In October, the Social Security Administration (SSA) reinterpreted its approach to Missouri Public Schools? retirement systems. Since the 1960?s Missouri public schools have been operating under an agreement with the SSA that teachers, principals, supervisors, and those with teaching certificates are exempt from paying into Social Security if they are covered by the Missouri Public School Retirement System. In 1984, Missouri expanded the retirement system to cover all public school employees. The SSA did not object to this expansion until this October, when the SSA issued a reinterpretation of its approach, stating that only teachers, principals, and a few other employees are exempt from paying into Social Security.
The SSA?s decision may affect as many as 10,000 employees, including guidance counselors, administrators, bus drivers, and teachers? aides. Seeking compliance by July 1, 2009, the SSA may face a class action lawsuit if they refuse to change their position, according to Alan Thompson, general counsel for the Public School Retirement System. Senator Kit Bond sent a letter to the SSA last week to the Social Security Commissioner, seeking an explanation for the change and warning of the potentially ?dire hardship? on Missouri public school employees.
For the Associated Press article that was the source of this post, click here.
The Southern District Court of Appeals recently decided that arbitration agreements are not enforceable against non-parties to the agreement. In Sennett v. National Healthcare Corporation, the facts were that Edith Schmeets was admitted to a long-term, residential care facility in Joplin, Missouri in 2004. When admitted, her son, Mike Sennett signed an arbitration agreement, but his mother did not. There was no evidence that Mike was legally appointed as Edith's guardian.
In May 2006, Edith passed away. Almost a year later, Mike and Edith's other children filed suit against appellants for wrongful death, alleging: general negligence (count 1); negligence per se (count 2); breach of contract (count 3); breach of fiduciary duty (count 4); aggravating circumstances (count 5); and lost chance of survival (count 6). Appellants responded with a motion to compel arbitration. The trial court held Mike could not be bound by the arbitration agreement, reasoning that Mike was not the legal representative of Edith and therefore could not be bound by the arbitration agreement. The Southern District Court of Appeals affirmed.
On November 4, Missourians will be able to vote on Proposition B, a ballot measure affecting the elderly and disabled.
The measure would create a Missouri Quality Homecare Council to recruit and train home-care workers and develop a registry connecting workers and consumers. According to the Kansas City Star, supporters say the measure will ensure in-home care for an aging population. But, critics claim it is a veiled attempt to unionize home-care workers because the council could recommend wages for those workers and the measure includes a mechanism which would allow the workers to collectively negotiate wages and benefits with the state. For the Kansas City Star Article, click here.
I encourage you to do some research before November 4 and decide what you think about Proposition B. The Columbia Tribune recently published an article on the measure. There is more information available online.
The measure reads:
Shall Missouri law be amended to enable the elderly and Missourians with disabilities to continue living independently in their homes by creating the Missouri Quality Homecare Council to ensure the availability of quality home care services under the Medicaid program by recruiting, training, and stabilizing the home care workforce?
The exact cost of this proposal to state governmental entities is unknown, but is estimated to exceed $510,560 annually. Additional costs for training are possible. Matching federal funds, if available, could reduce state costs. It is estimated there would be no costs or savings to local governmental entities.
Fair Ballot Language (from the Secretary of State):
A ?yes? vote will amend Missouri law to enable the elderly and Missourians with disabilities to continue living independently in their homes by creating the Missouri Quality Homecare Council. If formed, this Council will ensure the availability of quality home care services under the Medicaid program by recruiting, training, and stabilizing the home care workforce.
A ?no? vote means the Missouri Quality Homecare Council will not be created.
This measure will have no impact on taxes.
The National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA) is offering its first-ever public webcast. The topic is "Aging in America: How to Plan for It." The free broadcast will be streamed on naela.org at 1:00 p.m. ET, Thursday, October 30.
In other NAELA news, last weekend was the annual NAELA Advanced Institute in Kansas City. A variety of lectures were offered. Comments from attendees about what they learned at the Institute are welcome.
The Social Security Administration announced Thursday that Social Security benefits will increase 5.8% at the beginning of next year, increasing the monthly payment by $63 for the average retiree. The increase is the largest since 1982, and it is more than double the 2008 increase. More than 55 million Americans will benefit from this boost. According to the Wall Street Journal economic blog, the timing of the increase is advantageous for Social Security recipients because it is based on the consumer price index from July one year to September the next. Thus, the recent economic downturn was not factored into the recalculation of benefits. For the Wall Street Journal blog, click here.
|