tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post2711667038862447302..comments2024-03-26T20:09:19.458-07:00Comments on Oregon PERS Information: Pay in Bloodmrfearless47http://www.blogger.com/profile/03454690519716783056noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-50804010825957340182013-08-27T14:10:39.447-07:002013-08-27T14:10:39.447-07:00They won't replace the DOJ. They will represe...They won't replace the DOJ. They will represent the employers making an independent case in favor of SB 822. To the extent that PERS' and the state's interest overlap, they will provide backup legal analysis.mrfearless47https://www.blogger.com/profile/03454690519716783056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-79344961588171767612013-08-27T12:11:20.850-07:002013-08-27T12:11:20.850-07:00I don't understand the role of intervenor. How...I don't understand the role of intervenor. How will OSBA assist in the defense of SB822? Will they donate money to Oregon DOJ or provide a more competent legal team?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16751520728679068518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-19396772326885603412013-08-26T08:09:36.185-07:002013-08-26T08:09:36.185-07:00Just want to say how much I appreciate you Marc, y...Just want to say how much I appreciate you Marc, your blog and the great service you provide for those of us who would struggle to weave through and understand all that is happening in and around PERS.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-43563587331095006772013-08-25T16:13:14.242-07:002013-08-25T16:13:14.242-07:00If the employer is arguing that its total PERS co...If the employer is arguing that its total PERS cost is to fund current workers future benefits, they are not only misleading you; they are outright lying to you. My point from above remains. It is not the fault of any current PERS member that PERS rates are as high as they are, and no current PERS member at your institution can or should expect to receive the benefits paid for by the current mrfearless47https://www.blogger.com/profile/03454690519716783056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-131519205591004412013-08-25T15:56:25.986-07:002013-08-25T15:56:25.986-07:00I'm not trying to say it belongs to current em...I'm not trying to say it belongs to current employees or that there's anything unfair about current workers paying for current retirees! <br /><br />The UO administration is claiming that our benefits package, including PERS, is unusually generous. To support this the point out how much it costs. I'm trying to argue the point that what's important to current and future faculty is Openhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15489396604684895931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-18822795290523711442013-08-25T15:47:51.771-07:002013-08-25T15:47:51.771-07:00Maybe you are confusing employees with employers.Maybe you are confusing employees with employers.mrfearless47https://www.blogger.com/profile/03454690519716783056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-21375949071551312172013-08-25T15:46:39.081-07:002013-08-25T15:46:39.081-07:00No. A better way to say is that the emploER contr...No. A better way to say is that the emploER contribution rate would be 40% lower if the employers had paid their full contributions when they were due. The 40% of employer contribution rate wouldn't be paid at all if the employers were current on payments. Keep in mind that the PERS Board allows employers to get away with spreading out liabilities over 20 years, and the Board also smooths mrfearless47https://www.blogger.com/profile/03454690519716783056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-43711259330079209062013-08-25T15:38:38.828-07:002013-08-25T15:38:38.828-07:00Maybe I'm confused or not saying it right. P 1...Maybe I'm confused or not saying it right. P 14 of PERS by the numbers says<br /><br />Approximately 68% of PERS’ total accrued liability is for members who are no longer working in <br />PERS-covered employment (retirees and inactives). As a result, approximately 40% of an employer’s <br />contribution rate is associated with these groups. <br /><br />So wouldn't it make sense to say 40%Openhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15489396604684895931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-38461913821878076982013-08-25T15:29:02.663-07:002013-08-25T15:29:02.663-07:00@open. From all the sources I've looked at, i...@open. From all the sources I've looked at, including all the PERS By The Numbers, and the biennial CAFR, every dollar contributed by current (active) employees go directly into the accounts owned by those employees. Not a penny of current employee money goes to subsidized benefits for current retirees. mrfearless47https://www.blogger.com/profile/03454690519716783056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-77164367899956440302013-08-25T15:22:47.728-07:002013-08-25T15:22:47.728-07:00Hi Mr. Fearless,
Do you have a pointer to anythin...Hi Mr. Fearless,<br /><br />Do you have a pointer to anything showing what % of PERS payments by current employees go toward subsidizing the benefits for current retirees?<br /><br />Thanks, UO Matters<br />uomatters@gmail.comOpenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15489396604684895931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11957094.post-82727662553497438082013-08-24T22:39:09.991-07:002013-08-24T22:39:09.991-07:00Hello Mark,
Well there is a new development in spe...Hello Mark,<br />Well there is a new development in spending general fund dollars... fighting wildfires so far has burned through $100 million. Landowners, FEMA, the OFLP Fund, Insurance policy has paid most, but the general fund is out $10 million and the interim Ways and Means Committee on Sept 18 will be asked to pony up $6 million (as of today the 24th) and probably a million dollars per dayScotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17831241899036666520noreply@blogger.com