From the CBC:
Ontario’s highest court has closed the door on a pension increase for fired Hydro One Inc. executive Eleanor Clitheroe.
Clitheroe sued Hydro One seeking to have her pension raised to $33,644.21 a month — slightly more than the average Hydro One pensioner gets annually.
The lawsuit was originally dismissed, but in appealing the suit to the Court of Appeal Clitheroe noted she worked 16-hour days and earned bonuses for her performance and is the only income earner for a family of four.
In a brief decision released Friday, the court dismissed the appeal saying Clitheroe had made the same arguments at trial and the court agreed with the trial judge’s reasons and conclusion.
Clitheroe’s pension is capped at $25,637.08 a month due to legislation passed by the government that limits executive salaries at the utility.
Clitheroe was dismissed in July, 2002 after weeks of controversy over executive salaries at the publicly owned transmission utility.
Although I am generally against the government interfering with a person’s negotiated pension settlement – and that is what has happened here – I can’t help wondering why, rather than spend a small fortune on lawsuits, Rev. Clitheroe didn’t simply adopt a philosophical, “you win some and you lose some” attitude. It isn’t that hard to live on $25,637.08 per month.
Rev. Clitheroe is now a part-time priest in the Diocese of Niagara; a paid part-time priest. Bishop Michael Bird has written a letter explaining Rev Clitheroe’s financial hardship. Bird points out that “as we are all aware legal matters can sometimes drag on for many years” – and he should know. He appears to be under the impression that Rev. Clitheroe is currently receiving no pension at all, which is, to say the least – odd:
We also understand that the legal matters have been very costly for her and her family, and we do not begrudge her right to seek a peaceful resolution and compensation through the justice system. She has the right to do so, just like all Canadians, and we respect that.
Ellie’s legal issues date back several years, to a time before she was ordained and joined our Diocese as a priest. Naturally, she will want to see those matters concluded, and as we are all aware legal matters can sometimes drag on for many years.
Ellie worked for over twenty‐five years in the private and public sector and received pension compensation for her work. She consistently took her pension with her as she moved from being a lawyer and banker, to deputy minister and then a CEO.
These pension matters have no impact on her compensation for her part time work in the Diocese. She does not currently receive and has not received a pension from Hydro One or the government. She has indicated to me that she hopes that she will receive a pension when she is 65, and that she wishes to use it wisely, in Christian stewardship in support of her family, the community and her church.
This letter is all part of Michael Bird’s Blueprint for Poverty Reduction.
Mr.Bird seems to be not well informed of what his clergy are doing. He should refrain from public statements as most of what he says merely reinforce the general opinion a lot of people have of him.
Rev. Clitheroe may have a pension plan that only allows for payments to be made when the pensioner reaches the age of 60 or 65. If you should have the need to draw on it earlier your payments are greatly reduced.
Could be. She is 56 now and part of the lawsuit seems to be for her to have a full pension starting at 55:
But if she tithes then +Bird can top up the coffers. To be honest I am confused how the process of discernment to become ordained would ignore the massive red flag of greed being waved. My step-daughter and her family of 4 live comfortably on 10% of that pension. Of course if she lived a lifestyle that would put her in debt, sort of like Hydro One, then when the payments come due for the Porshe and big-big house she will only have enough to brown bag it. Poor woman.
Meanwhile, my current Priest, Father Robert with the Anglican Catholic Church of Canada has refused to accept a stipend from us. He has only accepted a mileage allowance and donations made to his home congregation.
Mrs. Clitheroe’s case is a clear example of the old adage that “you don’t get what you are worth, you get what you negotiate” because a brief perusal of her background indicates to anyone with at least two functioning neurons to rub together, IMHO, that she was not even REMOTELY qualified for the position she was given at Ontario Hydro.
Frankly, she seems to be have been suffering from delusions of adequacy! Perhaps that is why she devloped the kind of massive ego that would actually lead her to mistakenly believe she was actually worth the kind of money and perquisites she was being paid. Let us hope the quashing of her appeal has led her to some degree of introspection and epiphany as to her place, financial worth and relevance in this world.
Anyone can (and hopefully SHE WILL) read more about her case – and in particular the kind of public response (nothing that could be classified as overly sympathetic) it has provoked in reader commentary here:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/06/13/clitheroe-pension.html
and here:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/06/18/toronto-clitheroe-pension-rejected.html
– and I sincerely hope anyone reading my comments WILL go to those links to read more. It is nothing if not a cautionary tale of the abuse of power and the public purse that can easily occur in our non-participatory style of “democracy” if ordinary citizens do not maintain a constant scrutiny and close vigilance of what elected officials get up to when they think no one is watching them reward their friends. It also constitutes yet another example (as if more were needed) of why, IMHO, Mike Harris quite properly belongs in prison.