Retirement payments for city workers date back to at least 1964, city clerk says

Payments to retiring city workers appear to have been paid out since at least 1964, according to Calgary's city clerk much earlier than it had previously been assumed those bonuses were implemented.

According to the memo presented to council on Thursday, there is no record that the bonuses were ever approved by council.

Calling it a "very loose paper trail," Coun. Jeromy Farkas said the retirement bonuses needed to come to a "swift end."

"The deeper that we dig into this hole, the darker it gets. It really begs more questions than answers," he said. "In my mind, though, it's very clear. This policy, whether it was in 1964 or 1981 that staff may have approved itit needs to go."

Farkasannounced his plans Tuesday to put forward a motion that would see council scrap their own transition pay, saying the perk went "above and beyond" the current pay and benefits package received by council.

• Councillor wants to scrap transition pay for departing Calgary politicians

As currently implemented, transition payments are intended to provide a bridge for former politicians after they leave office.

Politicians are not allowed to collect employment insurance after leaving their posts, and are entitled to allocations of two weeks pay for every year served in office.

After being elected, Farkassaid he would not accept a transition payment after leaving office.

"There's been a lot of speculation as to why the city has this practice in the first place, but the deeper we dig we get fewer answers," Farkas said. "It might have been used to hire and retain staff, but administration has come back and said it's not been very useful for that."

Next steps

Mayor Naheed Nenshisaid council was near-unanimous in suggesting the practice should end.

"Ultimately, we have to be transparent about these things," he said. "If we're paying something out that doesn't even exist, it's not documented, that's not a great way of running a city."

Nenshi said that the next moves taken by the city should be prudent.

"We don't want to open ourselves up to grievances or legal action that would end up costing more than the allowances cost," he said. "So it's just a matter of what, according to the best HR advice we've got, is the right way to do that.

"I want to make sure the city manager has as many tools as possible as he continues to negotiate."

The motion from Farkas is set to be discussed at council's meeting on Dec. 16.