1 direct that his contributions be transferred to the Central 2 Pension Fund or to a pension plan of which he becomes a 3 member upon entering into new employment if that plan so 4 permits. 5 7 14304. The executive secretary may require the transfer 6 of the pension benefit credit necessary to provide the deferred life annuity to which an employee is entitled under Section 14300 to the Central Pension Fund or to the pension plan of which such employee becomes a member upon entering new 10 employment or may require the former employer of an em11 ployee to enter into a contractual undertaking to pay or to 12 purchase the annuity prescribed by Section 14300 upon the 13 attainment of retirement age by the employee. 14 14305. A pension plan filed for registration as required in 15 Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 14200) shall provide for: 16 (a) Funding, in accordance with the tests for solvency pre17 scribed by the regulations, that is adequate to provide for 18 payment of all pension benefits or deferred life annuities re19 quired to be paid under the terms of the plan. 20 21 (b) A written explanation to each member of the terms and conditions of the pension plan and amendments thereto applicable to him, together with an explanation of the rights and 23 duties of the employee with reference to the benefits available to him under the terms of the pension plan. 22 24 25 26 27 28 (c) Investment of pension fund moneys in the securities and loans prescribed by the regulations. 14306. All of the requirements imposed on employers, stated in this chapter, shall be deemed to be qualifications necessary to initial or continued registration pursuant to 30 Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 14200). 29 31 32 33 34 35 CHAPTER 5. FINANCIAL PROVISIONS 14400. All fines or fees collected pursuant to this division shall be credited to the Central Pension Fund, which fund is 36 hereby created. This fund may also be used as a depositary for 37 moneys representing pension benefit credits deposited to the 38 credit of individual employees, although sums credited to the 39 account of individual employees shall not be used for any 40 administrative or general purpose. 41 14401. The money in the Central Pension Fund is con42 tinuously appropriated for expenditure in the manner provided 43 by law for the purposes of this division. 44 45 46 14402. The following registration fees shall be tendered with each application for registration: (a) For each plan with 0 to 9 members, two dollars ($2). 47 (b) For each plan with 10 to 99 members, ten dollars ($10). 48 (c) For each plan with 100 members or more, fifty dol49 lars ($50). 1 If the registration is rejected the fee shall be returned with 2 the notice of rejection. If the registration is favorably recon3 sidered the fee must be paid before a certificate is issued. 4 5 14403. Each registered pension plan shall pay on or before February 1, an annual fee equal to the fee prescribed in Sec6 tion 14402 and based on membership in the plan as of December 7 31 of the preceding calendar year. 8 9 10 11 CHAPTER 6. PENALTIES 14500. Any employer who violates a provision of Chapter 12 3 (commencing with Section 14200) shall pay as a penalty a 13 sum not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) for each day 14 during which the violation continues. This penalty shall be col15 lected in an action brought by the commission in the superior 16 court of the State of California of appropriate jurisdiction. 17 14501. Any person who willfully violates any provision of 18 this division other than as provided by Chapter 3, or the rules 19 or regulations (commencing with Section 14200) issued there20 under, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment 21 for a term of not more than six months, or by a fine not to 22 exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or both. 23 24 25 26 27 14600. CHAPTER 7. GENERAL The commission is not liable for any act or omission of any trustee, insurer or administrator of a pension plan, or for or in respect of any default or breach of contract on the 29 part of an employee or any trustee, insurer or administrator 30 of a pension plan. 28 31 14601. No action lies against any person for withholding, 32 deducting, paying or crediting any sum of money in com33 pliance or intended compliance with this division. 34 14602. Where this division requires an amount to be de35 ducted, withheld, paid or credited, an agreement by the per36 son on whom that obligation is imposed not to deduct, with37 hold, pay or credit such amount is void. 38 14603. This division may be cited as the Pension Bene39 fits Law. dollars ($ ---) or so 41 much thereof as is necessary is appropriated from the General 42 Fund to the Pension Commission of California for the fiscal 43 year 1965-1966, for the purposes of this act, and the sum of 44 --- dollars ($‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒) or so much thereof as is neces45 sary is appropriated to said commission for the fiscal year 46 1966-1967, for the purposes of this act and thereafter the sup47 port of said commission shall be from the Central Pension 48 Fund. 49 SEC. 3. This act shall become operative January 1, 1966. HOUSE RESOLUTION No. 77 RELATIVE TO IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES OF OLDER PERSONS (Adopted, First Extraordinary Session, 1963 California Legislature) Whereas, Legislation is now pending before the Congress of the United States which would provide new grant programs for experimental and demonstration projects to stimulate employment opportunities for older persons; and Whereas, In California, it is known that many older applicants seeking employment are not placed in proportion to the number of those needing employment; and Whereas, There is a need for more specific information relating to the increasing effects of automation and technological changes affecting employment of older persons; and Whereas, There is a need for current data concerning employer and union attitudes and action in providing employment for older workers; and Whereas, Such data would be valuable in the stimulation of community understanding and support of employment opportunities for older persons; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Assembly of the State of California, That the Department of Employment and the Citizens' Advisory Committee on Aging are requested to undertake jointly a study of how and where employment opportunities for older persons may be improved and expanded throughout the State, and to report their joint findings and recommendations thereon to the Assembly on or before the fifth legislative day of the 1965 Regular Session. Hon. ELMER J. HOLLAND, Chairman, Select Subcommittee on Labor, WIESEN & ROSENBERG, Cincinnati, Ohio, October 13, 1965. DEAR MR. HOLLAND: In acknowledgment of your letter of September 13, I appreciate the invitation to express my views with reference to the middle aged and older worker. No point would be served in discussing the needs or statistics inasmuch as your files must already be full of the basic information. I think it is important, however, to emphasize that both the 40 to 65 age group and the older than 65 group have very serious problems but of a different nature. In the case of the younger group, where automation eliminates a job, the blow falls at a time when usually the needs and responsibilities of the worker are at their height, such as growing families, and while there are a number of programs in the process for retraining we have not yet-it seems to me-responded to the needs of this group in any numbers. The over-65 group, while normally not faced with the financial responsibility of caring for young children, nevertheless find themselves at a point of drastically reduced income at a time in life when the incidence of illness and disability are greatly intensified, to say nothing of the indignity of not being in a position to maintain itself in a meaningful kind of way. About eight or nine years ago our local Council of Aging had a committee working on these same employment problems. It was formed at the time an older worker specialist had been assigned to the Cincinnati office, Ohio State Employment Service. During that period the committee devoted considerable time toward examining the effectiveness of those states which had anti-age discrimination laws. The information received then was that the laws might have been helpful as an educational tool but not particularly effective in direct attack on the problems. It is also my opinion that while the work of the many volunteer groups in the company are laudable and educational, their work is of necessity rather sporadic and without real force. I would like to suggest that there be formed in the Department of Labor a bureau of older workers which would be concerned not only with educating the Labor Department employees to the needs and possibilities of both the 40 to 65 age group and the 65 and older group, but could also be instrumental in developing effective older worker specialists programs among the state employment services through their local offices. More staff time and effort is needed both in the interviewing and counseling of the older worker, and also in working with employers on specific jobs these older workers could fill, and to encourage employers to open more opportunities to this group. In the over-65 group, more emphasis could be placed in the area of part-time employment. Along this line I might point out that I am serving on a National Task Force for Older People under the Economic Opportunity act, and fairly recently we submitted recommendations to Sargent Shriver and Mr. Theodore Berry, his deputy, for committee action commissions, and among these recommendations was the "Foster Grandparents" plan under which the older person would be employed approximately 20 hours a week, working with children in hospitals, orphans homes, etc., who are without families, the object being twofold-first, to give love and affection to these children, and to show an interest in them and help them develop, and secondly, to add to the meager income of the "Foster Grandparent" and at the same time give him the dignity of something meaningful and worthwhile to do. I might point out that in our area where we had room for only 38 of these jobs we received 130 applications and the great majority of the applicants seemed to be very highly qualified in spite of limited education. One of the great needs, among others, is the development of jobs requiring limited skills. It might be advisable to think in terms of developing national sheltered workshops which would not be competitive with industry, but rather would supplement and complement industry. From the experience of rehabilitation centers for the handicapped industry has frequently found it profitable to shop out to these centers routine jobs requiring little skills. As I indicated before, this subject is so complex and so much factual information is already in our hands that I have attempted only to suggest several concrete things that might be done. Again I wish to thank you for this opportunity, and I shall be extremely interested in the valuable work you are doing. Respectfully, AARON M. WIESEN. Hon. ELMER J. HOLLAND, FEDERATION EMPLOYMENT AND GUIDANCE SERVICE, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN HOLLAND: I appreciate your recent invitation to submit a statement for your printed record on the employment problems of the older American worker. Federation Employment and Guidance Service is probably the largest voluntary vocational service facility in the country, and among its numerous accomplishments is its recognition as a pioneering agency in the area of economic adjustment services for the older worker. The experience of FEGS since its inception in 1934, plus my own experience of almost an equal number of years, does not necessarily qualify me to provide expert testimony. Since we want to avoid a lengthy commentary, at least at this time, I will limit this statement to one area of great need, namely, vocational rehabilitation services for the older disabled person. For approximately the last ten years, the Federation Employment and Guidance Service has cooperated with the Vocational Rehabilitation Administration in Washington, and the New York State Division of Vocational Rehabilitation in the conduct of demonstration, research, and vocational service programs for individuals who are physically, mentally, or emotionally impaired, and who are at least 55 years of age. The average age of those served throughout this period, several thousand in number, is 64. Based on the success of these ef forts, the Vocational Rehabilitation Administration prototyped our program. and, as a result, some twelve additional states have special programs for older disabled persons, at least in some of their cities. The experience in all of these programs shows that for each 1,000 aged disabled persons going through vocational rehabilitation 650-700 can be returned to some productive employment in competitive industry or in a non-profit vocational adjustment center. Though costs will vary somewhat among states and agencies, the average subsidy for this significant achievement is approximately $500 for a full year's vocational service per individual. At recent hearings on H.R. 8310, the Hon. Edith Green, Chairman of the Special Education Subcommittee of the House, said: "I hope that more provisions will be made for older handicapped persons." It is increasingly essential in legislation that touches directly or indirectly on economic adjustment services that we specify the intent of these services to include older persons. Failure to do so or to follow up on implementation of legislation frequently results in the older individual's being left out of the mainstream of service. The Vocational Rehabilitation Administration must be applauded for what it has done to date. However, this must be significantly expanded, and states must be encouraged to take advantage of Federal programs and assistance for vocational services to the aged. We must recognize that there are large numbers of aged who are willing and able to work but who may not be adequate for competitive industry. Opportunity should be provided, through sheltered employment and other forms of subsidized employment. We must also recognize the need to provide many of our services on a local neighborhood basis since there are many older persons with limited mobility. In my opinion, large numbers of older persons, yes, even those who are severely disabled, can be helped to become fully or partially self-supporting, with all of the economic and other advantages that go with such, for the individual, his family, and his community. There is no longer need to demonstrate the feasibility of this goal. This has been done. What we need is a large-scale expansion of the programs which have worked. We know enough today to be able to meet a large segment of the vocational service needs for the hard-core older person who wants to be helped through proper community organization and service. I will be happy, at some future time, to meet with you and members of your Committee or their representatives, to discuss this and other recommendations in greater detail. The enclosed materials may be of some interest and help. Respectfully yours, ROLAND BAXT, Executive Director. THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, COLLEGE OF LAW, Columbus, Ohio, October 14, 1965. Hon. ELMER J. HOLLAND, Chairman, Select Subcommittee on Labor, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in response to your invitation to submit a statement on pension aspects of reemploying older workers. The Subcommittee and the parent Committee are to be commended for entering upon an inquiry into the employment predicament of older workers. But a great deal more has to be done before the public becomes aware of the fix thousands of their fellow citizens are in simply because their jobs have been shot out from under them and they are past 45 or 50 or 55. (1) Pensions as a Factor in Discrimination Against Older Job Applicants Fresh documentation of discrimination in employment because of age is not needed by this Subcommittee. It is all too readily available. To what extent pension considerations may aggravate the already severe reemployment problems of those who lose their jobs when they are past 40 or some other alleged threshold of elderliness is not readily ascertainable. But there are indications that pension plans may increase reemployment difficulties. A 1960 NAM survey of 70 leading companies asked: "If you have a pension plan, does it affect your employment of those over 45?" The NAM reports: 66 . . . 58% of the employers declared age was no consideration if the older worker had the qualifications to fill the job. "30% stipulated they could not include anyone in their pension plans who had not been employed at least 5 years (and many preferred 10 years). |