Stress Pensions for L.A. Police Drop 75% in a Year

Fewer Los Angeles police officers applied for stress-related disability retirements last year than at any time in the last decade, and the number of officers who were actually awarded stress pensions was only one-fourth the number of the year before.

The decline appears to have reversed a steady rise in the number of young officers who claimed they were entitled to early retirement because job stress was causing them upset stomachs, irritable bowels, headaches, nightmares or physical injuries.

Typically, the applicants were officers in their 30s who had reached deadends in their careers, often after run-ins with their superiors. Some had been fired, subjected to disciplinary action or even indicted on criminal charges. Often, they were involved in outside jobs or businesses that demanded more and more of their time.

Such claims came under increasing scrutiny last year amid a growing suspicion that, in many instances, stress pensions had become an escape hatch for city police officers seeking early retirement.

An analysis of last year’s decline, based on statistics provided by city police and pension officials, shows:

- Twenty officers filed stress-related claims, down from 36 the previous year and fewer than in any year since 1976, when records were first kept. The record high was 104 claims filed in 1981.

- Twelve officers were actually awarded stress pensions, compared with 48 the previous year. This total is also well below the pace set during the first five years of the 1980s, when 175 stress pensions were awarded.

The Times detailed the rise in claims and pension awards in articles in early 1985. The series triggered an investigation by the Los Angeles County Grand Jury, and city officials sought ways to tighten the pension system.

Explanations for the drop vary. Some credit a recent restructuring of the Pensions Department, which processes claims, as well as the establishment of a special Police Department task force designed to ferret out the fraudulent disability applications. Others believe that the Los Angeles Board of Pension Commissioners, which awards pensions, has gotten tougher. And, in fact, Pensions Department statistics show that the commissioners approved just 43% of the applications they reviewed during 1985--down from an 80% approval rate in 1984.

The Police Protective League, which represents rank-and-file police officers, charged in April that the commission had unfairly cracked down on applicants because of “political pressure” generated by publicity and directions from Mayor Tom Bradley to pension commissioners to get tougher on disability claims.

While the commission denied the charge in a letter to the union, attorney Mary Ann Healy, who represents many disability applicants, said she too believes the commission has been “intimidated” by political pressure.

Whatever the cause, some officials are not convinced that the decline will be lasting. The longtime commission legal adviser, Assistant City Atty. Siegfried Hillmer, cautioned that “little significance should be attached” to a single year’s statistics. And Chief Administrative Officer Keith Comrie said “it’s too early to tell” whether the drop-off will be permanent.

Bradley Among Those

Bradley, meanwhile, is among those who think more needs to be done. The mayor, who early last year called for a charter amendment overhauling the pension system, wrote the pension commissioners last month expressing disappointment at what he regards as their failure to quickly enact lasting reforms.

Distressed by what he called the “alarmingly expensive escalation in stress disability pensions,” Bradley wrote, “I have yet to see any meaningful and substantive reforms put in place by the board.”

In cases examined in The Times series, most stress pension applicants had developed an aversion to police work even though they were years away from the normal 20-year service requirement.

One officer won a pension claiming to have been disabled by harassment from fellow officers because of a suspension for engaging in sex with a teen-age female Explorer Scout. Another claimed to have reached his breaking point the day his boss refused to let him bring his dog to work. Yet another won a $1,480 monthly pension, plus $51,390 in back benefits, after convincing officials that he coughed to the point of regurgitation whenever he came within the city limits because it reminded him so much of the Police Department.

Still Collect Checks

Found to be disabled from doing even light-duty police work, the officers are nevertheless free to hold other jobs and still collect their pension checks. Some of those receiving disability benefits have embarked on careers in real estate, law, private security, construction, photography, entertainment and even law enforcement.

Other major police agencies in California have also experienced a rise in stress pensions over the years, but the phenomenon has been particularly pronounced in the 7,000-member Los Angeles Police Department, which has one of the most generous pension systems in law enforcement.

Pensions awarded to officers for stress-related ailments “constitute a fiscal problem to the city (of Los Angeles) far out of proportion to any other municipal or county jurisdiction in the state of California,” the Los Angeles County Grand Jury concluded after its investigation.

Each Los Angeles police officer who wins a disability pension is guaranteed between 50% and 90% of his salary, tax free. Assuming he lives to the age of 72, he would receive an average of $823,000--and up to $2.7 million if cost-of-living adjustments are included, according to Gary Mattingly, the city Pensions Department general manager.

Especially Troubling

Questionable stress pensions are especially troubling to many city officials because they help fuel the increase in total pension costs. Comrie said actuaries hired by the city to calculate future pension costs have predicted continuing trouble ahead, not just in the area of stress-related disability claims, but for all police and fire disability pensions.

As it is, Comrie said, “The (pension) system is structured all wrong.”

Comrie has argued for several years that only a fundamental restructuring of benefits will take the profit out of the pension process, permanently discouraging officers from filing phony disability claims. He has proposed placing on the ballot a charter amendment, supported by Bradley, that would give the Pension Commission greater latitude in granting disability benefits. While the commission is required by law to give a disabled officer at least 50% of his salary, the charter amendment would allow the commission to award benefits as low as 10%, if the officer is capable of working elsewhere. Revamping the disability benefits through a charter amendment is also supported by the grand jury.

The police officers union, of course, is opposed to any reduction in benefits.

Another Year for Vote

City officials had hoped that the matter would be ready to take to the voters this year, but they now say it may drag on for at least another year.

The commission has not taken a stand on the proposed charter amendment. Historically, the commission--consisting of a representative from the police and fire unions, a high school administrator, a marketing sales representative, a psychiatrist, accounting executive and bond broker--has been divided on proposed reforms and has not pushed for change.

However, Mattingly agrees that the benefit structure “needs to be redesigned to fully protect those members who become truly disabled in the course of their employment while at the same time not offer a substantial reward for seeking a disability retirement.”

Under the present system, Mattingly said, an officer who has spent 20 years on the force would retire with significantly less money than an officer with just one day on the job could get through a tax-free disability pension.

Gates Against Amendment

Joining the police officers union in opposition to the charter amendment is Police Chief Daryl F. Gates, who has decried the pension system’s “looting” by officers filing phony disability claims, but believes that a charter amendment is the wrong solution.

“The psychologists and attorneys who specialize in the field overwhelmed the Pensions Department and the Police Department to the point that it was difficult to react to the onslaught,” he said. “However, both of us have reacted in a very responsible way which says, in effect, this is the way to deal with the problem, and not changing benefits, which has the potential for harming those who are deserving.”

Gates said the way to deal with the problem is to “get at the cheats, the thieves, and prosecute the hell out of them.”

To achieve this, the department has set up a claims validation unit to ferret out phony disability applicants through investigation and surveillance. Established initially as a one-year pilot task force, the unit was recently funded for another year by the commission.

How Successful?

“It’s been so successful,” the department’s medical liaison officer, Lt. Ed Gagnon, said, “that we get calls from people who think they’re under surveillance even when they aren’t.”

He said stress pensions have been brought under control because city officials from various departments have joined together in tackling the problem.

“There was a realization, ‘Hey, we’ve got a problem!’,” he said. “Everybody has jumped on board and decided it’s time to cooperate (to weed out false claims). And when you return a phony (stress pension applicant) back to (his job at) the same station, the impact is significant.”

Others, he suggested, are discouraged from following suit.

Gagnon was among several observers who said the commission has tightened on disability applicants by demanding more “significant proof” of their complaints.

‘Questioning Improved’

“The level and depth of questioning (by commissioners) has been greatly improved,” Mattingly said. The commission membership changed somewhat last year. In July, Bradley replaced David Bow Woo with psychologist Kenyon Chan. At the time, Bradley aide Tom Houston said Bow Woo was not reappointed because Bradley wanted to make room for someone with greater expertise in disability pensions.

However, Bow Woo maintains that he was replaced because he disagreed with Bradley on divestiture of pension fund investments in companies operating in South Africa. Under the leadership of Bow Woo, who has been replaced as chairman by David Velasquez, the commission began hiring professional hearing officers to evaluate the more complicated disability applications. The program, which has received mixed reviews, was expanded this year, with 13 cases assigned to the hearing examiners.

Fred Tredy, a Police Protective League director who represents officers seeking disability benefits, said hearing examiners have made pension proceedings more adversarial. He said, “It seems they’re almost putting on a trial.”

Grand Jury Recommendation

The grand jury, in a report released in June, did in fact recommend that the city take a more adversarial approach in evaluating disability claims.

Under the present system, the panel reported that police officers win lucrative benefits with “minimal . . . challenge” because city personnel have taken a “benevolent approach” in evaluating an officer’s claim. “There is minimal utilization of existing workers’ compensation files, medical data and investigatory information to challenge applicants,” it said.

The commission has always viewed its role as non-adversarial and has structured commission proceedings to favor pension applicants. Critics have charged that the process is lopsided because a pension applicant is allowed to bring an attorney to argue his case, while the city has no lawyer present to argue the other side.

But hearing examiner proceedings are different. Mattingly said he has recruited several aggressive lawyers from the city attorney’s office to represent the city. They did well, he said, but “indicated they didn’t want to come back. It’s too much work.” Because of the commission’s heavy caseload, Mattingly has recommended hiring private attorneys.

Check on Pensioners

Another project that Mattingly said has been hampered by lack of manpower is a program to periodically check on pensioners and determine if they are able to return to the job.

This year the board has tried to return four pensioners to work in light-duty jobs in the Police Department. One left the state. One filed a lawsuit. One returned. The fourth is on his way back.

Mattingly aide Dale Griffith has accumulated a host of tips about pensioners who are reportedly capable of returning to duty. But he said he does not have the staff to verify them.

“It’s hard enough to stop the ones going out right now, let alone try to get the old ones back,” Mattingly said.