OPSEU denied say in OMERS plan
Many OPSEU members who work for municipalities, Children’s Aid Societies, the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, school boards, and many ambulance services are members of the Ontario Municipal Employees’ Retirement System (OMERS). They will have no part in the governance system that the OMERS Board wants.
In a report March 28, OMERS recommended that two administrative bodies, a Sponsors Committee and a Plan Administration Board, govern the plan. The Sponsors Committee would take over a role now performed by the Ontario government. The Administration Board would do plan administration, actuarial valuation approval, investment
policy and management, make technical plan changes and set contribution rates.
Now, the government appoints the members of the OMERS Board and approves all plan changes. In the new system, employer and employee groups would make their appointments and the Sponsor Committee would make plan changes.
The Coalition for OMERS Pension Fairness, formed by OPSEU, other unions and retiree groups with members in OMERS, has been campaigning for joint trusteeship and full autonomy for OMERS. The coalition agrees on key governance principles.
Our principles for joint governance include:
OMERS must remain a multi-employer/multi-sector defined-benefit pension plan, run by a joint sponsor committee and a joint board of trustees comprised of 50 per cent union/retiree and 50 per cent employer representatives.
Unions or employers with more members in OMERS would have more seats; unions with fewer members would serve in rotation. There would also be a dispute-settling mechanism.
Why not the OMERS deal?
Under the OMERS proposal, the employee side would have representatives from CUPE, Police and Fire Fighters and “others.” Others includes plan members who belong to no union, managers and a number of other unions including OPSEU. Non-union and management people would sit on the employee side. It could be more than
a decade before OPSEU was represented.
The surplus would be divided into two, 50 per cent employer and 50 per cent employee. In other public sector plans, the surplus belongs to the plan to be used as agreed to by the parties.
Votes on the new board would require two-thirds majority to pass, unlike other pension plans. This will make it hard to make changes, particularly with a board stacked in the employer’s favour.
And there will be no dispute resolution system. Whatever the Sponsors Committee determined by a two-thirds vote would be it.
It’s a sham!
The OMERS Board is recommending that the current board members stay in power, and be replaced gradually with new members over the next seven years. Joint trusteeship would be a sham for the foreseeable future. There would be no new action on surplus usage for at least two years and no major plan changes for at
least three years, and then only every three years, if two thirds approve.
What next?
Campaign for fairness
The Coalition for OMERS Pension Fairness is preparing a campaign against the OMERS recommendations. We want true joint trusteeship and a say in the plan.
Contact Shirley McVittie at OPSEU Head Office, (416) 443- 8888, ext. 657 or 1-800-268-8850.
OPSEU ActionFax is an electronic publication of the Ontario Public Service Employees Union. Original authorized for distribution by Leah Casselman, president.
