The thing that sort of touched off my desire to write this series on Detroit was coming across this article in the Free Press that was sitting on my parent’s coffee table. Oddly enough (or maybe not) it wasn’t the plight of the widows featured in the article that really propelled me though. It was the fact that the article was written at all. To me, the story seemed like a calculated attempt to put a compelling face on the story of the dwindling pension fund. As social workers we know, widows have historically been a group deemed “deserving” of our support.  The more I researched the story online, the more often I started noticing this pop up in the ads displayed on my pages (I know you are watching Google), a video created by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSME). The video led me to this site, Stand with Detroit also featuring stories of the folks whose pensions were under threat. The more I researched, the more evidence I found to support my theory that  the people of Detroit were organizing to stand up for themselves and their futures and the more I believed that social services organizations were playing a role in that. Immediately following the rulings from Judge Rhodes back in December ( remember way back when I started this real lengthy series?), AFSME announced its’ intentions to file an appeal of the ruling. Several unions in the Detroit area joined suit. The US Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan has devoted its own page to the City of Detroit’s case. A look at adversary proceedings indicate that two lawsuits (probably appeals but I’m not privy to looking at the papers) have been filed by retiree organizations, the Official Committee of Retirees of the City of Detroit and the Retired Detroit Police and Fire Fighters Association. Other suits have been filed regarding the loss of health care.  Its this sort of vocalizing of distress, I think, that led to this: $330M Pledged to Save Pensions and DIA Artwork from Detroit Bankruptcy. $330M donated by 9 foundations including the New York based Ford Foundation as well as local organizations like the McGregor Fund.  Call me naive, or maybe, more kindly, idealistic, but I really think that putting a face to a struggle makes all the difference. Its one thing to hear about creditors or about pension funds that are hemorrhaging money and its quite another to see the faces and hear the stories of those actually affected by Judge Rhodes’ ruling. We, social workers, can sometimes take this for granted. Its a gift our position offers, keen insight into another’s personal struggles, struggles we may not have ever or will ever experience on our own. What sets us apart from other mental health practitioners is what we do with this gift. We are called by the National Association of Social Workers’ Code of Ethics to advocate for our clients on small and large scales. We see the face of the struggle and then we help people in power to see it too. I can’t say for sure, but it would my guess that there are a lot of busy social workers in Detroit right now. Honestly, it pains me a good deal that I’m not one them. Social workers with clients who are willing and interested in supporting the cause should be put in touch with organizations filing appeals or media outlets who might be interested in their story. Social workers should be involved in the advocacy to make sure that their client’s voices are heard as negotiations and cuts continue. It might be a losing battle, but its certainly one worth joining. A ruling like Judge Rhodes’, indicating that pensions would not be protected in a Chapter 9 bankruptcy and should be treated as contractual rights, is unprecedented. That means that if other cities some day face similar problems with their pension funds (and with this economy, it’s entirely possibly), this ruling will likely be cited as case law on the matter and could play a role in any decisions made. Its not just a Detroit issue, its potentially a national one. Its not just a legal matter either, its one that reaches us, social workers and our clients. I think its one that we should be paying a great deal of attention to (obviously), because ultimately, it may be our clients impacted most when this is resolved. We are the ones who will be helping individuals to come up with contingency plans if their pensions are lost, not Mr. Orr, not Judge Rhodes or any of the negotiators,  and I certainly would not want to be sitting across from them if I didn’t do all I could to prevent the need for a contingency in the first place. Climbing down off my soapbox now……The End.

Back to regularly scheduled programming next week.

Just one last thing…. This makes me REAL happy.