Human Resources
Retirement
| Question: | Will there be a furlough exception allowed for employees in the Arizona State Retirement System within 36 months of retirement? First they are being subject to the decrease in pay for the year in which they are furloughed. Second their retirement is then reduced because it is based on the highest 36 consecutive months of salary which will be reduced because of being furloughed. This seems to be discrimination based on age as these employees do not have the benefit of years remaining to make up for the loss in salary. Their sacrifice is not equal to employees with enough employment years left to make up for the loss. 2/26/2009 |
| Answer: | Because employees generally can choose when they retire, creating an exception on this basis would be very difficult to manage in an equitable way. |
 |
|
| Comment: | Offer early retirement to employees with 5 years of being eligible. 2/5/2009 |
|
|
| Comment: | The most well-to-do people I know in Flagstaff are long time employees of NAU. I think it would make sense to try to get at least one person from each department / office / shop that has their 80 points to retire. I also welcome the furloughs rather than layoffs to save money. Let's take the pay cuts rather than the job cuts! 2/5/2009 |
|
|
| Question: | Has the idea of retirement incentives been discussed? Possibly folks close to retirement would be willing to retire early if they were offered incentives to do so. |
| Answer: | President Haeger indicated at his forum on Jan. 28 that the suggestion merits evaluation. 2/3/2009 |
|
|
| Question: | Has the state (any or all 3 universities) considered a buyout plan for early retirement? This would not work for FY09, but in the following years, this could provide considerable savings. Many states have taken this route during previous financial crises. To get people to agree to do this for FY10, some formal plans would be needed by mid-March or thereabouts. |
| Answer: | President Haeger indicated at his forum on Jan. 28 that the suggestion merits evaluation. 1/30/2009 |
|
|
| Comment: | Thank you for the opportunity to provide input. On Nov.21, the following comments were posted on the NAU budget website: "For employees nearing retirement, NAU might make immediate retirement financially feasible by pre-paying future contributions, or by purchasing future service that the employee planned to work to attain. Given the relatively low cost to pre-pay contributions, NAU would likely achieve more salary and benefit cost savings than if a lower paid employee had to be laid off or terminated. This seems to be an ideal solution that can actually benefit both NAU and its employees while, at the same time, providing substantial cost reductions during these tough budget times." This is a viable solution to address the budget crises across AZ state government. NAU could take the lead on this. Perhaps it is necessary to introduce legislation to implement such a measure, but it certainly makes much sense. There could be a sunset clause to such a bill so that it would remain in effect only through the next year or two based on JLBC budget projections. A sunset provision provides for an automatic repealing of entire sections of the law once a specific future date is reached. Once the sunset provision date is reached, the bill would be rendered void. Should the budget situation worsen, the legislature could reset the sunset provision date any time before the original date is reached. 1/20/2009 |