Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Phased Retirement Models topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Regents task force hears out‑of‑state phased‑retirement models; minutes approved
Summary
The Board of Regents task force heard presentations from Pennsylvania State System and Loyola University New Orleans about phased‑retirement programs, asked detailed questions about benefit eligibility and operational impacts, and approved the meeting minutes. No formal policy decision was made; follow‑up work was scheduled.
The Board of Regents task force convened for a scheduled meeting to review phased‑retirement program models used by other universities and to discuss next steps for Louisiana institutions. The task force approved the minutes at the start of the meeting and heard two external presentations before opening a lengthy question‑and‑answer period.
Brenda Mundell, Director of HR Shared Services for the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education, described a negotiated side letter with the faculty union that allows eligible faculty to "phase out over a 3 year period at a reduced schedule," while retaining full‑time health benefit eligibility for the duration of the program (Brenda Mundell, Director of HR Shared Services, Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education). Mundell said participation there has been limited — typically less than 5% of those eligible — and that competing early‑retirement incentives have complicated both participation and attempts to measure net cost savings.
Representatives from Loyola University New Orleans — Rachel Derman, Director of HR and Payroll, and Kristen (University Benefits Manager) — described a nonunion model managed through the provost. Derman said Loyola’s program commonly runs three years and generally requires tenured faculty who are 60 or older with at least 15 years of continuous service; in their design, year one retains full salary and status while years two and three reduce pay to about 50% of base salary but often maintain full‑time benefit eligibility.
Task force members focused their questions on: (1) who must approve a phased‑retirement application (department chair vs. president), (2) how institutions define "full time" for benefit eligibility under federal rules and the ACA, and (3) operational issues such as backfilling duties with adjuncts or overloads. On approval authority, presenters said unusual or hard‑to‑cover roles (for example, athletic directors) can be denied or modified by university leaders; routine requests are often approved as submitted. On benefits, presenters said their programs maintain ACA compliance while using negotiated or plan‑level rules to preserve health coverage for participants.
The task force did not adopt a policy during the meeting. Members were asked to gather institution‑level information and return with recommendations; a follow‑up meeting was set for September 17. The meeting began with the chair calling for approval of the minutes, an unidentified member moving to accept, another seconding, and the minutes being approved without recorded opposition.
