Download - OCSEA

Holding on to your retirement
It’s been almost three
years since the Ohio
Public Employee
Retirement System Board of
Trustees made recommendations
to make some incremental
changes to the pension system
to ensure it remains solvent
while maintaining retiree health
care. So why has nothing happened?
In 2009, OPERS and the other
public employee retirement
systems sent their recommendations
to the legislative body
charged with coming up with a
plan to bring the public pension
systems into solvency within
the 30-year legal requirement.
OCSEA even invited OPERS
staff on the road to explain the
changes to the membership so
they would be fully understood.
Some of the changes include
an increase of two years in eligibility,
a change in Purchase
of Service Credit as well as an
increase of the minimum earnable
salary to $1,000 per month.
These are changes that no
one necessarily wants, but are
necessary to keep the fund
solvent and to maintain retiree
health care.
But then the 2010 election
happened and any proposal or
will to make a change evaporated
along with it. But without
small changes now, as OPERS
Trustees had recommended,
things are only getting worse
for the fund that 1.7 million participants
depend on. Last year,
instead of fixing the problem
and looking seriously at the
OPERS recommendations, the
General Assembly delayed them
and, instead, contracted to do
an actuarial study. The results
of that study are not expected
until July.
Meanwhile, the pension
system’s problems did not go
away and the fund continues
to struggle, in part due to the
market downturn in 2008, but
mostly because people are
simply living longer.
The longer the lifespan, the
more money is drawn from the
retirement. In fact, the basic
structure of OPERS has not
changed since the fund began in
1935. But since then, the length
of time the average retiree
draws a pension has tripled.
Now, public sector unions
are worried that anti-worker legislators
will do nothing until it’s
too late. “The question is, are
legislators dragging their feet so
they can create a crisis that can
justify making rash and extreme
changes?” said Carol Bowshier,
OCSEA’s Director of Health
Care Policy.
Some of the severe recommendations
being discussed
by lawmakers are a move to a
defined contribution plan and
an increased employee share
“They need to keep health care.
My parents are 81 and 77 and are
both public workers. The older
they get the more they need health
care. Without retiree health care,
one major illness and you'll be
paying off the bill the rest of your
life.”
~ OCSEA State Board
of Directors
Bob Valentine
“The question is, are legislators dragging
their feet so they can create a
crisis that can justify making rash
and extreme changes?”
~ OCSEA Director of
Health Care Policy
Carol Bowshier
(up from the current 10 percent).
Because health care is not
required by law, these and other
rash changes could reduce or
completely eliminate health
care for retirees. None of these
changes were part of the OPERS
recommendations in 2009, but
anti-worker politicians in the
General Assembly are making
no indication that they’ll play
nice on the subject.
14 Public Employee Quarterly Winter 2012