The Oregon state employee. (Salem, Oregon.) 1944-195?, July 01, 1950, Page 5, Image 5

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    3
Changes in Retirement Law Urged
Special OSEA Committee Notes Weaknesses
A special committee of the O SEA
in a mee|j5aJ-with' the state retire­
ment board on August 2 presented a
i^ ^ ^ ^ ^ fb:^Bffirovihg, the retirement
system. The committee was composed
of Forrest Stewart, executive secre­
c y ; P- M. Brandt, laws and legisla­
tion director; Roy G. Green, actuary;
Loren R. White^ ^ ^ W ^^sident: and
Dr. Roy SarfdS a o f Oregon state col­
lege. The committee requested offi­
cial estimates of the cost to the; state
and employees in mee^Ba the sug­
gested improvements.
The original obj ective of the Ore­
gon public employees retirement law
was to pro vide a retirement annuity
for each member employee of ap­
proximately one-half his last five
years average salary after 30 or more
yQ g > f service, with certain excep­
tions. The plan as originally present-,
ed to the legislature provided an ade­
quate annuity, but certain reserva­
tions .were adopted which prevented
its attainment. These reservations
cause the plan iofrfjjgBifort of its orig­
inal obj ective and in a manner which
was probably not intended by "/the'
legislature and which has not been
corrected by amendments adopted to
date. It fails to cope with the situa­
tion brought about by itsigprupt ap-
^O^Btion 'at an unanticipated early
g i and the appl;igatiS B j i » Jpi'xed
retirement age with no p ro vision for
^ S ^ ^ n n u i^ ^ ^ B ith adequate prior
service.
Spetrficaily, there ^^Bplleral maj­
or criticisms of the Act:
1. Inadgguaip provision is^made«lor
those retiring during the transition
period. -
2. The^ p | seraamB3^ment annuity \is
I computed on only a limited portion
of many employees’ salaries ( $2400
from 1946 to 1949; $3000 since
1949). This limits the amount that
can be received by many em­
ployees upon retiring, if they re-
ceive I full benefit, to much less
than . one-half of thei^ ^ l^ ^ five
year’s salary. Few are now receiv­
ing KB much as a fifty dollar ,^,
month pension.
3. If anH|empipy^^Wes after ten
years’ service but before retire­
ment , his ac cumula ted contribu-
tions are not matched by the State.
4.
requirement of 15 years’ serv­
ice before an employee is eligible
I for disability retirement aliowance
off-duty disability is ex-
cessive and should be reduced td
iob BI
5. The retirement age should be more
To|p»perly cornSphesjBfaults the
O SEA is considering appropriate Aleggi
It hopes to have
th^^BreparbdiMgiji^^^'Qvan^c^^f^fh^
session.
c S R on&fcgmnot, be?
reached onBpome of the proposals,
until due consideration h ili
been given to the cost both to the
^gab^^&^P the members of the realsa
BOSES Suggested measures which it is
believed are neétOÌ to correct the
above-mentioned faults,I are enum­
erated below in the same order. I I
1. Two methods are under^Wnsider-
ation for correcting item 1.
(a) To w e the prior service à i- 1
I lpwance from $2.50 to $4.00 a
month for ea<g$V year of prior
service.