit in Colorado might just tell us something in Ohio!
Can they legally reduce your pension benefits once they are vested? A class action lawsuit in Colorado might just tell us something in Ohio!
"Both the United States and Colorado Constitutions bar reductions in pension benefits once the right to those pension (benefits) vests. And that is exactly what the legislature did here," attorney Stephen M. Pincus said in the release."The attorneys said some retirees will lose more than $165,000 over the next two decades because the legislation reduces the annual cost-of-living raise from 3.5 percent to 2 percent annually, with no increase this year."
The Denver Post, February 27, 2010
A class-action lawsuit filed Friday claims pension legislation signed into law this week is unconstitutional because it reduces benefits promised to retired government employees.
In a news release, the attorneys said the suit also was filed on behalf of approximately 100,000 PERA members who became eligible to retire or who have retired since March 1, 1994, when annual pension increases were first guaranteed under state law.
Monday, March 01, 2010
AARP fights attempt to block a COLA increase for Idaho public service retirees
Hey Dispatch......are we a little biased against public pensions and especially Ohio public pensions?
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Ohio Council 8
RH Jones: Where's ORTA's rebuttal? (You're dreaming, Bob)
Subject: Hey Dispatch......are we a little biased against public pensions and especially Ohio public pensions?
John and all:
Concerning the Dispatch's biased attack on defined benefits (deferred compensation), where is the rebuttal from ORTA, I wonder? Silence is not golden in this instance. Perhaps retired educators could become members of the union mentioned [in John Lyall's letter above].
RHJones, PUFL Member of ORTA
Doctors threaten to close up shop over changes to Medicare
ABC, February 26, 2010