Skip to main content

Why TVARS should not reduce COLAs

I believe that any compromise involving a reduction of the COLAs applied to the TVARS pension and supplemental pension benefit would assure their eventual elimination.  Please allow me to explain.

TVA's lawyers argued in the lawsuit that the TVARS board must think that TVARS COLAs are not vested because we voted to reduce them in 2009.  In March of 2015, the TVARS board filed documents with the court explaining that we did not have time to consider the vesting issue before the vote in 2009.  We also did not have independent legal counsel.  We explained that after we examined the arguments in the court documents filed by TVA and the plaintiffs, and discussed the vesting issue with independent legal counsel, we determined that the COLAs were and are vested benefits.  We explained that we should not have reduced them in 2009.  This brings up two points:

  1. If the TVARS board votes to reduce COLAs again, TVA's lawyers could make the same argument, and TVA could be able to eliminate COLAs entirely if a court agrees.  This is why I believe that voting for any COLA reduction, even a very small one, would likely turn out to be a vote to eliminate COLAs altogether. 
  1. The system’s rules say that the TVARS Board makes the determination as to what benefits are to be paid, and the TVARS Board has determined that COLAs are vested.  This is why I believe that TVA’s offer to vest COLAs is worthless.

Comments

  1. UnknownFebruary 14, 2016 at 3:42 PM

    As a layman (non-lawyer), I see a couple of other potential problems. Section 21 of the TVA Acts reads:

    "Sec. 21. (a) All general penal statutes relating to the larceny, embezzlement, conversion, or to the improper handling, retention, use, or disposal of public moneys or property of the United States, shall apply to the moneys and property of the Corporation and to moneys and properties of the United States entrusted to the Corporation.

    (b) Any person who, with intent to defraud the Corporation, or to deceive any director, officer, or employee of the Corporation or any officer or employee of the United States (1) makes any false entry in any book of the Corporation, or (2) makes any false report or statement for the Corporation, shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more
    than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."

    In my view, the funds in the TVA retirement system and the debt TVA owes the retirement systems are "public moneys" of the United States and/or moneys of the United States entrusted to the Corporation.

    Should any Board member of the TVA or the member of the TVARS Board vote for to give up the clearly vested COLA they could stand accused of: "unlawful conversion" or the with "improper handling, retention, use, or disposal of public moneys". Where, conversion is defined as of "exerting unauthorized use or control of someone else's property".

    In the 2009 case, it could be argued that while the TVARS acted outside the bounds of its authority, was not a case of unlawful conversion because the reduced COLA was exchanged for cash. Hence, it could be argued that the TVARS board was simply weighing present value of the COLA reduction in exchange for the present value of the moneys offered... and made a financial choice to take money as having the higher perceived present value. (Keep in mind I'm not saying this was a good or lawful choice, only that a argument can be made that it was not a criminal act to the statue cited above).

    In the present case, however, the TVARS Board would be reducing a vested benefits (i.e., the moneys of United States & TVA retirees being held in trust for TVA's retirees by the United States) in exchange for nothing of value. In other words, the TVARS Board would be surrendering retirees "property" in exchange for nothing.

    In the current circumstances, I believed an effective legal argument could be made that a current member of TVARS Board who is both an active TVA employee and votes to reduce the COLA could be accused of engaging in an unlawful scheme designed to relive the TVA's of its debt obligations thru the seizer of moneys owed the TVARS system.

    I would also like to point out that, as TVARS Board as already declared to the Courts of the United States that the COLA was a vested benefit, that treating the COLA as a non-vested benefit now could be construed as a violation of Section 12 (b) as:

    "Any person who, with intent... to deceive any officer or employee of the United States... (2) makes any false report or statement for the Corporation, shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."

    On the one hand if the TVAR's Board statement to the Officers of the U.S. Courts was false then the statement was a violation of the criminal law cited above.

    Conversely, if the TVARS Board turns around and arbitrarily declares (or treats) the declared vested benefit to be a non-vested benefit then this could be construed as an attempt to deceive "employees of the United States" (i.e. active or retired members of the TVARS)and U.S. Court Officers by making "a false report or statement for the Corporation". Again a statement or act in violation of criminal statue cited above.

    If I were a TVARS Board member considering reducing the COLA, I'd carefully consult with legal counsel before voting.

    Regards, David Kelly

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Task Assigned to the TVARS Board

The TVARS board is required to recommend a contribution from TVA to be made in fiscal year 2014 prior to the end of the current fiscal year.  (See Section 9B on pages 51-53 of the rules here .)  Since TVA sets its budget months before the end of the fiscal year, it is imperative that this recommended amount be: decided upon by the TVARS board as quickly as possible; sufficient to adequately fund TVARS; and consistent with the amounts charged to ratepayers for pension expense. All seven TVARS board members have an obligation to come together to accomplish this.  (See TVARS board members here .)  I sincerely hope we will be able to accomplish this without further rule changes suspending TVA contributions, or further claims that legitimate accrued benefits are not really vested and must be reduced.  I hope we will be able to put an end to our failure to insure that amounts paid by TVA ratepayers for pension expense are used for their intended purpose.  As a TVARS board member, I
Post a Comment
Read more

Why do TVARS board meetings remain closed?

Within the next couple of months, the TVARS board must vote on a contribution amount to recommend that TVA make in fiscal year 2014. In conjunction with the contribution amount, it is possible the vote will include amendments to the rules. In conjunction with the contribution amount in 2009, the rules were amended to: suspend contribution requirements and related actuarial valuations for four years (Section 9B9); suspend the requirement that part of the contribution go to the “excess COLA account,” which was designed to accumulate and grow funds to be used for payment of future COLAs (Sections 9B9, 10D1 and 10D2); and reduce legitimate accrued pension benefits (Sections 6I, 7L and 18C3). The vote in 2009 was not open to observation, and unless the TVARS board takes action, neither will the vote this year. Not one of the six other TVARS board members would second the motion I made in December to open TVARS meetings to observation. All that is required to open future boa
18 comments
Read more

Introduction

This is my personal blog to facilitate communication among TVA employees, retirees and beneficiaries who are members of TVARS and who wish to preserve their retirement benefits. Please join my site and post your comments.  I have been an elected member of the TVA Retirement System (TVARS, or the system) board of directors since 2003. I am not speaking officially for the TVARS board of directors or TVA management. TVARS is an entity legally independent of TVA. Three of the board members are TVA employees (including myself), three are appointed by TVA management (currently all TVA executive managers), and the seventh is generally a retired TVA employee (appointed by the other six). As TVA employees, we all have a duty of loyalty to carry out directives issued by TVA management in our regular TVA jobs. However, each board member has a fiduciary duty to all the members of the system when performing TVARS duties. This fiduciary duty legally supercedes our duty of loyalty to carry out direct
21 comments
Read more