I understand the Deferred Compensation Plan has switched to CitiStreet as the plan administrator and that

Posted on
I understand the Deferred Compensation Plan has switched to CitiStreet as the plan administrator and that employees are now being charged a fee that is higher than what PEBSCO used to charge.
The deferred compensation plan is administered by the Office of Administration, Division of Accounting, so we asked them to respond to your question. Their response follows:
"It is important to understand that in the business of Deferred Compensation, all third-party administrators charge a fee. The only difference is how the fee is charged and communicated to the participants. The Commission was concerned that PEBSCO’s fee was not clearly communicated, and they wanted the new third-party administrator to give participants a clear picture of exactly what was being charged.
PEBSCO’s (Nationwide) fees were generated based on the difference between what the annuity investment earned and what was credited to each individual. In other words, if the fixed annuity increased in value by 10%, PEBSCO would only credit the value of your account 8%. The difference, sometimes called the spread, was retained by PEBSCO.
PEBSCO also received additional revenue from the mutual funds in the form of reimbursements for services that funds include in their expense ratio. Most mutual funds agree to provide a reimbursement to the third-party administrator, so the participant will not be double charged for services like sending out statements and educating participants about features of the mutual fund.
As you can see, PEBSCO was compensated for their efforts even though it may not have been visible to participants. One of the primary reasons for bidding the contract was to provide a fixed investment which fully disclosed the vendor’s fees.
CitiStreet will be charging a flat fee to administer the Plan. The CitiStreet contract sets a maximum fee of $56 per participant. However, this amount will be offset each year by reimbursements received by CitiStreet from the mutual fund companies. The result is that this year, each participant will be charged 3 dollars per month. This fee covers the cost of the local customer service office, mailings, booklets, recordkeeping etc. To put that number in perspective; the fee equates to approximately 1 ½ months of the state match. Your participant statement will now clearly show the fee that has been charged. The Commission is convinced that participants will have a substantial cost savings as a result of the CitiStreet and ING contracts.
It is important to understand that the fee paid to CitiStreet is a fixed amount. As Plan assets grow it is expected that reimbursements from mutual funds will increase, therefore reducing participant administrative fees. This fee replaces the 17 hundredths of 1% fee that was previously announced." Print Friendly and PDF

Do officials such as the CLERK of the CIRCUIT COURT who are in a position to dock an employee's pay receive any form of compensation

Posted on
Do officials such as the CLERK of the CIRCUIT COURT who are in a position to dock an employee's pay receive any form of compensation or kickback at any time for such action? Are Deputy Clerk's supposed to receive over time pay?
Please contact your agency personnel office for information regarding these questions. MOSERS is not involved in personnel or payroll issues so we are not able to give you specific information on these subjects. The contact person for the courts on these issues is Tammy Giesing and you can contact her at (573) 526-8809 or at Tammy.Giesing@courts.mo.gov Print Friendly and PDF

At the local University where my husband is employed, they have now started having all new faculty contribute to TIAA CREF

Posted on
At the local University where my husband is employed, they have now started having all new faculty contribute to TIAA CREF and the new folks are not covered under MOSERS. My question is, if a faculty member who is covered under MOSERS retires, would it affect his retirement if he were to be rehired as "new" faculty and went under the TIAA CREF retirement plan?
The plan you referenced is the College and University Retirement Plan (CURP). It is currently administered by TIAA CREF. To qualify for the CURP a person must have never been employed in a position covered by MOSERS. Consequently, if a MOSERS covered employee retires and is then reemployed in a benefit eligible position with a participating university, they would again be an active member of MOSERS and not be a participant in the CURP. If a MOSERS retiree returns to work in a MOSERS benefit eligible position, retirement benefits are suspended for the duration of the reemployment. When the person again retires, payment of the initial benefit is resumed and an incremental benefit is paid based on the salary and service during the period of reemployment. Print Friendly and PDF

MOSERS has received several questions regarding a Missourinet report which

Posted on
MOSERS has received several questions regarding a Missourinet report which cites unfunded retirement plans in Missouri. The article is referring to retiree healthcare costs, which are unrelated to MOSERS.
We have addressed your concerns in a new website feature found on our homepage, and also by answering the questions listed below.
Question 1: I have heard recently on the news that Missouri's retirement system may be as much as 1.32 billion short in funds for the near term. First of all, is this true? And secondly, if so, how will this shortfall affect my retirement benefits?
Question 2:A recent article from the local radio station states that "our government retirement plan for tens of thousands of former government workers in MO face a financial crunch within months. State and local governments have only a few months to determine how much it will cost to pay for the benefits promised to their employees who have retired... or who will retire... in the next several decades. Budget officials say the state's unfunded liability is about 1.3 billion dollars. New federal rules will require the legislature to put about 40 million dollars a year into its budget for at least 20 years to make sure promised benefits are met." What does this mean to state employees and is this true?
Question 3:Several of my co-workers stated that they heard a news blurb on the local radio station on July 6, 2006 (KTJJ, Farmington, MO) about changes to the state retirement fund. Some of their statements really scare me. Can you help by repeating the information given in the news release as I have been unable to find it.
Question 4:There is an article on the Missourinet, by Bob Priddy with the title: "Unfunded Government Retirement Plans Could Be Billions Short." Would you please address that article in relation to the funding for MOSERS? Is MOSERS in trouble and to what extent?
MOSERS' Response:
The radio report you mentioned was referring to retiree health care costs, and is not in any way related to MOSERS’ funding. The MOSERS trust fund is stable and your future retirement benefits are secure. This issue, commonly referred to as Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB), is a result of new accounting rules for government employers and is difficult to reduce to a short, easy-to-understand summary. Much of the publicity about this topic tends to confuse – and in this case concern – our members, as well as employees of other public agencies.
While MOSERS does not administer any of the state health care plans, we do understand that this is an important issue for public employers and for our members. We have posted a feature on our web site that provides more details about this issue. While this does not affect the funding of MOSERS in any way, it is a serious issue for the state and other governmental entities. The Office of Administration is working with the Missouri Consolidated Health Care Plan (MCHCP) and other agency health care plans to address these new accounting rules.
The article that prompted these questions may be accessed by clicking on the link below. Given some of the statements that were made, the false interpretation by some of our members is understandable. Once again, this story is totally unrelated to MOSERS and has nothing to do with the security of your retirement benefits.
Link to Missourinet Article
We hope the feature article on our website will provide you with a general understanding of OPEB. As noted in the article, we will provide additional information on this important issue through our website and in future newsletters as further information becomes available. Print Friendly and PDF

Is it true that once you have retired from one Missouri retirement system, such as the Public School Retirement System,

Posted on
Is it true that once you have retired from one Missouri retirement system, such as the Public School Retirement System, you cannot work for another Missouri department, such as Conservation, without losing your retirement benefits? Are all these systems the same?
All Missouri retirement systems are NOT the same. If you retire under MOSERS and return to work in a MOSERS covered position, your benefits will be stopped while you are employed.
If you retire under a state system (MOSERS or MPERS) and return to work under any other Missouri retirement system, your MOSERS benefit would be unaffected. If you retire from the Public School Retirement System (PSRS), as you noted above, you can then go to work for the Department of Conservation without losing your retirement benefit from PSRS.
Be sure to contact a benefit counselor at your retirement system prior to your retirement and discuss any plans that you have regarding re-employment. Print Friendly and PDF

One way to help with the high cost of health insurance for the retiree would be for MOSERS, the CAFETERIA PLAN and MCHCP to work together

Posted on
One way to help with the high cost of health insurance for the retiree would be for MOSERS, the CAFETERIA PLAN and MCHCP to work together so that the retirees’ health insurance premium could be deducted as pretax dollars. Just imagine how much in taxes a retiree would save on each month's benefit check if that were possible. Cafeteria Plan savings run about 20% to 25%. On a $500 dollar a month health insurance premium this would save the retiree approximately $100 to $125 each month.
Active state employees have this option now, and their rates are no where near as high as those that retirees pay. This could be a great savings for retirees, but not affect what MCHCP would receive to cover the premium. Only tax dollars would be affected.
Please give this careful consideration.
The Cafeteria Plan that you refer to is governed by federal law (Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code), and therefore cannot be modified by state law. Federal law specifically limits these provisions to active employees only. Your comment that “only tax dollars would be affected” is at the heart of this issue, since your proposal would reduce federal revenue. We are not aware of any recent proposals to change federal law by expanding these provisions to include retirees. Print Friendly and PDF

On the back cover of the Spring 2006 PensionsPlus magazine there is a short article entitled

Posted on
On the back cover of the Spring 2006 PensionsPlus magazine there is a short article entitled "In more ways than one...It pays to be Healthy." This article goes on to say that although unused sick leave cannot be used to reach your drop back eligibility date, if a person is 2 years past there 80 and out date, unused sick leave will be used to determine both your monthly retirement benefit and your drop back benefit.
The article then gives the example of someone with 1600 hours of unused sick leave. The article shows that after dividing the 1600 hours by 168 the resulting 9 months would be added to both your longevity and to the time used to determine your drop back. My understanding of this article is if, for example, a person had worked 2 years past their 80 and out date and had 2 years of drop back and 29 years of longevity and they had enough hours to have 12 months of unused sick leave, the result would be a monthly benefit based on 31 years of longevity and a BackDROP payment based on 3 years of BackDROP .
Is this correct? Does unused sick leave count towards your BackDROP payment? If not, what was the article in the Pensions Plus magazine saying about unused sick leave and BackDROP?
Unused sick leave is only used in calculating the amount of your benefit, not in determining your eligibility for benefits. In your example, you would still have only two years of BackDROP, but the amount of your lump sum and monthly benefit would be slightly higher as a result of your unused sick leave. Print Friendly and PDF

Is some State body going to stand good to make up for the fiasco that the Deferred Comp committee perpetrated

Posted on
Is some State body going to stand good to make up for the fiasco that the Deferred Comp committee perpetrated on the state employees? Due to the change in third party administrators, the people with deferred compensation accounts may lose 3.7% of account value for a market valuation adjustment. It seems that the "MVA" (Market Value Adjustment) was clearly written as a part of the Nationwide contract. Nationwide's return of the MVA to the account holders may not occur. Is seems to me that the Deferred Comp commission is culpable. There is even talk about kickbacks to the commission for the change. What actions will be taken to replace the account holders’ money withheld as MVA?
The deferred compensation plan is administered by the Office of Administration, Division of Accounting, so we asked them to respond to your question. Their response follows:
The changes in third party administrator to CitiStreet and of the fixed annuity to ING were both part of an open procurement process administered by OA Division of Purchasing. To suggest that anyone acted other than in accordance with their fiduciary responsibility is irresponsible.
Whether Nationwide is entitled to a MVA and in what amount is a legal matter being pursued by the Attorney General’s Office.
Regarding participant fixed annuity accounts, ING has assured us that they will be able to maintain the book value of participants’ accounts while we pursue our legal remedies against Nationwide to recover the money.
Print Friendly and PDF