Cutting COLA 'after the fact' an ethics violation?

From RH Jones, June 1, 2012

To all:

Not being a lawyer, I am wondering if the OH STRS Board, in their unanimous vote to cut our COLA “after the fact”, may have violated an Ethics Code of Ohio? To take such risky decision-making to penalize retired members should raise a red flag of their decision perhaps to be unethical. Retired teachers have been undercounted in the aspect of inflation especially in regard to the increase costs to us in our HC/Rx and other inflationary expenses such as food and fuel.

Our ORTA by being consubstantial with our STRS has worked against its very retired members it supposedly represents. Another union, the AFSCME, reports in their AFSCME Works Spring 2012 edition, Page 28, that the City of Pawtucket in Rhode Island stated: “… thanks to a court decision earlier this year that overruled the city’s decision to arbitrarily change what was in the contract.”

Had the ORTA made a move to “cry foul” when younger retirees' HC/Rx was “cut out from under them” by the STRS before they reached Medicare age eligibility, many retired teachers would not have had their promised, vested benefit HC/Rx cut short. This ORTA member looks forward to having ORTA representation that will lead to significant victory in keeping our simple 3% COLA. Our STRS Board cannot unilaterally cut retirement benefits.

RHJones, I would be proud to be an AFSCME member