Louisiana House Bill HB20

Louisiana 2016 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/20/16
• Refer: 1/20/16
• Refer: 3/14/16

Caption

Places new hires of the 19th Judicial District Court for the parish of East Baton Rouge in the Municipal Employees' Retirement System

Impact

If enacted, HB20 would affect state laws concerning retirement systems and employee benefits specifically for JDC employees. Presently, MERS may include certain entities not classified as municipalities by agreement, making this bill a necessary step toward integrating JDC employees into a wider retirement framework. This change would mean that employees of the JDC, once hired under the specified conditions, would not only gain access to a public retirement plan but would also affect the financial planning both for the employees and the court system itself.

Summary

House Bill 20 aims to authorize employees hired from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court (JDC) in East Baton Rouge to participate in the Municipal Employees' Retirement System (MERS). This legislation seeks to expand the pool of participants in MERS, allowing newly hired JDC employees to contribute to and benefit from this retirement system, contingent on an agreement between the MERS board and the JDC. By enabling these employees to join MERS, the bill is designed to provide them with greater retirement security and benefits.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding HB20 is positive among those advocating for improved employee benefits within the judicial system. Proponents argue that this action is crucial for attracting new talent and ensuring that judicial workers have access to competitive retirement options. There are concerns, however, regarding the financial implications of enrolling new employees into a retirement system, especially amidst budget constraints faced by the state. As such, while the bill is largely viewed favorably, some skepticism remains about its long-term sustainability.

Contention

Notably, the bill specifically excludes judges and employees of the Clerk of Court from participating in MERS, which could lead to debates about equity among judicial positions. Critics may argue that excluding certain employees underlines disparities within the court's workforce, potentially leading to discontent among those excluded from the benefits. This aspect of the bill highlights ongoing discussions regarding fairness in public employee benefits and may prompt further scrutiny and dialog within legislative committees.