Inquiring minds are reading where a California appeals court Wednesday overturned part of a negotiated increase in retirement benefits for several thousand regulatory workers, saying the Legislature never approved the full increase or its estimated $40 million cost:
The case involves 3,500 to 4,000 employees whose union, the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association, reached an agreement with then-Gov. Gray Davis’ administration in 2002 to reclassify them as “safety members” of the state’s retirement system in July 2004.
That entitled them to higher pensions – 2.5 percent of their pay, instead of 2 percent, for each year of service if they retired at age 55.
The workers included licensing employees and investigators for regulatory agencies, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles and consumer bureaus, said Jason Jasmine, a lawyer for the union. They also included non-patrol workers for law enforcement agencies, such as criminalists and California Highway Patrol dispatchers.
The agreement did not say, however, whether it was retroactive – that is, whether the employees would be classified as safety members for their previous work years, or only for their work after July 2004.
The Legislature quickly approved and Davis signed a bill that ratified the deal. Later in 2002, Davis’ administration told employees that the pension increases would apply to their past years on the job.
Since this is ‘standard operating behavior’ for Democrats in California because it has happened so often, SurvivingCalifornia.com wants to ask: How can any Californian vote for a Democrat candidate until the California Democrat Party completely disavows this kind of smarmy double-dealing by its candidates/officeholders?
Until both parties hold their members feet to the fire and not allow this kind of unethical behavior this country will continue its slide into the abyss. Morals and values are inexorably linked.
Filed under: Uncategorized |