 |
|
 |
||||
Home
A Conversation With |
Benefits and Pensions MonitorA Conversation With… Ewart 'Odie' O'Hara Multi-employer pension trusts are different. One failed contributing employer, out of many, does not destroy the trust or the pension plan it sponsors. The regulators seem not to appreciate that distinction and it shows in many ways. This is not to say that multi-employer (trusteed) benefit plans are without problems. They have their share. Otherwise, firms like ours would not be in business. We help the governing trustees do their job properly. BPM: So, how do you do that, without supplanting the authority of the trustees? EO: First of all, our people never put themselves in the position of being the decision-maker. We make sure that the trustees have all of the facts and help they need to reach appropriate decisions. We do not direct their decisions or make their decisions for them. For example, as administrators and consultants, we assist our trustee clients in the selection of the other professional organizations they employ – audit firms, lawyers, money managers, and so on. We have ways of leading the trustees through the sourcing and decision-making processes, which keep us at armslength. After all, those other professionals must serve to balance off and monitor our work, impartially. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BPM: Have any government agencies ever assessed the capabilities of trustees and, for that matter, your whole industry? EO: The federal government did assess the qualities of our industry a few years ago. Senator Michael Kirby led an investigation team that did some good things. He identified inadequacies and suggested the need for remedial action. The IF met the call. It created special education programs for both trustees and professionals, which have produced obvious improvements in all sectors. BPM: Would you say that the trusteed benefits industry, and its government regulators, have had to suffer a lot of growing pains to get where they are today? If so, why has it been such a struggle? EO: Yes, the growing pains have been intense and have lasted much too long – almost 50 years. Why, because the beginning was ambiguous. Unlike the USA, in Canada we started out with no codification; no Taft-Hartley Act; no legal guidelines. The service industry grew around an imported concept that had no Canadian foundation, and it grew like topsy until problems arose. The regulators stepped in with some of their typical overkill. It was fortunate that the IF was around to mediate and help to direct everyone’s attention toward improvement and stronger success. ■ This past August, Ewart ‘Odie’ O’Hara became the first recipient of the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans’ Canadian Lifetime Volunteer Award. Influential in the Canadian employee benefits community for several decades, he has been a speaker, moderator, and committee member for the International Foundation since 1979. The selection criteria includes length of service, professional designations, other academic achievements, overall body of volunteer work, and contributions to the Canadian benefit industry. Bernard Christophe, chair of the International Foundation Canadian Board, says “Odie played an instrumental part in establishing the International Foundation’s Canadian roots. Throughout the years, his continued involvement in the foundation has established him as a leader in the benefits community.” He is currently president of Benchmark Decisions, Ltd., an actuarial and benefit consulting firm to benefit trust funds, corporate plan sponsors, and unions. |
|
||
Home / News Alerts / Archives / Classifieds / Events / Directories / Resources / Subscribe / Login / Contact Us Copyright ©1999 - 2008 Benefits and Pensions Monitor. All rights reserved. |
||||
PDF version 
Word document 
