If you wish to help support the ongoing costs of running this blog and you haven't purchased anything through Amazon on this site, please consider a small donation to defray basic costs. It isn't free to me to keep this site current. I have to pay for bandwidth, costs of duplicating documents when they exist only in paper form, and keep printer ink around to read lengthy documents, and the time to do the research. Thank you. Marc Feldesman, site owner and publisher.
Oregon PERS Information is Copyright Marc R. Feldesman (c) 2003 - 2017 All Rights Reserved. Posts may not be reprinted without prior consent.


Please don't post your comments more than once. I moderate all comments and a delay between posting and appearing is part of the drill here. I get to all comments in due time. Please don't continually repost the same comment. Only one will be posted. Thank you.

Monday, May 11, 2015

Peaceful, Easy Feeling

There is considerable debate about what PERS is going to do, might do, or absolutely will not do when the COLA comes due this July 1, 2015.  Rest assured, my friends, that nothing is set yet.  We know that PERS will pay 2% COLA to all retirees, but it is not yet known, and won’t be known for a few weeks whether the 2% will be on our current (unadjusted) benefit, or on a revised benefit that reflects the compounding effects of readjusting the current benefit for 2% COLAs in 2013 and 2014.  One thing is almost certain.  Whatever PERS does on July 1, it probably will not include any restitution for previously withheld COLA.  That is a more complex proposition.  I did learn today from knowledgeable sources within PERS that on May 29, 2015, the PERS Board will meet in their bimonthly setting, and PERS Staff will outline the plan for rectifying the COLA for all retirees.  So, for now, take a chill pill, relax, and know that within a few weeks, we will all know the timetable for restoring the lost COLAs, and for receiving any back benefits with interest we are owed.  I am willing to bet that everything will be resolved before the 2016 COLA comes due.  I’m heartened by PERS’ quick response to the Court ruling, and its desire to move forward as quickly as feasible.

7 comments:

Unknown said...

I am sure PERS sees this entire exercise aka "The Grand Bargain" as a grand pain in the ass. They are the ones who got to do all of the work, run various scenarios, recommend palatable solutions, and revise formulas, knowing full well the Court was going to overturn whatever they did. Colossal waste of time.

Befuddled said...

I hope that the legislation moves quickly to reverse one element of the Grand Bargain. It was giveaway of $150 million a year (and it will grow) to mostly wealthy individuals who own S Corporations. It was necessary to get Republican votes, and I'm sure that the legislators (foolishly in retrospect) did not tie the fortunes of the S Corp legislation to the upholding of the PERS changes. By the way, who led the charge for S Corp giveaways? None other than legislator Larry George, who owns an S Corp. Hey, no conflict of interest there!

xqqme said...

My PERS benefit (as estimated by the inexact and not-to-be-relied-upon web tool) will more than likely be "Money Match", meaning that the full pension amount I will receive will be based on time employed and deposited to my Tier 1, non-IAP, account balance. Based on the Supreme Courts' ruling I should therefore receive the full 2% COLA, plus the full benefits of the COLA Bank. I'm fully expecting to have to take PERS to court, however, to receive it, although I will be watching for their post-PERB-meeting posts, and will be submitting my two-cent's-worth of comments for any rules they intend to promulgate on the issue.

mrfearless47 said...

Are you still working? If not, then you have every right to expect your benefit to be subject to the old rules. If you are still working, the court's ruling will apply to the portion of your benefit earned from work prior to May 6, 2013. But if your argument is going to be that ALL Money Match is based on earnings accrued before that date, you would be wrong, since you have accrued earnings for part of 2013, all of 2014, and part of 2015 after the rules changed.

Douglas Cook said...

Well now we have a decision on all that it would be a good idea for the activists to move on to the next pressing issue - that is making sure that all the PERS funding that is supposed to be paid, is. This is best way to protect the future of the retirees. We may not ever see another grand recession but each dip in the business cycle gives cause to interests who want money that doesn't belong to them to tinker.

Unknown said...

I think they are waking up to the fact they are drilling a dry hole

Douglas Cook said...

I was trying to address the issue of required employer contributions to PERS. On the input side of the system. Maybe Mr. Feldesman might comment on where entities have gotten away with short changing the system?