Re “Exceptions Should Be Made for Senior City Workers, Malsin Says”
Re “Malsin Accuses City Hall of Miscalculations”
[Editor’s Note: The third of a series of three promised essays by the City Councilman who is seeking to protect his own healthcare benefits and those of some city workers.]
Culver City is at a philosophical crossroads. We're faced with a serious question. The way we answer it will say a lot about us. It is:
Should the city protect the well-being of its older workers by honoring its commitments to them?
As I wrote in my first two essays, changes in the city's retiree health plan that go into effect on Jan. 1, are likely to force many valuable employees to retire before then.
The impact on our community will take many forms, from slower emergency response times and less personal service to greater liability costs and higher turnover of employees.
Those are costs a city whose reputation centers on its high level of service should avoid incurring. This is not just about the services we enjoy; it's about the kind of community we are.
Many employees will find themselves better off retiring than continuing to work.
It makes no sense to force them out. They will leave with their benefits, plus we will be paying their less experienced replacements new benefits. We won't be saving money, we'll be spending more.
Many neither can afford to retire nor lose their benefits.
Imagine yourself in their place.
You come to work here later in life in part because of the security your benefits will provide, benefits that had been offered and honored for decades. You have planned your retirement based on them. You have a modest pension and no margin of error. Then the rug gets pulled out from under you.
Since I began this public conversation, city workers have come up to me to said, “That's me you're talking about.”
Don't take my word for it. Ask them for yourself.
You don't have to go far. They work in your neighborhood; they may live on your street.
Of course, this isn't just a local issue. We are seeing it played out across America. I don't like what I am seeing. It's neither fair nor right to change the rules of the game when it's too late for someone to make up the ground he has lost.
Tarnished Golden Rule
Culver City has a powerful sense of community. Our workers feel it and help sustain it.
Shouldn't we treat them as we would wish to be treated?
Shouldn't we do our best to honor the commitments we have made to them, most particularly in the case of our older workers.
This is a question that goes right to the heart of what our small town is all about. A 2011 nationwide survey by the non-partisan, non-profit Center for State and Local Government Excellence (www.slge.org) asked public agencies how they have modified their pension and health benefit programs to help meet their financial challenges.
Less than one percent of the respondents indicated that they are implementing changes similar to those Culver City is putting in place.
If Culver City was on the brink, if we had no financial reserves, if we had no options to consider, all bets would be off.
In that situation, however, even the strategy the city has adopted wouldn't work. The amount it will cost to treat our older employees with compassion and respect is not enough to make or break the city's financial future. Not even close. Together with my fellow Councilmembers, I have been focused on careful stewardship of the city's resources.
We have developed new sources of revenue and kept our costs as low as possible.
We have achieved a lot together, but on this issue we see things differently.
The way we answer the question I posed will say a lot about our community. I feel the answer deep in my bones. It is: Rather than breaking commitments to achieve savings that do little or nothing to ensure the city's long-term financial stability, we should honor our word and continue our efforts to find real solutions to ensure it.
Grandfathering in the retiree medical benefits of longtime and older workers is a cost-effective way to protect the quality of our services and care for the well-being of vulnerable members of our city family.
The policy our city is pursuing threatens both and will not save jobs or solve our financial problems. It already is taking a toll on our workforce.
This is a situation in which the smart choice and the right choice are the same.
There still is time to change the course. I urge you to call or email each City Councilmember and tell him, “Find another way.”
