The California Department of Personnel Administration misapplies Deferred Compensation.

In 1991, I worked one-week-a-year for THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; It was my sixth consecutive year doing so. When I received my paycheck (twelve days after I ceased to be an employee), I also received a Notice that I had just unilaterally and involuntarily joined a 'Deferrred Compensation' plan [styled the Part-time, Seasonal, and Temporary [employees] (PST) PLAN. Under the PST PLAN, THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THE DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION, withheld 7.5% of my pay, placed it in a 'defined benefit' fund, did NOT make any employer's matching contribution, and committed to pay me interest at the rate of 3% per annum [while a bank passbook savings account was paying 5.25%].
I said, "NO Way!" to myself and researched the matter.
It turned out that Congress had modified the Internal Revenue Code in 1990 and required all STATE employees to be covered under either Social Security or under a STATE-controlled benefit program. [My position in 1991 was that many members of the STATE-created class (part-time, seasonal, or temporary employees) were already covered under Social Security and should have had their payments to SSA matched by THE STATE]. Instead, THE STATE created the PST PLAN, administered by THE DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION [DPA] through THE SAVINGS PLUS PROGRAM and required [2 C.C.R. 599.999] all non-union, part-time, seasonal, and temporary [working less than 6 months] STATE employees to be members. My research determined that every other retirement plan that DPA administered, except the PLAN I had just involuntarily 'joined', required a STATE employee to work for a certain minimum length of time [usually 6 months to 1 year] and to elect in writing to join. After the statutory 90-day hold on my money, I sent DPA a Demand letter (not onits silly refund form) and it returned my money.

In August, 1992, I again worked for THE STATE for 1 week-a-year, DPA took my 7.5% of my pay again, and I filed a 'Request for Determination' of the validity/invalidity of the PST PLAN Document as 'underground regulations' with THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (OAL).

6 1/2 years later [December, 1998], I finally received a formal and final Determination [so far as I know, DPA never Appealed the Determination] from the OAL that the PST PLAN Document itself was invalid as improperly adopted 'underground regulations'. I believe that means that DPA had been in unlawful possession of my money from August, 1992. I further believe that under THE CIVIL CODE, that action created an 'involuntary Trust' in my favor [and that of everybody else in the class] with DPA being the involuntary Trustee. During one year between 1992 and 1998 [I do not remember which year, but I have the records], the money in THE PST PLAN fund was sent to a private management company in New Jersey and returned after one year. I believe that amounts to two counts of interstate transport of stolen property to be charged against DPA for each person in THE PST PLAN. My money [initially $38, grown now to $72, plus some interest] is still in THE PST PLAN fund.
The Sacramento Bee reported in 1998 that the-then Director of DPA resigned about 10 days after I received the OAL Determination. I do not believe the timing of his departure was coincidental.
Maybe I accomplished something good in this f*cked-up state.

The case Public Agencies Opposed to Social Security Entrapment v. Heckler (1985), [613 Fed. Supp. 558; rev. sub. nom. Bowen v. Public Agencies Opposed to Social Security Entrapment (1986), 477 U. S. 41, 91 L.Ed.2d 35], seems to lay the overall legal background of this incident.

END

[BACK to My Work][Come Visit My Home Page]

E-mail me here: