Badin vs. Fredericktown
Miamisburg graduation 2012
Valley View vs. Greenville
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2011 > June > 14 > Entry
Editorial: Culture, laws on pensions need to be reformed
Maybe the problems that ail some public employees receiving disability pensions are contagious.
Some places sure seem to have more than their share of police and firefighters getting a disability pension.
Dayton ranks highest among Ohio’s six largest cities for the percentage of active police and fire pension members who retired on disability between 2001-10. Its rate was 19 percent — almost one in five people. Cleveland was No. 2 at almost 13 percent, and Cincinnati was No. 6 at 6 percent.
The state police and fire pension fund, as well as Dayton, need to be asking why Dayton’s safety forces have more injuries or disabilities than their peers.
Meanwhile, Huber Heights had almost 25 percent of its active police and fire pension fund members receiving disability benefits; Trotwood was at 22 percent.
Whatever the explanation for the high numbers, there’s none the reflects well on the public employees. Are workers getting hurt because they aren’t following safety rules? Are they being injured because they’re out of shape for what their job requires?
Or, most concerning, are they seeing their fellow workers taking advantage of the pension rules and following suit?
A six-month Dayton Daily News investigation by Staff Writers Lynn Hulsey and Lucas Sullivan uncovered these trends and more. Besides disability pensions being given frequently, numerous individuals were receiving benefits even though they had been fired or were in the process of facing serious disciplinary action or criminal charges.
The seeming ease with which disability pensions are awarded is a problem police and firefighters — and their bosses — have talked about among themselves for a long time.
Many can name individuals who discovered an ailment only at the moment they found themselves in trouble on the job, or who, though they’re getting a disability pension, are fit enough to work in another field.
Police and firefighters do incredibly dangerous work. Beyond the stress they face, their bodies take a beating. That more of their ranks receive disability pensions than, say, teachers is not the scandal.
The scandal is that some individuals look for excuses to retire early on disability, in part, because, unlike regular pension benefits, on-duty pensions of up to 60 percent of average pay are exempt from federal taxation for safety workers.
Pension systems exist for the benefit of the people who pay into them. So it’s not shocking that pension administrators want to assume the best about those who come to their offices saying they’re too hurt to work.
But the administrators’ responsibility is to all the members — including the far larger number of people who don’t have an inflated sense of entitlement — and to taxpayers, who contribute handsomely to public employees’ pension funds.
Administrators say there are multiple checks-and-balances in place to ensure people aren’t malingering. They believe they have enough, but the record suggests otherwise.
Why should someone be able to put in for disability, for instance, after disciplinary action or a criminal investigation has been initiated? That’s like applying for an insurance policy after you find out that you have cancer — but at least the insurance company can say that your timing disqualifies you.
If someone is able to work and does so, shouldn’t there be a financial offset — in the name of encouraging people to contribute and to make sure the system can afford to give decent benefits to people who have lost their ability to earn the sort of living they once had?
The pension directors should be at the forefront of protecting the system against those who would milk it. But if they’re not going to do that, the job falls to employers and public employees themselves to put pressure on the pension boards to do the right thing — and on lawmakers to make sure the laws require as much.
TweetGo to our facebook page and Like us to comment.
