History of the Pension Preemption Sentence Goes Back to July

Galanter: Conspiracy vs. incompetence

In a posting yesterday, we noted that Regents Item F2 - up for a vote at next week's meeting - although ostensibly about pension funding - appears to preempt the decision on what pension options will be offered to new hires.*

As noted yesterday, a committee was set up in August by UC president Napolitano to recommend pension options. It has made no decisions. Yet Item F2 contains the sentence:

"New employees will have the opportunity to choose a fully defined contribution plan as a retirement option, as an alternative to the PEPRA-capped defined benefit plan."

Eric Hays of the Council of UC Faculty Associations (CUCFA) pointed out to me that this same issue arose in July, even before Napolitano's committee was established. It came up as part of a discussion item (#F3) at the Regents back then which contained the same sentence.** CUCFA pointed this issue out to the Regents in July.***

The DC-only option just seems to keep popping up in official documents, despite the fact that no decision has been made.****

Former LA City Council member Ruth Galanter once said, "I used to believe in conspiracies until I discovered incompetence."***** But given the repeated history of the offending sentence, it would take a heck of a lot of incompetence to explain why it keeps appearing. Or there is the alternative Galanter-style explanation: Someone sure wants a DC-only option and is trying to get the Regents to adopt that option in a sub rosa manner. Note that back in July, the offending sentence appeared only in a discussion item (no vote). It now appears in an action item which involves a formal vote (decision) by the Regents.
====
*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2015/11/regents-pension-funding-item-short.html
**http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/regmeet/july15/f3.pdf (page 3 - click to enlarge)

***http://cucfa.org/2015/07/statement-to-uc-regents-about-new-ucrs-tier/
I call your attention to the third paragraph on page 3 of the F3 agenda item. First OP declares, "The President will convene a retirement options task force to advise on the design of new retirement options that will include the pensionable salary cap consistent with PEPRA. The retirement options will be brought to the Regents next year for review and approval.” But apparently the “design of new retirement options” is a fait accompli, for the penultimate sentence of that paragraph declares, "new employees will have the opportunity to choose a fully defined contribution plan as a retirement option, as an alternative to the PEPRA-capped defined benefit plan.”
****http://ucnet.universityofcalifornia.edu/compensation-and-benefits/2016-retirement-benefits-advisory-task-force/faq.html#continue
*****http://www.dailybreeze.com/general-news/20080326/the-mystery-of-the-green-line