Main content
City of Alexandria Homepage
Saturday, October 25  •  66°Partly Cloudy Air Quality: Yellow
CloseWeather Forecast
Today: High 69° Low 52°
SunnyAir Quality: Yellow
Sun: High 66° Low 44°
SunnyAir Quality: Green
Mon: High 68° Low 50°
SunnyAir Quality: Green
Tue: High 78° Low 59°
Partly CloudyAir Quality: Green
Wed: High 69° Low 48°
Few ShowersAir Quality: Green
City of Alexandria, VA City of Alexandria, VA
  • By Date
  • By Board

Debbie Ludington (user 257) - Comments by Date

I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the work of the Ad Hoc Retirement Benefit Advisory Group, and I thank all of the members for their time and dedication to this important topic. After reading through the reports and documents available, it appears that a great deal of research and study has been done regarding retirement benefits for full time employees. However, it does not appear that the same level of research and attention has been given to retirement benefits for permanent part time employees. Specifically, in the following documents:
1. Retirement Plan Summary – General Schedule Employees dated 3/24/2011
No information is included regarding retirement benefits for permanent part time employees. This may lead readers to the erroneous assumption that permanent part time employees receive the same, though pro-rated benefits as their full time colleagues. In my experience, I have found this assumption to be true.
2. Benefits Overview of city Retirement Benefits with examples dated 4/4/2011
There are no examples for permanent part time employees. Given that permanent part time employees are not currently covered under VRS, the value of their retirement benefits under the Supplemental Retirement Plan is very low. I would recommend doing a comparison of retirement benefits for a part time and full time employee that have worked in the same type of position for 30 years. The result would be eye opening.
3. Local Comparators Retirement Benefits dated 4/4/2011
No information is included from local comparator jurisdictions as to the retirement benefits they offer their permanent part time employees.

4. In Resolution #2432 which describes the Group’s tasks, it indicates the following:
Section 3: Tasks of the Advisory Group
b. iii To provide an opportunity for City employees to save for and have a secure retirement.
This statement does not differentiate between full time and part time City employees, yet in practice there are great disparities in their retirement benefits. This Group has not yet taken the time to look into this issue and develop proposals to resolve the disparities. In the current structure, permanent part time employees will not have a secure retirement.

I would suggest that part time employees are no less dedicated to their public service than their full time colleagues, and they should be compensated equally. Lastly, it does not appear that General Service Employees have had an opportunity to make a presentation to the Group. I believe their presentation was cancelled due to the earthquake. I think this is important information that needs to be available to the public before any deadline for public comment.

Respectfully Submitted,
Debbie Ludington, a 25 year City Employee

Debbie Ludington (257) | User | September 2, 2011 - 10:20 AM | Ad Hoc Retirement Benefits Advisory Group Comments

Debbie Ludington (user 257) - Comments by Board

Ad Hoc Retirement Benefits Advisory Group Comments

I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the work of the Ad Hoc Retirement Benefit Advisory Group, and I thank all of the members for their time and dedication to this important topic. After reading through the reports and documents available, it appears that a great deal of research and study has been done regarding retirement benefits for full time employees. However, it does not appear that the same level of research and attention has been given to retirement benefits for permanent part time employees. Specifically, in the following documents:
1. Retirement Plan Summary – General Schedule Employees dated 3/24/2011
No information is included regarding retirement benefits for permanent part time employees. This may lead readers to the erroneous assumption that permanent part time employees receive the same, though pro-rated benefits as their full time colleagues. In my experience, I have found this assumption to be true.
2. Benefits Overview of city Retirement Benefits with examples dated 4/4/2011
There are no examples for permanent part time employees. Given that permanent part time employees are not currently covered under VRS, the value of their retirement benefits under the Supplemental Retirement Plan is very low. I would recommend doing a comparison of retirement benefits for a part time and full time employee that have worked in the same type of position for 30 years. The result would be eye opening.
3. Local Comparators Retirement Benefits dated 4/4/2011
No information is included from local comparator jurisdictions as to the retirement benefits they offer their permanent part time employees.

4. In Resolution #2432 which describes the Group’s tasks, it indicates the following:
Section 3: Tasks of the Advisory Group
b. iii To provide an opportunity for City employees to save for and have a secure retirement.
This statement does not differentiate between full time and part time City employees, yet in practice there are great disparities in their retirement benefits. This Group has not yet taken the time to look into this issue and develop proposals to resolve the disparities. In the current structure, permanent part time employees will not have a secure retirement.

I would suggest that part time employees are no less dedicated to their public service than their full time colleagues, and they should be compensated equally. Lastly, it does not appear that General Service Employees have had an opportunity to make a presentation to the Group. I believe their presentation was cancelled due to the earthquake. I think this is important information that needs to be available to the public before any deadline for public comment.

Respectfully Submitted,
Debbie Ludington, a 25 year City Employee

Debbie Ludington (257) | User | September 2, 2011 - 10:20 AM