Cypen & Cypen
MARCH 31, 2005
Stephen H. Cypen, Esq., Editor
The National Conference on Public Employee Retirement Systems is the voice for public pensions. The latter, in turn, are the guardians of defined benefit retirement systems, which have successfully battled attempts to diminish or eliminate such plans that protect the welfare of millions of public employees, retirees and their families. Most people are aware of the legislative initiative underway in California to outlaw defined benefit plans for new public employees and place them in 401(k) type plans. This legislative effort in California has spawned interest in similar proposals in other states, and is quickly becoming a national issue. Proponents of eliminating DB plans are seeking money and support from the very firms and institutions that do business with public retirement systems. It is wrong that companies that already manage money for public retirement plans would, at the same time, be working to undermine the retirement plans of other public employees. To prevent public employee money from being used against public employees, NCPERS encourages all its member funds to ask their investment advisors the following three questions:
The NCPERS Executive Board unanimously supports the efforts of California’s public employees to preserve the integrity of their retirement plans and protect the safety and security of their families. It is incumbent on all public retirement systems to do the same. A word to the wise... .
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution recently took a look at pension plans of North America’s four major pro sports leagues. Here are the results:
National Conference on Public Employee Retirement Systems has been aware of the disturbing trend of escalating health care costs for some time and has devoted time and resources to help its members cope with this problem. One outcome of its engagement in health care is a publication entitled Creating a Retiree Medical Trust: How Employers & Employees Can Use Pre-Tax Dollars to Fund Their Retirement. A retirement medical trust is a unique and advantageous method for employers and employees to prefund for retiree medical needs. Retirement medical trusts offer employers the benefit of fixed contribution levels, similar to defined benefit pension plans, provide retirees a lifetime of benefits. We have sent all of our clients a copy of this useful 14-page piece.
In response to concerns about corporate governance, National Conference on Public Employee Retirement Systems has adopted model proxy voting guidelines, and recommends that every public pension board adopt a similar policy for its fund. The guidelines are designed to protect investments of the fund and make sure the board is acting like an owner -- not a rubberstamp -- in the corporate arena. Although most public plans allow their investment managers or others to vote their shares, the model proxy voting guidelines will enable funds, at no expense, to direct their equity managers or proxy voting agents how to vote on the most common and recurring issues. We have sent our clients copies of the guidelines, which are available in Word format from NCPERS at info@NCPERS.org.
provides that an action may not be instituted on a claim against
the state or one of its agencies or subdivisions unless the claimant
the claim in writing to the appropriate agency. Sections 760.01-760.11,
Florida Statutes, are part of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992.
In particular, Section 760.11(1), Florida Statutes, requires that
a claimant comply with a set of presuit administrative procedures.
Supreme Court of Florida recently answered a question certified to
it as a matter of great public importance, holding that claims filed
against a state agency pursuant to the Florida Civil Rights Act of
1992 are not subject to the presuit notice requirements of Section
768.28(6), Florida Statutes. Thus, the court reinstated a case alleging
discrimination, in which claimant had complied with the Florida Civil
Rights Act of 1992 but not with the presuit notice requirements of
Section 768.28(6), Florida Statutes. Maggio v. Florida Department
of Labor and Employment Security, 30 Fla. L. Weekly S174 (Fla. March
Copyright, 1996-2006, all rights reserved.
Items in this Newsletter may be excerpts or summaries of original or secondary source material, and may have been reorganized for clarity and brevity. This Newsletter is general in nature and is not intended to provide specific legal or other advice.