SACRAMENTO – Today Assemblymember Portantino, Chairman of the Assembly Higher Education Committee, introduced Assembly Constitutional Amendment (ACA) 5. If approved by the Legislature and enacted by the voters through a statewide initiative, ACA 5 would establish a board of trustees to govern the University of California Retirement System (UCRS).
"The UC Retirement Plan holds the unique distinction of being the only state public pension plan that doesn´t give workers a seat at the table," said Portantino. "It is unfortunate that recent news accounts of conflicts of interests by pension managers and an underperforming portfolio have plagued the system while other similar pension funds are doing quite well. This is an issue not only of fairness to UC workers and retirees, but an issue of ensuring that this pension fund is properly managed."
ACA 5 follows Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 52 of last year, authored by Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo), which called on the UC Board of Regents to establish a jointly governed pension board with adequate employee representation. Despite passing with bipartisan support, the Board of Regents has so far ignored calls for establishing pension joint governance. Both California State University and community college workers have pension plans with shared governance, with both employee and employer representation on their boards. However, at UC the Regents currently have unilateral control over all pension decisions.
In response to SCR 52, the UC reactivated the UCRS Advisory Board, allowing elections to take place for the first time in six years. This powerless Advisory Board is the only formal avenue for employees to raise their concerns on pension management, yet hardly qualifies as a shared governance structure.
"Jointly governed pension plans improve pension security by preventing conflicts of interest and providing better oversight of pension investments and benefits changes – all of which is greatly needed at UC," said Lakesha Harrison, President, AFSCME Local 3299. "We believe that the time for band-aid solutions is over. UC workers want full access to information and an equal say on decisions about our pension. We demand joint governance of our pension."
Under shared governance, distribution of any fund surplus is agreed upon by the employee and employer trustees. UC would not be able to propose items such as supplemental benefits for executives, as it has done in the past, without agreement from trustees elected by workers and retirees.
It was recently reported that two members of an investment advisory committee for the UC appeared to have previously undisclosed connections to firms that won contracts to invest pieces of the university's $43.4 billion pension plan.
A number of newspaper reports, including the East Bay Express have detailed how a number of recent changes at the pension fund have cost the university billions of dollars. In fact, what was once one of the top performing pension plans in the country now underperforms compared to other similar pension funds.
"The UC Retirement Plan holds the unique distinction of being the only state public pension plan that doesn´t give workers a seat at the table," said Portantino. "It is unfortunate that recent news accounts of conflicts of interests by pension managers and an underperforming portfolio have plagued the system while other similar pension funds are doing quite well. This is an issue not only of fairness to UC workers and retirees, but an issue of ensuring that this pension fund is properly managed."
ACA 5 follows Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 52 of last year, authored by Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo), which called on the UC Board of Regents to establish a jointly governed pension board with adequate employee representation. Despite passing with bipartisan support, the Board of Regents has so far ignored calls for establishing pension joint governance. Both California State University and community college workers have pension plans with shared governance, with both employee and employer representation on their boards. However, at UC the Regents currently have unilateral control over all pension decisions.
In response to SCR 52, the UC reactivated the UCRS Advisory Board, allowing elections to take place for the first time in six years. This powerless Advisory Board is the only formal avenue for employees to raise their concerns on pension management, yet hardly qualifies as a shared governance structure.
"Jointly governed pension plans improve pension security by preventing conflicts of interest and providing better oversight of pension investments and benefits changes – all of which is greatly needed at UC," said Lakesha Harrison, President, AFSCME Local 3299. "We believe that the time for band-aid solutions is over. UC workers want full access to information and an equal say on decisions about our pension. We demand joint governance of our pension."
Under shared governance, distribution of any fund surplus is agreed upon by the employee and employer trustees. UC would not be able to propose items such as supplemental benefits for executives, as it has done in the past, without agreement from trustees elected by workers and retirees.
It was recently reported that two members of an investment advisory committee for the UC appeared to have previously undisclosed connections to firms that won contracts to invest pieces of the university's $43.4 billion pension plan.
A number of newspaper reports, including the East Bay Express have detailed how a number of recent changes at the pension fund have cost the university billions of dollars. In fact, what was once one of the top performing pension plans in the country now underperforms compared to other similar pension funds.
