Louisiana Senate Bill SB4

Louisiana 2011 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/25/11
• Refer: 4/25/11
• Report Pass: 6/6/11
• Refer: 6/7/11

Caption

Provides relative to employee and employer contributions under certain circumstances. (7/1/11) (EG INCREASE APV)

Impact

The proposed changes under SB4 represent a significant shift in retirement policy for municipal police employees. By requiring members to contribute to the employer's portion post-cap, the legislation seeks to address sustainability issues within the retirement system. Supporters argue this will help maintain the financial integrity of MPERS, ensuring that benefits remain available for current and future employees. It is designed to ensure that the burden does not fall solely on the employer during times when a member has maximized their benefits and continues to work.

Summary

Senate Bill 4 aims to amend the Municipal Police Employees' Retirement System (MPERS) by modifying provisions surrounding employee and employer contributions. Under current law, retirement benefits provided by MPERS are capped at 100% of a member's average compensation. Once a member earns benefits equal to this cap, they are no longer required to make employee contributions. However, the proposed law introduces a provision whereby a member must pay the employer's contribution in lieu of the employee contribution if they continue to remain in employment after reaching the benefits cap. This amendment is scheduled to take effect from July 1, 2011.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB4 appears mixed. Proponents, including policymakers looking out for the long-term stability of public retirement systems, view the bill favorably as a necessary reform. Conversely, there may be concerns raised by current employees regarding the fairness of altering contribution requirements once they reach the benefits cap. This has sparked discussions about employee rights and fair treatment within retirement systems.

Contention

Key points of contention have arisen regarding how this bill could impact the retirement plans of active municipal police employees. Opponents may argue that requiring additional contributions from an employee once they have reached their benefits cap could deter individuals from staying in the force, affecting workforce retention. There could also be concerns regarding the perceived fairness of this requirement, especially for those nearing retirement who might be destabilized by changes to their anticipated retirement benefits.