Automatic reply: RE Provincial court judges win salary, pension dispute with Higgs government So does the public get to check out the independent commission’s report?
| ||||||||||
Moore, Rob - M.P.<Rob.Moore@parl.gc.ca> | Tue, May 2, 2023 at 4:59 PM |
| To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | |
*This is an automated response*
Thank you for contacting the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P. office. We appreciate the time you took to get in touch with our office.
If you did not already, please ensure to include your full contact details on your email and the appropriate staff will be able to action your request. We strive to ensure all constituent correspondence is responded to in a timely manner.
If your question or concern is time sensitive, please call our office: 506-832-4200.
Again, we thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Office of the Honourable Rob Moore, P.C., M.P. Member of Parliament for Fundy Royal | |
RE Provincial court judges win salary, pension dispute with Higgs government So does the public get to check out the independent commission’s report?
David Amos<david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | Tue, May 2, 2023 at 4:58 PM |
| To: Geoffrey.Downey@gnb.ca, "kris.austin" <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, "michelle.conroy" <michelle.conroy@gnb.ca>, "Mitton, Megan (LEG)" <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, office@peoplesalliance.ca, chris.o'connell@gnb.ca, info@nbndp.ca, syp.okana@gmail.com, gilles.lepage@gnb.ca, "guy.arseneault" <guy.arseneault@gnb.ca>, benoit.bourque@gnb.ca, rene.legacy@gnb.ca, "keith.chiasson" <keith.chiasson@gnb.ca>, Chuck.Chiasson@gnb.ca, Jean-Claude.D'Amours@gnb.ca, "francine.landry" <francine.landry@gnb.ca>, isabelle.theriault@gnb.ca, eric.mallet@gnb.ca, david.coon@gnb.ca, "Arseneau, Kevin (LEG)" <kevin.a.arseneau@gnb.ca>, amanda.wildeman@greenpartynb.ca, Josh.O'Donnell@gnb.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com, andre <andre@jafaust.com>, "Dominic.Cardy" <Dominic.Cardy@gnb.ca>, "robert.mckee" <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, "robert.gauvin" <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>, "jacques.j.leblanc" <jacques.j.leblanc@gnb.ca>, "Frank.McKenna" <Frank.McKenna@td.com>, "rob.moore" <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, "Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, "Bill.Oliver" <Bill.Oliver@gnb.ca>, "Gary.Crossman" <Gary.Crossman@gnb.ca>, "Tammy.Scott-Wallace" <Tammy.Scott-Wallace@gnb.ca> | |
| Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, "Robert. Jones" <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>, "Jacques.Poitras" <Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca>, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca> | |
Tuesday, 2 May 2023 Provincial court judges win salary, pension dispute with Higgs government | |
Provincial court judges win salary, pension dispute with Higgs government
Province tried to change pay model but says it will accept independent commission’s recommendations
And the province says it accepts that decision and will go along with the commission's recommendations.
The government argued for smaller pay raises than what judges wanted during a hearing last year and made a case for putting their pensions under the province's shared-risk system.
The judges responded that the government's reasoning was flawed, didn't account for inflation and would jeopardize their independence.
The commission agreed with the provincial court judges that their salaries should remain linked by a formula to the salaries of Court of King's Bench justices, who are paid by the federal government.
"We are of the view that linkage of the salaries creates certainty for all involved," the report says.
A Justice Department spokesperson said the province would comply with all eight of the commission's recommendations. (Shutterstock)
"Linkage assists in fostering respect for the commission process. Linkage avoids litigation and subsequent allegations of unfairness and bad faith."
Justice department spokesperson Geoffrey Downey said the province would comply with the recommendations.
"The commission's report has been received and reviewed by the department, and all eight recommendations were approved," he said.
The report was tabled at the legislature April 11.
Province wanted salaries tied to N.B civil servants
Under provincial law, a commission is appointed every four years to make decisions on the salaries and pensions.
That is because of the principle that the salaries of judges shouldn't be set by the province, which prosecutes criminal cases that the judges hear.
As of April 1, the commission estimates King's Bench judges would be earning $381,505. Provincial court judge salaries, indexed at 80 per cent of that amount, would be $305,204.
The commission heard arguments from the province and the Provincial Court Judges Association last year.
The province tried to argue that salaries should be "de-linked" from the King's Bench salaries and indexed to those of civil servants because of "continued challenges in restoring balance to New Brunswick's finances."
That would have meant increases of two per cent per year for four years, starting in 2020.
But the judges argued that the economy was bouncing back stronger than ever after a major pandemic slowdown in 2020.
The province had a surplus of $408.5 million in 2020-21 and was projecting a surplus of $487.8 million for 2021-222 at the time the commission was hearing arguments.
And with inflation estimated at 17.4 per cent over the four-year mandate of the commission, the province's proposal would amount to "a substantial reduction in real salary."
The commission agreed with that.
Pension reforms also rejected
On pensions, the commission rejected the province's arguments for incorporating the judges into the shared-risk plan, in which the majority of public-sector employees are enrolled.
The government argued the existing plan was costly, with taxpayers contributing $5.77 for every dollar from a judge.
But the judges said it would put their pensions under the control of the board of Vestcor, the provincial pension management corporation, which has a board made up of provincial and union representatives.
"This would create the untenable perception and the real risk that judges would be vulnerable to economic manipulation from both the government and the largest unions in the province," the report says, citing the association.
The commission agreed.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
"A team from Morneau Shepell worked with the government-appointed expert task force and collaborating unions on the Shared Risk Pension Plan (SRPP) design for the Province of New Brunswick. As actuary on this project, Morneau Shepell consulted on the development of the new plan design and provided in-depth analysis."
Hence the judges will not lose a dime from their pensions the next time the stock market takes a dive
CBC News · Posted: Mar 11, 2009 5:46 AM ADT
The New Brunswick government is in line for a massive $800-million deficit in 2009-10 and is planning a series of program cuts and significant reductions in the civil service, a government official confirmed Tuesday night.
When Finance Minister Victor Boudreau tables his budget March 17, the official said, it will include a large deficit, more than one-third of which will be blamed on losses incurred by provincial pension plans on the stock markets.
Higgs and the taxpayers he represents and fights for lose .
CBC News · Posted: Oct 17, 2014 7:05 AM ADT
A former Progressive Conservative MLA says the Alward government missed a chance to end a long-time practice of offering a special pension perk to the province’s senior bureaucrats.
The previous Progressive Conservative government faced a significant backlash from provincial employees for its decision to overhaul civil service pensions by moving to a shared-risk model.
Civil servants accumulate larger pensions the longer they work for the provincial government, but deputy ministers accumulate their pensions at twice the normal rate for the first five years that they are at that top level.
Wes McLean, the former Victoria-Tobique Tory MLA who did not re-offer in the 2014 election, said the switch to a shared-risk pension system should have also eliminated that special arrangement for deputy ministers.
"I'm of the view that it's a relic and needs to be scrapped, especially given New Brunswick's fiscal situation,” he said.
When David Alward’s Progressive Conservative government took on pension reform, the goal was to reduce the long-term cost of the pension program.
McLean says he has a theory about why the Tories stopped short of cutting the extra benefit for deputy ministers while they were changing other elements of the pension system for provincial government employees.
"The water cooler talk was pushback from the deputies themselves,” the former MLA said.
Quispamsis Tory MLA Blaine Higgs, the former finance minister who was in charge of the pension changes, confirmed deputies got to keep the pension perk.
Somebody other than a Conservative or a corporate head got to keep pace with inflation. The horror! The horror!
"A third lawsuit is led by the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, and CUPE, representing 800 current employees, including engineers and prosecutors.
The employees' argument is that changes to pension plans should have been negotiated, not legislated."
Province spends more than $2M fighting civil servants in court
4 years after lawsuits were launched, legal costs are racking up
Gabrielle Fahmy · CBC News · Posted: Jul 06, 2018 4:00 AM AT
"The case where resolution seems the most likely is the one filed by Guy Levesque, a former deputy minister with the cabinet secretariat. He sued in 2015, alleging the break in contract is illegal.
Others are watching the case closely as they believe its outcome will impact the other proceedings.
Levesque would not give an interview to CBC because he is under a court order not to speak about the case, pending resolution of the latest motion.
A third lawsuit is led by the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, and CUPE, representing 800 current employees, including engineers and prosecutors.
The employees' argument is that changes to pension plans should have been negotiated, not legislated."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/pension-reform-lawsuits-costs-1.4732109
Province spends more than $2M fighting civil servants in court
4 years after lawsuits were launched, legal costs are racking up
As of late 2017, the province had spent $2,378,524 on legal fees to defend itself in three lawsuits, CBC News found through right to information requests.
The new shared-risk system introduced six years ago by David Alward's Progressive Conservative government didn't guarantee a set amount of pension benefits the way the previous system did.
After outcries and protests, the Liberals, who came to power in the next election, offered a compromise, but retirees rejected it and filed lawsuits instead.
- Retired civil servants launch pension-reform lawsuit
- Retired civil servants seek class action status in pension fight
Two other lawsuits were brought around the same time — one by a former deputy minister and another by current civil servants.
But after a complaint was made by CBC News, the office of the integrity commissioner said that while releasing the amount spent defending each case might compromise ongoing legal proceedings, the public had the right to know the total amount spent on the issue.
'It's sad really'
"I'm not surprised at the amount, it's sad really," said Claire LePage, a former deputy minister with the Department of Energy, who is now chair of the Pension Coalition of New Brunswick, a group formed when the changes were under consideration in 2012.
The coalition was first to file for legal action, representing 13,000 retired New Brunswick public servants. They were last in court in the fall of 2016 and decided to put legal proceedings on hold, pending resolution of another case, according to LePage.
"It's been a long journey so far," she said. "The province has used every tactic possible to burn everybody out.
"We've had to deal with … motion after motion, and that's very costly in court."
The Office of the Attorney General said that given the matters are before the courts, it would be inappropriate to comment on any case or the costs.
"We've been in court since 2014, and here we are 2018, and really the essence of this case has not been heard in court," LePage said.
The Levesque case
The case where resolution seems the most likely is the one filed by Guy Levesque, a former deputy minister with the cabinet secretariat. He sued in 2015, alleging the break in contract is illegal.
Others are watching the case closely as they believe its outcome will impact the other proceedings.
Levesque would not give an interview to CBC because he is under a court order not to speak about the case, pending resolution of the latest motion.
A third lawsuit is led by the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, and CUPE, representing 800 current employees, including engineers and prosecutors.
The employees' argument is that changes to pension plans should have been negotiated, not legislated.
A few unions, such as the one representing nurses, got behind the reforms.
Unions that left the discussions said they were one-sided.
As for Claire LePage, she said the proceedings have cost the pension coalition roughly $300,000 so far, which includes the money spent on its own case, and in support of the Levesque case.
Rationale for overhaul
At the time of the overhaul in 2012, the Alward government argued the guaranteed income system was designed at a time when people worked longer and lived shorter lives. Now, people were retiring earlier and living longer, making the plan unsustainable.
Without the changes, there wouldn't be enough money in the coffers to pay pension benefits to public workers, the PCs said, citing examples of companies that had slashed pensions when they went bankrupt.
The move was backed by the Liberals, who were then in opposition.
"It is a lot of money overall — $2.4 million and counting," said Mario Levesque. "But it pales in comparison to the amount of money the province would have to pay out to [pensioners] and government employees over time if they were to lose the case."
"So for the government, it's batten down the hatches and fight this tooth and nail all the way."
Levesque said the government may be trying to wear the pensioners — like Claire LePage — down.
"It's a real David and Goliath case," he said. "They are fighting and pulling out all the stops to make sure this does not move forward.
"You figure an individual, how long can he or she stay in this kind of legal battle with their resources, compared to the government?"
About the Author
Content disabled.
Provincial court judges win salary, pension dispute with Higgs government
Province tried to change pay model but says it will accept independent commission’s recommendations
Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: May 02, 2023 7:00 AM ADT
Ronald Miller
As I read the comments below I guess I should not be surprised that the same people who complain about money for this and money for that are the same ones who are on the side of the judges who will get more taxpayer money and not on the side of NBers.
Trudy Hebert
Reply to Ronald Miller
Shared risk pension sucks, no one in NB should be forced into this pension. However, many have been.. I am happy for any NBer that can hold onto their pensions that they deserve. So many of us have not been so lucky.
Samual Johnston
Reply to Trudy Hebert
sucks for who? it is the most fair and reasonable approach to a pension plan. The tax payers should no be on the hook to compensate government worker plans when the economy dips. This was a concept created when the economy was strong and governments gave in to every demand the unions came up with and with out any thought to the future.
David Amos
Reply to Trudy Hebert
You are not alone with that reasoning
Province spends more than $2M fighting civil servants in court
4 years after lawsuits were launched, legal costs are racking up
Gabrielle Fahmy · CBC News · Posted: Jul 06, 2018 4:00 AM AT
In a nutshell Mr Sinclair our highest paid employee has had a mountain of money to play with on the stock markets. The pension plans were NEVER in jeopardy even in 2008. When Victor Boudreau's budget in 2009 compelled the taxpayers top up the bureaucrat's pension plan to cover for Sinclair's losses. Many politicians should not deny that I let everybody know just how disgusted I was immediately byway of emails and posted my words within blogs as well N'esy Pas?
Maybe you need to do more reading . The Chair of the Board for the Public Employees Pension Fund came out and indicated they are very happy with the performance of their fund , the COL increase from last year , and how it's to be handled in the future ! You obviously don't realize until Higgs put in place regulations , that the fund was underfunded by almost 30 % ! Today it's fully funded ,government can no longer dip into it like they did in the past , and fully operated by THE OWNERS of the fund , the public employees themselves ! And yet you indicate you would be happy going back to a 30 % underfunded pension plan , being run by the province !
David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Trudy Hebert
Perhaps you should read the article I mentioned above
"The case where resolution seems the most likely is the one filed by Guy Levesque, a former deputy minister with the cabinet secretariat. He sued in 2015, alleging the break in contract is illegal.
Others are watching the case closely as they believe its outcome will impact the other proceedings.
Levesque would not give an interview to CBC because he is under a court order not to speak about the case, pending resolution of the latest motion.
A third lawsuit is led by the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, and CUPE, representing 800 current employees, including engineers and prosecutors.
The employees' argument is that changes to pension plans should have been negotiated, not legislated."
David Amos
Politicians pensions didn't go shared risk, but got more generous. Following the same train of thought we can't afford politicians pensions which are 6 figures a piece + perks & bonuses, all after 4 years of (dis)service.
Civil servants for the most part fullfilled their contractual obligations, while politicians continually reneg theirs.
Methinks they are broke because they can't manage money yet they want to oversee ours N'esy Pas?
Cash-strapped PCs selling party headquarters in Fredericton
The Regent Street building could be all yours for just $479,000
Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Jan 12, 2018 6:30 AM A
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/progressive-conversative-headquarters-sale-fundraising-1.4484153
Politicians continue to make stupid and expansive decisions out of greed and power.
We need a way to make them accountable and discourage them from participating in this race to the bottom that we are in.
And the only way I see to get politicians to do the right things is to hit them where it hurts..... Their wallet.
Marc LeBlanc
Nay not I
Methinks all old taxpayers who do not have the benefit of a fancy pension should be grateful to stay alive long enough to watch this circus After all we are paying for it N'esy Pas?
Rosella Melanson
David Amos
Fred Brewer
Imagine being offered a job where you are told they cannot pay what you are currently earning, but instead they offer a guaranteed, fully-indexed pension. You accept the offer and spend the next 35 years working and after retiring, your employer says "Sorry, we cannot hold up our end of the bargain and we need to cut your fully-indexed pension. That's what happened here folks and it is a disgrace.
You gave up 35 years of higher salary at your former employer only to be shafted by the government of New Brunswick in the end
Here is a local example
Nackawic mill pensioners will fight Tory plan
CBC News · Posted: Jan 19, 2006
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nackawic-mill-pensioners-will-fight-tory-plan-1.577888
Ex-Nackawic mill CEO gets 2 months in jail for hiding $8.4M from IRS
George Landegger's sentence cold comfort for former employees left with underfunded pension
CBC News · Posted: May 20, 2015 5:48 PM AT
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/ex-nackawic-mill-ceo-gets-2-months-in-jail-for-hiding-8-4m-from-irs-1.3080276
Just to state that salaries are way higher in the private sector than the public.
A lineman make around 40-45K(before taxes+ exp.) in the public, while in the private they make 80-100K for the same time period.
FAKE NEWS !!!!
Can't think of a proper reply, beside FAKE NEWS. LOL.
In 2013 knew the actuaries who conned Higgs and his union cohorts were profound liars. I put it writing and posted it in blogs long before this issue became an matter of history and the lawsuits began. In a nutshell Mr Sinclair our highest paid employee has had a mountain of money to play with on the stock market. The pension plans were NEVER in jeopardy even in 2008. When Victor Boudreau's budget in 2009 compelled the taxpayers top up the bureaucrat's pension plan to cover for Sinclair's losses I let everybody know just how disgusted I was immediately and posted those word within blogs as well Remember me now? Trust that many lawyers and politicians certainly do.
The largest employer in NB is the
NB Govt.......a lot of votes there !!!!!!
We are ALL going to have to 'bite the bullet'
in order to get this Province back on its feet.
NB also has the highest percentage of people working for government than any other province
Why is that?
The private sector gets whatever they want with the promise of jobs(that rarely materialize).
Where are all the jobs that were promised?
Colin Seeley
Nobody deserves an risk free pension . Especially those who are well paid and receive benefits the rest of us can only dream of like sick days and dental .
Why do those who work for Govt think they are so special !
Funny Alward speed up the gravy train on behalf of the Irvings (forestry & electricity agreements) that IS leading us to bankruptcy.
Dianne MacPherson
We taxpayers are all tapped out !!!
The only ones who will 'benefit' from
these civil suits are the Lawyers !!!
Methinks this lawyer is enjoying the litigation far to much and at our expense N'esy Pas?
Ronald Pink of law firm Pink Larson in Halifax represents the trustees of the shared-risk plan. He maintains the legislation is a necessary and reasonable solution to the pension conundrum.
“Nowhere is there an employer with a DB plan who is not under water, and every government is trying to find a way to reduce these liabilities,” he says. “At the same time, the objective is to continue providing a reasonable retirement allowance, and the way they’ve chosen to achieve that balance is by removing guarantees from employers and making pensions a joint venture with employees.”
Dr. Cleary made no statement on Glyphosate but
she did walk away leaving a lot of people believing
she was dismissed from her job because of it !!
'Dozens of regulatory bodies around the world, including
the European Food Safety Authority and HEALTH CANADA
have concluded that Glyphosate is NOT a health risk.' !!!!!
Dr. Cleary was canned because some in the private sector didn't like was her research was about to find.
While other regulatory bodies around the world banned it.
You know HEALTH CANADA is looking after the financial health of corporations not Canadians..
FAKE NEWS !!!!
Methinks the lady took a golden handshake and no longer cares N'esy Pas?
How convenient, crying Fake news!?
Glyphosate is a poison that is used to kill trees( a live organism) like agent orange was and it was deamed safe at the time.
Drink water that is tainted with Glyphosate if you believe it safe.
I won't and regulatory bodies are controled by politicians/ government that will do/ say anything their rich backers says.
Paul Bourgoin
Methinks that everybody knows the Crown can't put a muzzle on me N'esy Pas?
"New Brunswick lawyer Pete Mockler, who represents plaintiff Guy Levesque, is seeking damages. But he’s not relying on Charter arguments; instead, he says the defendants have committed breaches of contract, trust and fiduciary duty. He claims the unions and the trustees breached the terms of his employment by concurring in the transfer of assets to the new fund and other terms of the legislation.
Mockler believes a precedent established in 2012 favours his client.
“While the discussion about the shared-risk plan were ongoing, the government applied for a ruling on whether the province could relieve itself of its liability under the old legislation to top up the COLA adjustments, if there was insufficient money in the plan for that benefit. The judge ruled that the benefits were vested and couldn’t be taken away by negotiation.”
Mike Morton
Joseph Vacher
welcome to the real world, where you dont get everything you want
and that retirement allowance that no one in the private sector gets
Why were pensions underfunded to begin with?
To allow businesses to steal to pension of their employees.
Methinks they never were underfunded That was just what the actuaries claimed so that the mindless conservatives and union bosses would fall for the scam N'esy Pas?
And who got NB to this point and why?
Also if we are broke, how can government continue to give sweet deals to businesses.
Anne Bérubé
Watch for a shared-risk pension plan coming
to a FEDERAL Public servant near you......as soon
as there's a Govt. in Ottawa with the backbone
to implement it !!!!
Alward doesn't have that problem with his PM pension on top of the token job he got from Harper.
stephen blunston
do they not understand that NB is broke , they didn't take away their pensions like 85% of private businesses did just trying to make it a little better for province , and they are still getting golden pensions with the changes
Having worked as a PH Nurse for thirty years and continue to volunteer
Nice to know what my citizens think of me
Lou Bell
Methinks all of them were N'esy Pas?
Take a look at the membership
Lou Bell
Lou Bell
Valencia Deuchler
From out of Province are you ???
September 13, 2017
"A group of retired public servants learned the hard way just how difficult it can be to mount a constitutional challenge to benefits changes, according to a Toronto lawyer.
In Bemister v. Canada (Attorney General), retired members of the voluntary public service health-care plan, which also covers active federal employees, claimed a move to double their share of premium costs violated sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In 2014, the federal government shifted the cost-sharing split for premiums paid by retired members of the plan, boosting their portion to 50 per cent from 25 per cent. The government is phasing in the move, which was effective April 1, 2015, over four years.
Read: Government, public sector agree on changes to health benefits
In a verdict last month, Federal Court Justice Ann Marie McDonald rejected the retired members’ claims. “I conclude that the applicants have not established any breach of the Charter,” she wrote. “Further, had I concluded there had been a breach of Charter rights, I would have also found that the actions of the [Treasury Board] reflect a proportionate balancing of Charter values against the broader statutory objectives, and therefore that the [Treasury Board]’s actions and its decision were reasonable."
John O'Brien
Deborah McCormack
I am one of those retirees no not a Deputy Minister however I am a retired Nurse
Average pension for a retiree 19 thousand dollars per year
Very diverse group
As a single parent for 27 years I could have used the extra pay that was taken from my cheque
I did not have a choice although many individuals who could put money away in the private sector chose not to as they believe let the government look after me in my old age
Also it was a union who renegotiated to change my pension
When I had already retired and we know the mandate of a union is not to be concerned for the retiree
So when you decide to malign a civil servant remember the pandemic scare H1N1
Snow plough operators NB Power when your electricity is down Public Health Inspectors with food safety
The list is endless
And by we are not victims only fighting for a contract that was denied
"I am entitled to MY entitlements:" !!!!!
David Amos
Therein lies the rub I know for a fact some of my comments were blocked so it follows that other people were blocked as well Methinks you should ask yourself why N'esy Pas?
Methinks everybody knows your complaint is legit but the lawyers are not N'esy Pas?
Fred Sanford
1. Civil servants pay significant payroll deductions for their pension plans - generally about 10% of their gross income.
2. Whether you think government pension plans are too generous or not, it's never right to change the terms of a pension agreement after someone retires. If the pension plan is unsustainable, change the terms, but phase them in for current and future employees - not retirees.
3. There are a lot of petty, jealous, bitter people on here that seem to begrudge people that have chosen to work in a career that offers a pension plan. How about making your own situation better rather than trying to drag everyone down with you?
Gabriel Boucher
Chuck Michaels
Pension perk for deputy ministers should be cut, ex-MLA says
Former Progressive Conservative MLA Wes McLean says PCs should have ended special pension benefit
The previous Progressive Conservative government faced a significant backlash from provincial employees for its decision to overhaul civil service pensions by moving to a shared-risk model.
Civil servants accumulate larger pensions the longer they work for the provincial government, but deputy ministers accumulate their pensions at twice the normal rate for the first five years that they are at that top level.
Wes McLean, the former Victoria-Tobique Tory MLA who did not re-offer in the 2014 election, said the switch to a shared-risk pension system should have also eliminated that special arrangement for deputy ministers.
"I'm of the view that it's a relic and needs to be scrapped, especially given New Brunswick's fiscal situation,” he said.
When David Alward’s Progressive Conservative government took on pension reform, the goal was to reduce the long-term cost of the pension program.
McLean says he has a theory about why the Tories stopped short of cutting the extra benefit for deputy ministers while they were changing other elements of the pension system for provincial government employees.
"The water cooler talk was pushback from the deputies themselves,” the former MLA said.
Quispamsis Tory MLA Blaine Higgs, the former finance minister who was in charge of the pension changes, confirmed deputies got to keep the pension perk.
But Higgs says it's because he planned a larger overhaul of the pension system for deputy ministers had the Tories won a second term.
"That's why we didn't. We were looking at the whole picture. That was the next step, to look at the whole compensation package for senior officials,” Higgs said.
But the Progressive Conservatives lost the election to the Liberals, which makes further reforms unlikely.
The Liberals promised during the election to reconsider the reforms already imposed by the Tory government, rather than take them further.
Deputy Ministers are entitled to a car supplied by government.
Deputy Ministers are also entitled to a "performance bonus" on an annual basis, which amounts to an additional $15k -$20k a year. And guess what, nearly all Deputy Ministers receive their bonus.
When I and a couple other civil servants suggested the bonus be eliminated we were told that the bonuses were needed to retain the best, and without paying it, those DMs would leave. Not likely I responded. At a salary level of $120k-$150k, there are plenty of others that would assume the job.
It would appear that these Deputy Ministers had no objection to cutting the pension benefits of the rank and file civil servants, but not their own very costly perks (bonuses and car allowance, and travel).
Right Blaine... You had plenty of time to screw over the little guy making thirty grand a year and getting a twenty some thousand dollar pension, while you the politician and the senior civil servants still get the same cushy pensions you always get, and those are the pensions that make the public mad. There was no time to deal with Deputies pensions while you were in office and people would need to re-elect your government for that to happen... Tell me Blaine... Are you still waiting for that call from Brian Gallant offering you the position of Minister of Finance? Because if you are, you can forget it he already has one.
No comments:
Post a Comment