|
Coop pensions threatened
|
|
by Neil Zacharjewicz
MANITOULIN - The retirement future of the employees of the
Manitoulin Livestock Cooperative has become somewhat hazy following
the collapse of their pension plan.
"The pension plan has been closed down," stated Hugh Moggy, former
general manager of the Coop who is also a member of the pension plan.
"We don't know what is going to happen from here on in."
The collapse of the plan affects 24 cooperatives across Ontario,
including the United Cooperative employees and the employees of
Gay-Lea Foods, and affects the approximately 40 employees and four
pensioners living on Manitoulin.
"From the perspective of the trustees, this is a tragedy," stated
Michael Barrett, chair of the board of directors for Growmark, the
mother company for the affected cooperatives.
As of May 1, all of those individuals currently receiving a pension
under the plan will have their pensions cut in half. Those currently
paying into the plan have effectively lost 50 percent of their
investment.
Mr. Moggy indicated the board of directors for Growmark began to
realize there was a problem as far back as 1998, but it was not until
December of 2002 that those paying into the plan even realized there
was reason to be concerned. He attributed the collapse of the pension
plan to risky investment on the part of the investment company
handling the pension plan on behalf of the Growmark board.
"I think the board of directors must have known what was going on,"
Mr. Moggy stated. "There is a class action suit underway now."
While Mr. Barrett admitted returns on the plan were below average
between the period of 1997 until 2000, he pointed out the issue
became much worse following the tragedy of September 11th. Following
that incident, he said, the plan experienced negative returns for
close to 30 straight months.
"It would be nice to be able to blame an investment company, but
nobody could have forecast that," he said.
Furthermore, there are other factors which come into play in the
collapse of the plan, he noted, such as a decline in the number of
cooperatives and employees paying into the plan.
"The plan itself was not viable anymore," Mr. Barrett said.
He pointed out that this particular situation is not unique, noting
there are at least 50 other plans in Canada facing similar problems.
"This pension plan is the tip of the iceberg," Mr. Barrett stated.
Mr. Barrett's assessment is backed up by the findings of a study of
the 104 companies on the S&P/TSX index with defined-benefit pension
plans conducted by the Globe and Mail. The study discovered that
only 23 of these companies showed a funding surplus in their most
recent fiscal year, and even those companies saw a substantial
decline in their cushions. All 104 companies had pension assets
valued at over $10 million, and had filed audited financial
statements by May 6, but collectively, those companies experienced a
pension funding shortfall of over $18.7 billion in 2002.
Things do not look to improve, either, as the study reported three
years of poor performance and optimistic estimates about pension
returns have created a $26 billion build-up of unrecognized losses.
It was noted these losses are unlikely to be recovered by higher
future returns or past pension gains which have yet to make their way
onto the books. This is expected to translate into increased pension
expenses down the road as they are moved onto the balance sheet.
Among the list of companies faced with pension problems cited in the
Globe and Mail report were Inco Ltd., Bombardier Inc., Alcan Inc.,
Quebecor World Inc., Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd., CAE Inc., and Air
Canada.
Mr. Barrett indicated the trustees for the pension plan are
implementing a wind-up of the plan. He explained present retirees
will likely be purchased annuities to provide them with some income.
Existing employees will likely receive a lump sum pay-out transferred
into locked RRSPs, unless the individual Coops which employ them
decide to roll the funds into a new pension plan of their own.
"We have all lost 50 cents on the dollar," Mr. Barrrett said. "For
those with 32 years of service, this is a tragedy."
|
MHC participant in provincial study on nursing and
health outcomes
|
by Neil Zacharjewicz
MANITOULIN - It is a study which could change the way the data
collection of nursing sensitive health outcomes is conducted
across
the province, and the Manitoulin Health Centre hospitals are
among
the key sites for Northern Ontario.
"We are pleased the hospitals on Manitoulin are involved in
this,"
explained Ellen Rukholm, site principal investigator for
Laurentian
University, one of the many partners involved in the project.
Ms. Rukholm stated the Nursing and Health Outcomes Feasibility
Study
is a study looking at the feasibility of collecting information
in a
standardized way. The project is the result of a recommendation
made
by the Nursing Task Force, 1999, which identified the need for
improved data collection and reporting of the impact of nursing
interventions on patient health. As a result of that
recommendation,
Laurentian University, the University of Toronto and the
University
of Western Ontario, in partnership with the Ministry of Health
and
Long Term Care, have jointly undertaken the study.
There is a four-fold purpose to the study, the first of which is
to
evaluate the feasibility, quality, utility and costs of
instituting
outcomes data collection for nursing sensitive outcomes in acute
care. The second purpose is to determine the frequency and
timing
with which it is necessary to collect data on symptoms over a
patient's health care stay or the purposes of outcomes
assessment.
The third purpose is to conduct a pilot testing of reliability
and
validity of a therapeutic self scale for acute care. Finally the
study is also intended to assess the training requirements and
resources required to institute nursing-sensitive outcomes
assessment
with province of Ontario.
Under the study, nurses ask patients specific questions which
are
standard to the usual day-to-day assessments normally made. When
patients are admitted, and during their stay, they are assessed
based
on their functional status, symptoms status (pain, nausea and
fatigue), and the ability to manage their self-care (such as
what the
patient needs to know when they go home with regard to
medication).
A total of 15 health care facilities are participating in the
study,
including four acute care facilities, six long-term care
facilities,
four Community Care Access Centres, and one complex continuing
care
facility. The participating sites include facilities in the
London/Waterloo region, the Ottawa region, the Toronto region,
and
the Sudbury region. The participating facilities in the Sudbury
region include the Manitoulin Health Centre, Extendicare York,
and
Pioneer Manor.
Ms. Rukholm stated the notion of collecting information in a
standardized fashion could be incredibly useful for in regard to
future planning at health care facilities. She noted in addition
to
the data collection, focus groups are also held with nurses and
managers at the facilities to gather data on how useful and
meaningful the standardized data collection system has been for
them.
While it is premature to guess what the outcome of the study may
be,
Ms. Rukholm explained if the study results in the rolling out of
a
standardized data collection system for Ontario, the province
would
become the first jurisdiction in the world to implement such a
system. She noted while the Americans have done a little work in
this
area, no one has ever attempted such a project with a province
or
state-wide scope.
As site principal investigator for the Laurentian University,
which
oversees the Sudbury region portion of the study, she said the
data
collection system appears to be working well. She indicated the
data
collection process was begun in January, and it is anticipated
that
data collection on Manitoulin will wrap up in June. In other
areas,
particularly in Toronto, she said the data collection process is
anticipated to take longer due to the Severe Acute Respiratory
Syndrome (SARS) demanding the immediate attention of the medical
community in that area. While the final report was projected to
be
presented in November, Ms. Rukholm said that will likely be
delayed
until next spring.
"It is really important to have large, central, southern
communities
involved as well as the smaller northern communities," Ms.
Rukholm
suggested. The challenge, she said, is creating a system of data
collection which is accurate, valid, and meets the needs of both
the
smaller, rural and northern communities as well as those of the
larger facilities in the larger urban centres.
Ms. Rukholm said the data collected is also key in identifying
the
impact of nursing intervention on the outcome of patients
admitted to
health care facilities.
"I think research is something people do not realize that nurses
do,"
Ms. Rukholm said.
|
|
Sheguiandah water system deficit |
bby Cheryl Waugh
NORTHEASTERN MANITOULIN and the ISLANDS (NEMI) ---The
Sheguiandah
water system will run a $10,000 deficit this year if the town of
NEMI
doesn't rectify the situation by raising the water rates,
something
town council voted against doing at its meeting last Wednesday.
Clerk Ned Martin explained the Sheguiandah water system
generates
revenues of $50,000 a year, but it costs about $60,000 a year to
run
the operation.
Ten thousand dollars is needed just to get the system to a break
even point.
"Ideally," said Clerk Ned Martin, "we should go beyond just
breaking
even, we should be providing for the future."
At council last week, a recommendation from the Public Works
committee suggested raising the water rates in Sheguiandah by 10
percent. That amount would have raised $5,000, only half of what
is
needed, however, several councilors felt that a 10 percent
increase
in one year was too much, and the recommendation was defeated in
a
recorded vote 4-3.
Mayor Ken Ferguson voted for the recommendation, and explained
later
that he simply does not see any other way to raise money for the
water system other than by raising rates. "The system does have
some
reserves, but this will probably clean it out. Since not
everyone is
on the municipal water system in Sheguiandah it wouldn't be fair
to
put it on the tax bill (in order to raise funds), the system
might be
able to finance it."
However, he noted that in order for the province to allow for a
finance alternative there would have to be a plan to recover
that
money, which would mean water rates would still go up. "There is
no
other way to bail itself out. And, I believe, we can't operate
it any
cheaper," said Mayor Ferguson.
The Sheguiandah water system is experiencing the fallout from
the
Walkerton water crisis of 2000, an incident that saw seven
people die
and more than a thousand people get sick after e-coli bacteria
contaminated that town's water supply.
Stan Koebel, manager of the Walkerton Public Utilities
Commission,
was recently indicted on seven criminal charges, including
public
endangerment, forgery and breach of trust, relating to that
incident.
His brother, Frank, his assistant, was indicted on five charges,
including public endangerment.
The Walkerton incident led to a string of new water safety
regulations by the province, including more stringent testing,
that
is having an adverse affect financially on small water treatment
plants across the province.
On Monday, Mayor Ferguson said the water issue was a 'scary'
topic at
the annual general meeting of the Federation of Northern Ontario
Municipalities (FONOM), which took place over the weekend.
"Regulations are still unfolding from Walkerton. We're going to
see
more regulations coming down. It's going to be tough on the
staff...and expensive."
The issue has become a scary one for municipalities because the
province has declared that revenue for water systems must be
raised
through its users, as the costs sky rocket.
Councilor Ron Lewis, chair of the Public Works committee that
recommended to council the 10 percent increase for Sheguiandah
water
users, was one of the four councilors that subsequently voted
down
that motion.
"This is all fallout from the Walkerton incident," said
Councilor
Lewis. "They brought in new legislation that requires additional
sampling, along with other requirements downloaded from the
provincial level, but the province won't pay for them. The costs
have
increased to the point that small systems, like in Sheguiandah,
might
not have been implemented."
He explained the province "saw fit to provide funding to get the
system started, but have since turned around and said, 'Now,
we're
going to download it back down on you.' At some point the
province
has to assist. We are facing considerable upgrades at the
Sheguiandah
plant."
One of the consequences of the new water safety legislation was
an
edict that all water treatment plants in the province must under
go
inspection by an engineer to ensure the plant's safety. J.L.
Richards, of Sudbury is in the process of completing a report
for the
Sheguiandah plant. One recommendation expected to come out of
that
report is a need for a special liner between two of the plant's
holding tanks. One tank holds raw (untreated) water, while the
other
holds treated water, the two tanks share a common wall. It has
been
suggested that if a crack ever developed in that wall, the raw
water
could leak into the treated water, contaminating it.
That leads into another problem for the Sheguiandah water
system, if
reserves are depleted this year to pay for the deficit that
means
there will be no money readily available for future capital
costs,
such as when one of the pumps needs to be replaced.
Mayor Ferguson said he understands increasing the water rates 10
percent in one year is a lot, but noted it needs to go up more
than
that just to get it operating at a break even point. "I'm not
suggesting it's a low cost thing, but it's a fact that rates
will
have to be raised to a point that it can maintain itself and
provide
for future needs. We can't sit on our hands," said Mayor
Ferguson.
Along with the 10 percent increase for Sheguiandah, the motion
also
called for a five percent increase in the water and sewer rates
in
Little Current, however, because of its defeat at the council
table,
the issue is back at the committee level with the Public Works.
Voting down the motion were Councilors Bill Koehler, Kathleen
Bowerman, Jim Stringer and Lewis. Voting in favour of the motion
were
Councilors Al MacNevin, Ann McGregor and Mayor Ferguson.
Councilors
Marcel Gauthier and Carl Ziegler were absent from council.
|
|