Is what we need to get PERS to implement Sartain/Strunk. From the looks and sounds of things so far, PERS appears to be ignoring the Sartain/Strunk ruling in favor of a different interpretation of the "settlement". They don't seem to be moving to restore retiree COLAs on the basis of the "fixed benefit" defined in Strunk, nor do they seem to be planning to return members to the status quo ante as of 7/1/03, as the Court required them to do. By all indications, PERS is going ahead and implementing the "revised benefit" language struck down by the Court in Strunk, in order to tag retirees for benefits that PERS has decided they are not entitled (I don't know this because anyone from PERS has bothered to confirm it, but from the examples PERS distributes to the media more liberally than drug detail men distribute pill samples to doctors). All the examples show retiree reduced benefits and invoices for amounts to be repaid. That isn't supposed to happen under Sartain/Strunk. So, retirees will almost certainly have to take PERS back to court again. This costs money. If you want to help out in this high stakes poker game, please send your donations to OPRI (Oregon PERS Retirees Inc) at: OPRLF, PO Box 7325, Salem, OR 97303-0065. Your money won't be used for guns (I promise), but it will be put to good use for Lawyers seeking lots retirees' money.
No comments:
Post a Comment