An earlier post noted the ongoing negotiations between Governor Brown and certain GOP legislators as he tries to get a couple of Republican votes for his budget proposal.A 2/3 vote in the legislature is needed to put the governor's tax extensions on the June ballot and at the moment he doesn't have 2/3. (As previous posts have also noted, there might be a technical work-around the 2/3 rule, but is is more technical than practical.)
One of the items for which Republicans are holding out is what is termed a "hybrid pension." This notion surfaced as part of the Little Hoover Commission report (again - see prior posts) and from other sources. Basically, public defined benefit pensions of the type UC offers would be subject to a cap. The numbers that have been talked about have been well under $100,000, i.e., below what long-service UC professors would receive under the current system. Above that cap, there would a defined contribution plan of some type. Exactly how much would go into the defined contribution plan and how it would be shared (employer vs. employee) is unclear. The plan would certainly apply to new hires. The Little Hoover Commission also recommended litigating the issue of what could be changed for existing employees.
The Regents changes in the UC pension voted last December do involve a two-tier arrangement for new hires. But they retain defined benefit and apply only to new hires. If a pension deal is struck with the governor - by no means certain - and if it applied to all public pensions, the Regents deal would be overridden. Could it happen? There was that unintended acceleration problem for Prius hybrids, not so long ago. Is anyone from UC pointing out to the governor et al that UC already has a pension reform?
Just asking 'cause it makes me nervous:
No comments:
Post a Comment