Workers decry pension ruling

Safety benefit won't apply to past service, and managers aren't eligible for it at all

By John Hill -- Sacramento Bee Capitol Bureau Wednesday, July 28, 2004

State workers in a union that recently won lucrative public safety pensions won't get the better retirement formula for past service, and 600 supervisors and managers won't get the special benefit at all, the state department that negotiates labor contracts has decided. That's led to anger and disappointment among the workers, who had been told by their union their past service would count.

"Everybody assumed it was going to," said Tom Miller, a 57-year-old conservationist with the California Conservation Corps.

The union, CAUSE, is considering whether to sue or use other means to try to overturn the decision by the Department of Personnel Administration. The union includes business inspectors, driving testers for the Department of Motor Vehicles and dispatchers for the California Highway Patrol, among others.

"We've received dozens of calls from people who are upset over the decision," said Lynelle Jolley, spokeswoman for the personnel department.

Most of the calls have come from managers and supervisors, Jolley said, who are not represented by CAUSE, the California Union of Safety Employees.

In 2002, the Legislature passed a bill that granted public safety pensions to about 3,000 CAUSE workers as of July 1, 2004. The "safety" category makes the workers eligible to receive, at age 55, an annual retirement of 2.5 percent of their pay times the number of years they have worked. Most state workers get just 2 percent per year at that age.

The Bee reported in May that Senate Bill 183 skirted the procedure set up four years earlier charging the personnel department with determining whether workers met the criteria for public safety pensions. Those criteria include safeguarding the public or supervising inmates and patients.

The state retirement system and, in recent months, the personnel department have said that the CAUSE workers do not meet that criteria despite their role in enforcing laws and the on-the-job hazards they may face.

The union gave about $1 million in 2002 to then-Gov. Gray Davis and lawmakers, including large amounts to the Democratic governor within weeks of action on SB183.

Last month, a bill was introduced that would have blocked the special benefit from going into effect as scheduled. It failed after Democratic lawmakers argued that it would undermine the state's agreements with public employee unions.That left open the questions of whether to make the benefit apply to past service or extend it to 600 managers and supervisors.

On July 15, the personnel department sent a letter to state officials announcing its decision. The department says it is sticking to its own precedent as well as the public safety pension criteria in state law.

That decision represents a financial setback for supervisors and CAUSE workers close to retirement.

Miller, the conservationist, found out about it when one of his co-workers retired this month. "People like myself with 25-plus years are really affected," he said.

Miller's wife started an embroidery business in Lodi a year ago. With the expectation of having past service tallied at the higher pension formula, Miller was toying with retiring in a year or two to help her with the business.

Now, the calculation has changed and though he doesn't know for sure how much less he will receive, he is rethinking early retirement. He still loves the job of supervising young corps members who respond to fires and floods, Miller said. But he doesn't relish the idea of sticking around after that zest is gone just to boost his pension.

Since it took over decision-making power from the Legislature in 1998, Jolley said, the department has never allowed reclassification to a public safety retirement category to include past service.

"We are being consistent with historical process," she said.

But the union argues that it was told in 2002 by officials, including Marty Morgenstern, then the director of the personnel department, that the higher formula would be retroactive.

"We believe that we were told by the state's representatives that it was part of the deal," said Craig Brown, a lobbyist for CAUSE.

Morgenstern told The Bee in May that he could not recall how or if the question was resolved.

In its July 15 letter, the personnel department wrote that managers and supervisors did not meet the criteria in state law for inclusion in the special retirement category. That's consistent with the department's position during debate over the recent legislative attempt to block the pensions that none of the 3,000 CAUSE workers should be eligible.

"While we respect the important public safety role these people fill, that is not the only criteria they must meet to receive a safety retirement benefit," Jolley said.

But Bonnie Morris of the Association of California State Supervisors, said the department's position "doesn't hold any water." The safety retirement status has been granted in the past to recognize hazards in the workplace or even to encourage workers to take promotions.

Morris' association doesn't have official status as a bargaining unit with the state, but she said it would still ask the personnel department to reconsider.

In response to the Governor Schwarzenegger's 2005 Reform Proposals related to public employees pensions, the Legislative Analyst Office prepared an detailed analysis of public employees pensions.

TOP

Send mail to mikemcmahonausd@yahoo.com with questions or comments about this web site.
Last modified: , 2004

Disclaimer: This website is the sole responsibility of Mike McMahon. It does not represent any official opinions, statement of facts or positions of the Alameda Unified School District. Its sole purpose is to disseminate information to interested individuals in the Alameda community.