Trina Kay Prufer: Historic STRS membership documents - use of the terms: “Law”, “Ohio Revised Code” and “ BENEFIT INCREASES AFTER RETIREMENT” (all in caps)

From Trina Kay Prufer

October 27, 2023

Historic STRS membership documents -  use of the terms:

“Law”, “Ohio Revised Code”  and “BENEFIT INCREASES AFTER RETIREMENT” (all in caps) 

I begin each day thinking about how I could possibly have landed in the predicament of having an essentially fixed-income monthly pension, being dependent on a corrupt organization for my livelihood. 

After all, in general, teachers are planners, savers and do their due diligence. What could have been safer than a state pension? Nothing makes me more angry than being told, by Neville, (personally, no less) that inflation protection was never intended as part of the defined benefit. 

After all, being an educator is not the easiest job; however, many of us stayed in the same district because we had planned our retirements to maximize income… again.. planning and due diligence... or so we thought.

The earliest STRS documents ( annual statements) that I have go back to 1988. They all say pretty much the same thing and use words such as the “Law”, or “Ohio Revised Code” Each and every statement or document I have has a section on “ Benefit increases after retirement” or say ”Actual Benefits will be paid in Accordance with STRS law in effect at the time you retire” Every single retirement booklet I have has a section on the annual COLA. EVERY… SINGLE… ONE. There are absolutely no qualifiers in any STRS documents suggesting the cola was not a part of the benefit  or an  “enhancement”.

Even the name of the retirement system, The STATE Teachers Retirement System of OHIO, carries the GRAVITAS of the law backing up the documents. 

There was a significant change in the wording on the cola after 2012, yet we are told this applies to all retirees. What happened to the certainty conveyed to those of us who retired prior to 2012? 

A contract is a contract… otherwise, with intent, it was fraud. If Neville and status quo STRS board members really believe the cola was never a part of the defined-benefit, they need to go back and read the documents issued to us.… then tell us again WHY the cola was never a part of the benefit.