CSEA Rips Misrepresentation of the Facts Over Retiree Health Legislation

ALBANY, NY (05/13/2008)(readMedia)-- CSEA today ripped the Empire Center and the New York State Association of Counties for their attempts to mislead the media and the public over legislation to protect local government retirees' health care benefits.

"Media coverage of this issue has been outrageously one sided and does not accurately present the full story on what is at stake," said CSEA President Danny Donohue. "NYSAC has its own narrow agenda on this issue to pursue unrestricted unilateral action in this case regardless of who gets hurt. But the Empire Center, which is a front for corporate fat cats, is even more reprehensible in their manipulation of the facts."

"This legislation is about what is right and fair in making sure that localities live up to their responsibility to retirees that their promised health care coverage will continue to be there," Donohue said.

"CSEA will not apologize for standing up for our members but in this case it is also appropriate public policy," he said.

The CSEA leader pointed out that the public sector should be setting a good example in living up to its moral obligations rather than aping the excesses of the corporate world which increasingly has walked away from its obligations to its employees at great public and human expense.

The Retiree Health Insurance legislation (S. 6457a/A.9393a) provides for a study of this issue because of recognition that there are severe negative consequences from allowing unilateral employer action that could also cost taxpayers plenty.

CSEA also pointed out the Empire Center's hypocrisy in challenging public employee health care coverage at a time when many irresponsible businesses benefit at taxpayer expense under programs like Family Health Plus and Child Health Plus. Public employees do not qualify for these state programs, yet families of four earning nearly $85,000 annually can qualify and provide incentive to business to avoid providing health care coverage and its associated cost. At the same time there are too many New Yorkers without health coverage at all.

There are other facts about the legislation that have not been accurately presented:

  • The bill does not prohibit employers from making appropriate changes in retiree heath insurance. Instead, it stops them from making unilateral changes.
  • The bill does not increase employers' responsibilities under GASB Rule 45, an accounting requirement whose importance has been greatly overstated by employer organizations. In fact GASB 45 is a recent accounting requirement put in place because private sector employers routinely under funded and misstated their own pension and health insurance obligations.
  • The bill is modeled after an existing, successful law that has applied to school districts since 1994. Last year the Governor called for the creation of a task force and this bill simply complies with that request.
  • Contrary to recent editorials on this matter, this bill does not affect any public pension fund in any way. Public employee health benefits are not funded by the pension system.
  • NYSAC's position that this bill limits an employers' ability to lower property taxes is shortsighted and inaccurate. This bill will prevent retirees from being forced into more expensive Medicaid and/or other socially funded health care, which would only increase local property taxes.
  • The effort on part of employers' and big business is yet another example of the race to the bottom mentality and how to vilify public employees rather than address the real problems that our local communities face.

"Retiree Health coverage is just one of many real problems that New Yorkers face," Donohue said. "CSEA and other unions believe keeping promises to retirees and doing what's morally right is in the best interest of New Yorkers as a whole. But we also believe that our governments at all levels should be stepping up to issues like ensuring health care for all Americans rather than letting the public policy agenda be dictated by those who are not acting in the broader public interest."

-30-