The second act of the pension bill drama will commence next week when new legislation sponsored by Sen. Jim Rea, D-Christopher, allowing for choice in retirement makes its debut in the Senate Rules Committee.

At issue is what some SIUC staffers describe as the unfairness of the 1997 Pension Bill, which took effect Jan. 1. The bill prescribes, among other things, a flat rate benefit formula to replace the sliding scale formula formerly in place, effectively enhancing the pension benefits of Illinois workers. However, to help pay for the increased benefits, retirees with fewer than 20 years of service now must assume 5 percent of their health care premium costs. Prior to the new legislation, full health care benefits were supplied by the state.

As of Jan. 1, 4,400 state university employees with fewer than 20 years of service had satisfied the age and service requirements to qualify for full health care coverage under the old plan. According to State University Retirement System figures released in January, 375 university workers and about 44 community college employees resigned prior to the Dec. 31 deadline in order to retain their original benefits. However, 3,991 workers did not retire and will have to pay 5 percent of their insurance premium for each year under 20 years of service.

Advertisement

In August, a small but determined group of SIUC staffers, led by Ruth Pommier, a receptionist at the Southern Hills Apartment Complex, initiated an opposition movement to the bill aimed at reinstating the full health care coverage they were promised upon employment. Working tirelessly through the fall, they succeeded in persuading Sen. Dave Luechtefeld, R-Okawville, to sponsor an amendment to the pension bill allowing retirees to opt out of the new program and retain their original pension packages.

The amendment was defeated in the Senate during the veto session, falling five votes short of the three-fifths majority needed. Pommier and Luechtefeld attribute the vote to inflated budget figures supplied by the Bureau of the Budget on behalf of the governor, who opposed the amendment. They also contend many of the legislators voting had not been pressured by university constituencies who comprise the bulk of the pension bill’s opposition.

Though the attempt failed, Pommier and company are refusing to quit, and subsequently have contacted Sen. Bradley Burzynski, R-Sycamore, and Rep. Larry Woolard, D-Carterville, who have agreed to back another effort to amend the pension bill. To this point, it is unclear whether the two legislators will introduce their own bills or lend support to a bill submitted Tuesday by Rea. The bill, SB 1368, mirrors Luechtefeld’s amendment, offering State University Retirement System participants the opportunity to forgo changes in the retirement annuity formula and retain their old pension packages. Incidentally for Woolard, it would be too late to introduce any new legislation as the deadline passed Tuesday. The Senate deadline is Friday, but according to a Senate staffer, no further pension legislation will be submitted.

SURS Director Jim Hacking, an active participant in the fight to amend the pension bill last fall, has yet to contact legislators this session. Hacking could not predict the outcome of Rea’s bill but said he would work on behalf of university staffers again if asked to do so.

It’s not that I’m not optimistic, he said. I’m just not sure about the bill’s proponents and what they’re doing.

The issue is not dead by any means. We’re just going to have to see what happens.

Regardless of the tenor in Springfield, Pommier is back in the saddle, rallying the troops for another exhaustive effort to address what she refers to as the inequities in the pension bill.

Advertisement*

It’s a matter of fundamental fairness, she said.

Pommier, in coordination with 700 other university workers across the state, will continue to push for choice in retirement this session. To accomplish this, she is preparing to forge a broader effort that will include more universities and colleges affected by the new pension plan.

Pommier is adamant her activities in the fall were not in vain, contending renewed efforts will meet with success. If the results are unfavorable, however, the General Assembly can expect the tenacious red-haired SIUC staffer to keep fighting.

I’m optimistic that we’ll be able to pick up the five votes we need, she said. If we can’t, we’ll be here every session until there is an accommodation.

Unless they think they’re talking to a ghost, we have no intention of going away.