Benefits Of Pepra's Pension Benefits Changes Do Not Cover Most Of The Employees

1430 Words Nov 28th, 2015 6 Pages
Despite the fact that PEPRA develops new levels of both safety and –non-safety employees with lower benefits, PEPRA’s pension benefits changes do not cover most of the employees. According to Nava and Christensen (2015), following the implementation of PEPRA, most of the public employees in California were promised health coverage for life, which is one of the major components of other post-employment benefits (17). Nevertheless, the state and local governments have no strategy and are not setting the funds required to cover the future obligations aside. A report by Tatum (2014) assessed the financials of 690 post-employment benefits (OPEB) plans in California and found an unfunded pensioner health care liability that amounts to $157.7 billion. The pensioner health care system was part of Governor Brown’s 12-point pension reform plan but was not included in PEPRA (Halper & York, 2012).
Further, PEPRA created new benefits levels for safety and non-safety members, but it did not change the definitions of those terms appropriately (Nava & Christensen, 2015, 18). For instance, it did not determine exactly an employee that should be considered a “safety member” in California. The name has remained unclearly defined for many years, and it groups several employee categories whose work types are not risk or hazardous but are only associated with public safety (Nava & Christensen, 2015, 18). The benefits that are allocated to safety members are increased compared to those of regular…

More about Benefits Of Pepra's Pension Benefits Changes Do Not Cover Most Of The Employees

Open Document