« Arrowhead High School On Good Morning America | Home | Pope and Others Propose Voucher Accountability Package »
SAA Legislative Committee Expresses Concerns About Return to Work Bill
By Wisconsin School Administrators Alliance staff | December 5, 2019
At the SAA Legislative Committee meeting held on November 25th, Committee members discussed the merits of WRS annuitant return to work legislation for more than an hour. The legislation, authored by Representative Mary Felzkowski (R-Irma) and Senator Duey Stroebel (R-Saukville), was circulating for co-sponsorship inside the State Capitol at the time of the Committee meeting. The proposal has the support of the Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB). If adopted, the legislation would:
- Increase the minimum WRS retirement age from the current age 55 to the greater of age 59.5 or the age at which the IRS does not penalize a person for taking a distribution from a 401(k) plan.
- First apply the change in the minimum retirement age to individuals who are under the age of 40 on the bill’s effective date and who terminate WRS-covered employment on or after the bill’s effective date.
- Allow an annuitant who is hired by a WRS employer as an employee to elect to not suspend his or her annuity for not more than a total of 36 months.
- Reduces the break-in-service requirement from the current 75 days to 45 days.
During the lengthy and spirited Committee discussion, members expressed strong support for rolling back the provisions of the current return to work law to allow retired teachers, administrators and staff to return to WRS-covered employment without restrictions in order to fill critical positions in school districts throughout Wisconsin.
However, Committee members also expressed the following concerns or reservations about the proposed legislation:
- The authors’ statements about the need to raise the retirement age to maintain the integrity of the system into the future are simply assertions that have not been proven as fact. We need an actuarial study to clarify this issue.
- It will likely result in educators who are burned out at age 55 staying in the classroom for an additional 4.5 years, which is not in the best interests of children.
- It may result in significant numbers of retirement age educators leaving the profession a few years before they intended for fear that this bill will open the door for additional retirement system changes.
- It may result in some under-40 educators who have witnessed the impact of Act 10 to perceive this as another attack on educators and leave the profession.
- It is difficult to imagine how this proposed change will make the profession more attractive to young people.
- The “compromise” (the 36-month return to work window in exchange for raising the minimum retirement age) appears one-sided. One Committee member likened it to “trading an apple for an apple orchard”.
- It is unclear how the 36-month return to work window will be defined and ultimately administered. Committee members expressed concern that these provisions will make an already complex law that much more complicated to administer and will likely add administrative burden for school districts.
At the conclusion of the Committee discussion, members were asked, “If the objective is to improve our ability to recruit and retain quality teachers, administrators and staff to fill critical positions, on balance does this proposal help us do that or not?” The clear consensus of the Committee was that the proposal does not help us with that objective.
See the bill draft here.
If you should have any comments or questions on this important policy issue, please contact me at the SAA. Thanks for listening and, as always, thanks for everything you do on behalf of the children you serve.
Topics: SAA Capitol Reports, SAA Capitol Reports with Email Notifications, SAA Latest Update | No Comments »
Comments are closed.