Four Day Work Week for State Employees?

Posted on
As a state employee we are waiting to hear on SB 316 -  4 day work week. This week we have heard it is on the governors desk and we have heard it was vetoed. Can you help?
As far as we are aware, the last action taken on SB 316 was on February 24, 2011, when it was second read and referred to the Senate General Laws Committee. You can track any bill during any legislative session by going to the Missouri General Assembly’s Joint Bill Tracking website. Once there, click on “Joint Bill Tracking” and then enter your search criteria. In this case, you would enter “SB316” in the search box and choose “2011 Regular Session” in the session box.
It is possible that the bill was added to other related bills at the end of session. Since this bill isn’t about MOSERS business, we didn’t follow it and can’t provide an authoritative answer about it. We recommend that check with your human resources representative.
The link above makes it clear that bill, as a stand-alone bill, did not pass.

Print Friendly and PDF

Change to "Rule of 80?"

Posted on
Any chance for a change in the 80 and out rule ?? Like 75-78- and out?
Only the Missouri Legislature can make a change to the “Rule of 80” provision of the Missouri statutes. No such change was made during the 2011 legislative session that ended on May 13 of this year, and we know of no plans to make such a change in the future.
For some perspective, for new state employees hired for the first time beginning January 1, 2011 (MSEP 2011 members), the legislature changed that provision to “Rule of 90.” In other words, those employees have to work longer than employees who are members of MSEP or MSEP2000 in order to be eligible to retire under that provision.  
Print Friendly and PDF

Decision on HB 305?

Posted on
We saw a statement on your website yesterday about HB305, and that it would be decided today, May 13, after 5 pm, because today was the last day for voting in Congress. Today there is no evidence of that statement. Can you tell me why? Thanks.
The Missouri Legislature will adjourn today at 6:00 p.m. We won’t know the final outcome of the session until after that time. If the legislature takes action on HB305, we will post an update on our website early next week as soon as we have accurate information. Likewise, if the legislature does not pass HB305, we will include that notice in our website update.
You won’t see an update earlier today because we have no way of knowing which bills the legislature will choose to consider. After session ends today the legislature will begin to develop a list of all Truly Agreed and Finally Passed (TAFP) bills that have been forwarded to the Governor for his consideration. When that list is available to the public (likely sometime next week) we will be able to provide that information to our members. Print Friendly and PDF

When will we know if HB 305 has passed or not?

Posted on
How soon will those of us that are eligible to retire know as to whether the hb 305 has passed or not?
We will know whether HB 305 has passed or not when the legislative session ends at 6:00 p.m. on Friday, May 13th. The last action taken on the bill was on April 14, 2011. If you are interested in more information on this topic, there are several previous posts about it on Rumor Central. Print Friendly and PDF

Is HB305 Dead?

Posted on
I have talked with my house representative and a coworker of mine talked with the author of HB305. They both indicated the bill is dead even though it passed after the third reading in the House on 4/14/2011. Would you want to confirm that?
Unfortunately, we don't know if the bill will pass or not. All we know for certain is that the last action taken on the bill was on April 14, 2011. We, like everyone else, will just have to wait and see what happens during the remainder of the 2011 legislative session. As always, we will monitor the progress of all retirement related proposals during the legislative session and keep our members informed.
Print Friendly and PDF

Has MOSERS Lobbied Against HB305?

Posted on
I have heard the rumor that Mosers has lobbied against HB305 and this is the reason it has been laid over in the House and probably will not come up for the final reading and passed on to the Senate for a vote. Is there any truth to this?
No, there is no truth to this rumor. There are a couple of Rumor Central posts dealing with our governance policy with respect to legislation. What it boils down to is that the MOSERS Board of Trustees has adopted this policy to ensure that board members and staff act as fiduciaries first, and speak with one voice when taking official positions on legislation. In the case of HB305, the MOSERS board has not taken a position for or against this legislation.
The policy also reduces the potential for conflicts of interest by serving as the framework through which all legislative proposals are evaluated.
In most instances, MOSERS staff members serve as technical advisors. We review all proposed legislation affecting MOSERS programs, providing technical comments and fiscal (cost) information to members of the General Assembly who sponsor legislation, and the appropriate legislative oversight agencies. In accordance with the policy, staff will also offer alternatives and provide an unbiased analysis, including the pros and cons of proposals, when appropriate.
Print Friendly and PDF

Retiree Contributions to Deferred Comp

Posted on
Can a retired employee May 1, 2011, continue to make contributions to deferred compensation from their retirement check? Are their any other ways to contribute from another source of income?
Contributions to the plan stop with your last active paycheck (earned income). The State of Missouri Deferred Compensation Plan cannot accept contributions from your pension income. Therefore, after you retire, the only permitted contributions to the Plan would in the form of a "qualified rollover" from sources such as Traditional IRAs or other 401(k) or 457 type plans.
Print Friendly and PDF

MOSERS Funded Status

Posted on
First, I would like to tell the MOSERS board, thanks for the well maintained retirement funding. My question is why are we only 80.4% funded if ARC is 100% funded? 
In determining the ARC, the actuary must make assumptions about a number of future activities such as:

  •             What will the fund earn on invested assets?
  •             What will be the future rate of pay increases?
  •             What will be the future rate of inflation?
  •             How many people will terminate before being vested?
  •             How many people will terminate after being vested but before retirement eligibility?
  •             How many people will become disabled before retirement?
  •             At what ages will members actually retire?
  •             How many members will die before retirement?
  •             How long will members who do retire live after retirement?
Let’s first assume that the actuary is able to determine each of these variables with absolute precision.  In determining the ARC, the actuary uses the benefit provisions that are in place at the time of the actuarial valuation without any allowance for future changes that result in higher benefit levels.  When MOSERS was established in 1957, the benefit formula was 5/6 of 1% of the member’s five year final average salary times years of service.  Over the years this formula has changed a number of times.  For example, the 5/6 of 1% multiplier was changed to 1%, 1.25%, 1.33%, 1.5%, 1.6% and finally to 1.7%.  Each time the multiplier was changed, it was applied to the service already rendered by active members and to the benefits of members who had already retired under a lower formula.  Consequently, even though the ARC had been contributed to the system historically, each time there was a benefit formula change that applied to previous service it meant that the ARC established in previous years was short of the amount needed to fully fund those benefits when the formula increased.
Now let’s assume that there had never been a benefit change. The reality is that the assumptions made in computing the ARC will never (except by extreme coincidence) exactly match the system’s actual experience.  Even if benefit provisions had never changed, favorable financial experiences would push the funding level above 100% and unfavorable financial experience would cause the funding level to be below 100%.
It is the combination of benefit increases over the years that applied to previous service combined with variances between actual and assumed experience that have resulted in the system being less than 100% funded.  The bulk of the present difference can be attributed to negative financial market conditions at the beginning of this century combined with what happened in the great recession of 2008.  Even though our performance relative to the general financial markets during those periods was good, returns were still negative.  In determining the ARC, the actuary is assuming constant positive returns at a rate that is consistent with our long term average.
The 100% funded objective is a moving target. Each year we have an actuarial valuation to determine the ARC for the ensuing fiscal year.  With each valuation, full consideration is given to the differences between assumed and actual experience to determine the contribution rate (the ARC) needed to move the system in the direction of being 100% over a period of future years.  As long as the ARC is contributed (which it has been historically) the system will have adequate resources to pay all benefits.
To put this all in perspective, the ARC is a combination of two things.  First it is the contribution rate required to cover the benefits that will accrue to active employees during the next year.  Second, it is the amount required to move the system from its present funded status to 100% over the next 30 years.  That latter payment is similar to the situation of a 25 year old employed home owner who has 80% equity in a house with 30 years left to pay off the other 20%.

Print Friendly and PDF

Changes to HB305 ("years of service incentive")?

Posted on
There have been "rumors" going around where I work saying that the retirement incentive bill has been reduced to $1,000 per year for a maximum of 10 years instead of the initial 20. Is there any truth to this?
The last action on HB305, the “years of service incentive,” was on April 14, 2011. On April 22, we posted this article on our website showing a summary of the provisions in the bill at that time. To our knowledge, there has been no change to the number of years of creditable service a person would be eligible for under this incentive.

Print Friendly and PDF