Louisiana House Bill HB31

Louisiana 2012 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/12/12
• Refer: 3/12/12
• Report Pass: 5/21/12
• Engrossed: 5/23/12

Caption

Provides relative to the New Orleans Harbor Police Retirement System (RE DECREASE APV)

Impact

The bill introduces significant amendments to existing retirement policies, including extending eligibility for certain dependents of deceased members. It ensures that totally handicapped or mentally disabled children can receive survivor benefits, regardless of age, if dependent on the surviving spouse. These changes reflect a broader attempt to enhance support for vulnerable populations within the harbor police community. Moreover, it provides for technical adjustments within the boards' operations, likely improving governance and decision-making processes.

Summary

House Bill 31 (HB31) focuses on the Harbor Police Retirement System, primarily serving members from the New Orleans Harbor Police. The bill aims to amend eligibility and benefits regarding disability and survivor pensions. One key change is the elevation of the required years of creditable service for disability retirement eligibility from five to ten years, which may impact the ability of newer members to access benefits. Additionally, it alters the process of certifying disability to rely on a 'medical advisor' rather than a group of licensed professionals, effectively streamlining the disability claims process.

Sentiment

General sentiment around the bill seems to be supportive among legislators, as indicated by its unanimous passage with no opposing votes during a House vote. This level of support may reveal a consensus regarding the necessity to amend and modernize retirement benefits for the Harbor Police. However, while proponents praise the bill for providing essential protections and rights to dependents, potential critics might point to increased waiting periods for disability benefits as a concern, particularly for newer entrants to the workforce.

Contention

Notable points of contention could arise from the increased requirement for disability benefits and the new certification process. Some may argue that tying eligibility to longer service could unjustly penalize vital personnel who become incapacitated early in their careers due to hazardous occupational conditions. Furthermore, relinquishing a collective certification approach could lead to inconsistencies in determining eligibility for disability benefits, raising concerns about the fairness and transparency of the retirement system.