Hearings to examine secure retirement, focusing on the success of the Railroad Retirement Board.

The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions will please come to order. I start off today highlighting this is a bipartisan hearing. The witnesses were selected both by Cassidy and Sanders, and I thank Senator Sanders for his engagement and willingness to just address in such a process such an important issue, retirement. Like almost every American wants to retire for as many reasons as there are Americans. We want to retire with security. So therefore, we agree to have money taken out of our paycheck and put aside one day so that we can retire. Begs the question, if we're paying for it, why can some not afford it? As chair of this committee, I'm committed to making sure that retirement is not some far-off dream but a reality for everyone in my state of Louisiana and in the United States of America. Senator Tim Kaine and I have several bills in the works, but there is more to do. As we look to strengthen the American retirement system, let's look at what has worked. If we don't have to reinvent the wheel, don't reinvent it, look to the success. The Railroad Retirement Board works. It is solvent. It is successfully providing a wide range of benefits to rail workers and families, including retirement, survivor, disability, unemployment, sickness, and vested dual benefits. But important to note, this was not always the case. In 2001, the Railroad Retirement Board, the RRB, had over $34 billion in unfunded liabilities by private sector standards. There were too few workers supporting a lot of retirees. Now, that's a problem we're seeing in Social Security and other systems now. What can we learn to benefit? So in 2001, Congress formed a trust for the RRB, which resembled a private sector pension plan. And they subjected this trust to robust fiduciary standards similar to what is expected in the private sector. Congress made sure the money was invested with the best interest of beneficiaries in mind. And it took the power of the American economy and it brought it to the service of hardworking Americans who wouldn't invest on the stock market on their own, but through this process could enjoy the fruits of what our economy spins off. Now, this reform had bipartisan support. We look back upon that in kind of an envy. Every Democrat in the Senate voted for it, and many of my colleagues who voted for it in 2001 are still in Congress today. They were either in the House or the Senate then, but they still are. Let me give some examples: Susan Collins, Mike Crapo, Dick Durbin, Chuck Grassley, Lisa Murkowski, Patty Murray, who's on our committee, Jack Reed, Chuck Schumer, Mark Warner, and Ron Wyden. By the way, the few who opposed were Republicans. Democrats unanimously, Republicans substantially. But since this is an agency that's been supported by Congress, employers, unions, and workers, and that is what we should be striving for in this committee's work: bipartisan, multi-stakeholder agreement around solutions delivering results for workers and families. As of September 2024, the RRB trust held $28.6 billion in assets compared with $27.6 billion in liabilities. And these returns enabled Congress to lower the payroll tax on employers and to provide a lower retirement age to workers than Social Security without harming the overall solvency of the program. By the way, the RRB trust charges fees lower than most private sector funds, which means more of those dollars fund the benefits. So modeled after a pension investment fund, which is how every major corporation successfully plans for their employees' retirements, the RRB's trust fund is predicted to continue running smoothly and solvently for another 75 years, which is the limit of our projections. It is the gold standard for sustainability, investing in the power of the U.S. economy, producing returns for the families relying on that income. Now, we spend a lot of time in Washington talking about what doesn't work. It becomes about problems and barriers and, my gosh, can't we work it out? It turns out that when we focus on things that do work, we can find solutions to these problems and perhaps collaboration where previously we thought it not possible. So let's learn from the RRB. Let's come up with other solutions based upon this that work for the employer, the union, the ununionized, and the worker. Thank you to our witnesses for being here. We look forward to hearing firsthand accounts of the RRB's positive impact. And with that, I recognize Senator Sanders.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We thank our panelists for being with us. Thanks for holding this important hearing. And I think you and I will agree that being a railroader is a tough job. And I want to thank the many, many thousands of people who get up in the morning 365 days a year, maintain our trains, and make sure that the goods and the products that they deliver get to the places they're supposed to be on time. It's a tough job, and we very much appreciate how they keep our economy going. Mr. Chairman, last year I was pleased when I was chairman of the committee to work in a bipartisan way. Former Senator Mike Braun, Republican, worked with me on it to help lead the effort to ensure that our nation's rail workers receive paid sick leave. And that was quite a struggle, and I think we had some success. And I will soon be introducing legislation to make certain that every worker in America has at least seven paid sick days, not a radical idea. For far too long, rail workers have been overworked and underappreciated. But Mr. Chairman, there is one very good thing that has been accomplished. In the 1930s, way back when, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt made a commitment to our nation's rail workers that after a lifetime of work, they would receive a secure income in retirement. FDR also made sure that railroad workers would receive a decent disability and unemployment benefits. And those promises have been kept for over 90 years. Last year, 475,000 railroad retirees and their families received retirement benefits, 8,600 received unemployment benefits, and nearly 19,000 rail workers received disability benefits. The average pension for a retired rail worker is $3,575 a month. Rail workers who have been on the job for 30 years and retire at the age of 60 receive more than $4,500 a month. That is the good news. And that is the type of defined benefit retirement system that I believe should be expanded to every worker in America. There was once a time when if you worked for a large company, you received strong defined benefit retirement, you had a strong defined benefit retirement plan. In many cases, that is no longer the situation, and I would like to bring that back. So many people in our country, Mr. Chairman, retire and they have virtually nothing in the bank. And in the richest country on earth, we should be doing better than that. So the good news is that we have accomplished something. The bad news is, Mr. Chairman, that the Railroad Retirement Board's budget has been flat for several years. As a result of this insufficient funding, it takes an average of 470 days for the Railroad Retirement Board to determine if a worker is eligible to receive disability benefits. That's a bit absurd. Rail workers are forced to wait up to two and a half hours on the phone to receive the assistance they need from the RRB. Many field offices in rail communities have been forced to shut down or substantially reduce their services. And even when it is determined that a worker is eligible to receive disability benefits, it can take 18 months or longer for them to receive those benefits. And in my view, that is unacceptable. And that is why I strongly support the request of the rail unions and management to provide $170 million in funding for the Railroad Retirement Board. This is not an unreasonable request. It would roughly match inflation since 2019. It is urgently needed to improve customer service for rail workers and their families and to make sure that they receive the benefits they have earned and deserve. And Mr. Chairman, since the agency's administrative costs are funded entirely through payroll taxes paid by the rail industry, this budget increase would not cost taxpayers one cent. It would not increase the deficit, and it would not need to be offset. I look forward to working with you and the members of this committee to make that a reality. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Senator Sanders. We're joined today by Erhard Chorle, Chairman of the Railroad Retirement Board. Mr. Chorle has served in his current role since 2019, overseeing the operations of the RRB and the administration of benefits to rail workers. Before his appointment, he served in numerous roles in the Illinois state government, including as a chair of the State Board of Investments. He is a graduate of DePaul University and received his JD from the John Marshall Law School. Thank you, sir, for being here. Please proceed, Mr. Chorle.

Good morning, Chairman Cassidy, Ranking Member Sanders, and members of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today about the U.S. Railroad Retirement Board, the RRB, and the National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust. The trust's funding mechanism has been essential to securing retirement benefits of our nation's hardworking railroad workers. I'm Erhard Chorle, the public member and chair of the RRB. With me today are labor member John Bragg and management member Thomas Jane. We three were all appointed by President Trump with the advice and consent of the Senate in early 2019. Also with me is my chief of staff, Kimberly Cameron. The board members and our staffs will make ourselves available at the conclusion of this hearing for any additional questions or comments. The RRB was formed in early 1930s to provide stable and reliable retirement benefits to rail employees and a stable, reliable, skilled workforce to one of the nation's most critical and strategic industries. The RRB has been very successful in helping to achieve these goals. Since its inception, the RRB's responsibilities have expanded to include unemployment, sickness, disability benefits, plus Medicare administration for eligible railroad beneficiaries. Last year, the RRB paid more than $14.6 billion in benefits to approximately 500,000 beneficiaries and helped serve an additional 200,000 active rail employees. Benefits and costs are not funded by general tax dollars, although our administrative costs are subject to congressional appropriation. Instead, RRB administrative costs and the railroad benefits are funded through payroll taxes and investment income from the ENRIT. Both payroll taxes and their corresponding benefits are structured in two tiers. Tier one taxes and benefits are almost identical to Social Security. For two tier, employees pay an additional 4.9 percent in payroll tax and employers an additional 13.1 percent. The employee taxes are capped at their current rate, but the employer rate can rise up to 22.1 percent should our actuaries determine it was necessary. It's worth noting that even the post-COVID declines in the market did not require raising the employer tax rate, nor would even a significant increase in administrative costs.

[Crosstalk.]

ENRIT was formed in 2001 as a private trust under the laws of the District of Columbia and is governed by three trustees appointed by labor, three by rail management, and an independent trustee appointed by the other six trustees. ENRIT was initially funded with roughly $21 billion of accumulated payroll tax dollars, and these funds had been held and those funds had been held in a Treasury account and invested in U.S. government instruments. ENRIT has subsequently invested in a portfolio of diversified asset classes similarly to other large pension investment funds. A portion of the statutory language governing ENRIT sets forth that ENRIT invest, and I quote, 'with the care, skill, prudence, and diligence that a prudent person acting in a like capacity would use in the conduct of an enterprise of like character and with like aims.' ENRIT has achieved an average return on investment of more than 7 percent per year since inception, and this last year achieved a rate of more than 10 percent. ENRIT investment income supplements employer and employee taxes and contributed about $35 billion to the RRB funding, representing approximately 10 percent of the benefits paid each year. Yet the current ENRIT assets under management amount to approximately $29 billion. As a measure of RRB and ENRIT efficiency, RRB's operating costs are about 1 percent of the amount of benefits that we pay, and ENRIT expenses for the last 10 years have ranged from 0.31 percent to last year's 0.23 percent of assets under management. In recent years, the RRB has made significant improvements in program integrity, customer service, and technology modernization, all with declining staffing levels, increasing costs, and outdated technology. We will continue to work toward better serving our constituents and yours, but please be assured that the retirement system stands as a financially sound and sustainable retirement system, making it rare, if not unique, among public pension funds. Thank you again. It's been an honor and a privilege, and I'll do my best now to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.

I defer to Senator Sanders to introduce the Tennessee volunteer fan, Mr. Joines.

In addition, Mr. Jeff Joines is a railroader, and we thank you for your service, Mr. Joines. And is the director of government affairs for the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Division of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. So long title you got there. Before becoming a railroader, Jeff served in the U.S. Army National Guard for 21 years, where he was deployed to Iraq twice. Mr. Joines, thanks very much for your service and for being here today.

Chairman Cassidy, Ranking Member Sanders, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify here today on the importance of the railroad retirement and the Railroad Retirement Board. My name is Jeff Joines, I'm the legislative director for the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Division of the Teamsters. And along with the BLET, we make up half of all rail labor in this country. Our members are the members that swing the hammer. We drive the spikes. We lay the rails and inspect the track. Every day, our members are out there keeping the American rail system safe. As you can tell by the way I talk, I'm not from around the Beltway. I'm a proud son of Wilson County, Tennessee, and I live there on our farm with my wife, Debbie. As the Senator said, I've worn many hats in my career: a farmer, railroad worker, a unionist, and 21-year military veteran. But all I'll ever be is a railroader to my core. You know, most railroaders don't show up in suit and ties, but that's who I am and I'm proud of it. I started swinging a hammer for CSX many years ago, and now my railroad career is about over. In a few months, I will join a long line of railroad workers that have benefited from the railroad retirement. Railroad jobs are some of the hardest but best jobs out there for the working class. It has lifted many families out of poverty, and today they still stay with the railroads 30, 40, and 50 years. A lot of that is because the railroad retirement and the benefits they get through the RRB. Railroad workers do not get Social Security retirement or disability benefits or state unemployment. Instead, we receive these benefits through the Railroad Retirement Board. In fact, the railroad workers were the first private sector workers in the history of this great country to receive a defined benefit of retirement under the RRB. The railroad retirement even outdates Social Security. And the reason the railroad retirement was established is for older railroaders and their families could retire with dignity and have a secure future. While rail labor and the class one railroads don't agree on a lot these days, one thing we do agree on is a strong and functioning RRB. That's because of the importance to the workers and management alike. The railroad retirement is the best retirement out there, full stop. While the Railroad Retirement Board is at best at what they do, there are ways Congress can help the Railroad Retirement Board to serve railroaders even better. It's the payroll taxes off the railroad and the railroad workers that fund the Railroad Retirement Board, including the administrative costs through the RRB. Not one penny of taxpayer dollars goes towards any of the benefits or the administrative costs. Yet the RRB can't spend as much money as they need administering our benefits to do so. The RRB's have at their lowest staffing levels in 90 years, which is causing issues with 16-month backlogs for railroaders to get disability applications processed, long wait times, and only one employee in some field offices. But together, we can make small tweaks and make a stronger RRB even stronger. We've had some great successes in the recent years. I want to thank all the Senators that supported the REFA Act, which ended the sequestration of railroad workers' unemployment and sick benefits. Before that, we were the only workers in the country that was subject to the budget sequestration, so we thank you for that. And just recently, with the help of Chairman Cassidy, Ranking Member Sanders, Senator Hawley, Congress approved extra million dollars to help for the LOA to administer those benefits. And so we appreciate that. The railroad retirement has been around for 92 years, supported generations of railroaders over the years. Let's keep the railroad retirement going for the next 90 years and support railroad retirement system and the Railroad Retirement Board. And Mr. Chairman, if I could, I would like to say a special thank you to Michael Chorle. I've been working with Michael for a long time, and I know you're going to use a lose a value team member, but Michael, I would just tell you from this railroader, every railroader in this room, and every railroader across the country, we owe you a great deal of gratitude and we thank you.

[Applause.]

And I've always wanted to say this, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

You were on a roll, I was going to give you extra time. I thought you were going to say something nice about me and Sanders. [Laughter.] Okay, I'll start with questions. Chairman Chorle, again, you're a rare witness. You're talking about how well your agency is doing. Now, 25 years ago, Congress did a novel job. They allowed government funds, no, funds kind of the responsibility of the government to be invested in the broader economy, not just in Treasuries with a poor rate of return, but in the broader economy. Now, you hear criticism of that concept. It's privatizing a fund. It is President Obama used to talk about taking your money to Vegas, that there's a risk associated with it. Y'all started your fund not long before the great financial crisis. But it's done extremely well. So for those critics who would back then, if you could go back and address them and tell them why they were wrong, give it to me in 45 seconds, please.

It's hard to argue with success. Had the the the trust has sent us $35 billion over since its inception. Had it sent that same $35 billion, had it retained its investment in the 3.5 percent yielding government instruments that they were in, it would have run out of money in 2021. The the the funds at that point invested in, again, in fixed income at 3.5 percent. Currently, the average rate of return is annualized rate of return is 7.9 percent.

In your current account.

Correct. So 7.9 percent is is is what it's annualized. Last year, it was 10 percent, I think I mentioned. It's been higher, it's been lower. But when you invest over time, it is actually again, you can't argue with the results.

So going through the great financial crisis and the post-COVID, nonetheless, you've averaged 7.9 percent return.

And by the way, our projections for the sustainability of the fund are based on a on an assumption of only 7 percent. And it's actually it actually attained an annualized average of 7.9 percent.

I've polled this regarding another proposal I have, and the American people are a little concerned that Congress will kind of or the executive branch will use the money for its own purposes. Believe it or not, they don't trust Congress. They trust Cassidy and Sanders, but nobody else. So but you've got guardrails that make sure that you spoke of the fiduciary responsibility, please speak to that again.

So one of the keys to the success of this and its independence is is governance. If if if you the governance of the ENRIT rests in the hands of the stakeholders. You have the two principal stakeholders, the people that are paying paying the money that supports it, they are governing the they're governing the trust, not us, not the government. And they leave the investment process to the investment professionals. Additionally, you've got the law of trust, you've got their fiduciary responsibility, they report to Congress on an annual basis, they're audited by, I think, this last year.

And let me ask you another critical question. And I'm guessing, but please tell me, what is your what was the ratio of worker to retiree when you started? What was it in 2001 when this system was put in place, and what is it now?

Those are numbers to be precise that I'd have to supply to you for the record.

Can you give me ballpark? We're at the no. That's okay. But the very fact that you've got more retirees relative to workers and you're about to add one more, tells me that that's an issue that you've addressed. Mr. Joines, again, you're a champion for this. And you recently, by the way, congratulations, effectively advocated for the passage of the bipartisan REFA Act, restoring full unemployment benefits to rail workers. So in your experience, in your experience, the fact that it's fully funded, it's able to take on additional responsibilities, and you still are fully funded for the life of our score, which is 75 years, what difference has this made to those who depend upon this program?

Well, Mr. Chairman, you know, most railroaders out there don't know how the sausage is made with the RRB. But but what I can tell you is they have the confidence is when they get sick and they need some assistance, there's somebody there on the other end of the line that can help them. Or or or when a retiree dies and that widow needs some assistance, they know somebody's there at the RRB. We have all the confidence in the world in our three board members to do the right thing when it comes to protecting the trust. And so you know, it's there's just a gamut of of of of of of ways that the railroad workers use the RRB, you know, whether it's through sickness, short-term sickness benefits, or whether it's unemployment or, you know, getting ready to retire or annuity or just all kinds of stuff that we use. But but but we have the confidence it's going to be there when we need it.

Thank you. Senator Sanders.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, over 20 percent of seniors in this country, believe it or not, are trying to survive on $15,000 a year or less. Half of seniors in America are trying to survive on $30,000 a year or less. I'm not quite sure how they do that. Nearly half of older workers in America today have no retirement security. Mr. Joines, what I want to ask you is a very general question. Railroad workers have been successful over the years in fighting for decent pensions. Many workers in America have not. In fact, we have had workers here from the automobile industry who reminded us that their grandparents had won good benefits, good retirement benefits, pensions that they do not have today. In many ways, we have gone backwards in that area. Talk for a moment about what it means for a railroad worker to know that when he or she retires, there's going to be a decent pension for that family.

...conception that all three board members were appointed at the same time. We had a staff of 840 persons when we took office. Last week, we were down to 660. Our IT staff alone was 130 people when we took office. We're down to 65. We have eight COBOL developers on board right now, six of whom could retire with full retirement benefits tomorrow. And so that's probably our most critical initial need. We have a backlog right now. We believe we do a pretty good job of issuing benefits, initial benefits, in an accurate and timely manner. Yet we have a backlog of 100,000 cases where someone is receiving benefits, but through some change in life events, a change in employment status or whatever, we may be paying them too much, we may be paying them too little. And yet we don't have the staff to do the follow-up. And part of that's technology, but part of that's just personnel. So we think it's probably overall pretty much a wash. Of the overpayments and the underpayments, which to the system is neutral possibly, but if you're the person that's been overpaid $30,000...

Yes.

...and now we come to you five years later, it's pretty unpleasant.

Yes.

And so we don't want to be overpaid, obviously we don't want to be over or underpaying anyone. The field offices, we have not since we've taken office, we haven't had to outright close, permanently close any of the offices. But we do have to close them for times of day. We have a single-person office, obviously people are entitled to vacation, they get sick. So a single-person office isn't providing the kind of service that we would like to provide. And so we have to look at imminently, we have to look at what do we do with these offices. So those are some of the lowlights of where we're at today. And the irony is the money's there. The railroaders and their employers have paid it in. The beauty of this system is it's self-sustaining. We're not asking the taxpayers to increase the federal deficit, if you will.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Senator Marshall.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the great advantages that Kansas agriculture still has is our ability to get our goods to market more efficiently, less expensive than other countries, and hopefully that leads to a lower price for consumers. You know, one of the reasons the Kansas City rail depot is the second largest in the country is because it's full of some of those goods. On a recent trip to Mexico, I learned once again why rail is so important and another reason that our trade with Mexico has grown now to a trillion dollar a year business. But I'm concerned. I'm concerned that do we have the infrastructure for the continued expansion of those markets and our interaction with Mexico's rail system as well. I feel like we've maxed out that system. And we're feeling that back home. We're feeling it back home at our small co-ops and our small elevators where we don't feel like we're being treated like customers. We feel like we're being treated like the last person picked on a team at recess back in grade school. So the stress, the customer service is probably my biggest concern right now with the rail system. And I realize that's the short line we're dealing with, but the short liners blame it on the big boys, right? That they show up with a train car and say on a Sunday at 3:00 AM and tell us we've got whatever it is, eight hours to fill it. So we're feeling that stress right now. I'll bring my first question to Mr. Joines. Again, I emphasize that rail service reliability is going down year to year in these small towns, leading to Kansas farmers deal with uncertainty and jumbled operations. From a worker's perspective, are you hearing anything from your members about rail operations on the ground and why service in the industry is deteriorating?

It's called PSR, Senator. That's why we're in the shape that we're in right now. Over the last few years...

What's PSR? I'm sorry.

Precision Scheduled Railroading. It's what the railroads call it. But what it means to the workers is over the past six years, they've reduced the numbers by 30 percent. So you've got track workers like myself doing more. You've got engineers, longer trains. You've got all the railroad workers are having to do more. You've got 70 percent of the workforce now trying to do 100 percent of the work that was done then. And so until we can have a robust, I used to have six guys on my gang when I was out there. Now there's two guys out there on that gang. And so the reliability issues are...

When you say your gang, what does your gang do? Be more, I'm really curious.

I worked on a section gang and so we'd go out and change ties, or we would lay some rail somewhere or just do repairs on the track. And so when you extend your territory by a third or a half nearly, it just, you don't get that scheduled maintenance like you're supposed to. And in the end, whether it's coming from a grain elevator or if it's coming from a factory or wherever it's coming from, it all suffers from PSR.

Okay. I'll follow up, kind of a similar question. My farmers and ranchers back home are very concerned about the Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern's plans to merge. And certainly we realize that it's been rejected by the STB for now. How do you think this will impact your membership? Sometimes these big mergers don't turn out well for the American worker.

Well, we could go back for the past three or four mergers. So the UP-SP merger, we lost 2,500, 3,000 members. The CSX-Norfolk Southern-Conrail merger, we lost 2,500 to 3,000. The last big one that happened was the CP-KCS. They said they were going to hire 600 and the exact opposite has happened. And so this merger, those are small potatoes compared to what this merger is. Never been a merger like this before. So in the context of the RRB, all those members that we lose, like you were saying, Mr. Chairman, won't be paying into the system.

How do you think it'll impact customer service? Especially that end of that little elevator out in Goodland, Kansas.

Well, when you're the only game in town, you can make the rules.

Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.

Senator Kaine.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to our witnesses. I really appreciate this hearing. You know, this is the HELP Committee, Health, Education, Labor, Pension. But if you look at the hearings we have in a two-year period, you would think it's Health, Education, Labor, Pension. We don't have many hearings about retirement issues here. And I really applaud the chair who has tried to kind of change that so we're having more hearings about retirement security issues compared to the first many years I've been on the committee, and I appreciate it. I also want to associate myself with comments that Senator Cassidy made about the structure of the RRB and the fact that you have been prudent investors like other pension plans have been in the market and have generated a return through those investments that have really helped meet the obligations that you have to railroad retirees. And the chair and I, and I give the chair more credit than me, have advocated that one of the potential solutions to Social Security solvency issues that we're seeing is to take the existing system and leave it as is with the employer and the employee contribution, but to additionally create a fund that could invest as the RRB does and the earnings of that fund would come in to buttress the solvency of Social Security. And this is an idea that Senator Cassidy and I and Senator Hickenlooper and others have talked about. And I hope that we will explore that, and the RRB's history tells us that we would be wise to explore that. I wanted to ask this question and really just underline it about ways you could be even more effective. Your testimony was very positive about what you've done, but the fact that you were limited in using assets for administration creates some customer service problems. And we were speaking, Chairman, the other day in my office about the delay, for example, in resolving disability claims filed by railroad workers. Talk to me about the sort of average length that it takes to resolve a disability claim.

Currently, it takes 470 days for somebody to get a determination on their disability. It's inexcusable.

And that 470-day time period, which is outrageous for somebody who is experiencing a disability, that's driven by an inadequate workforce, insufficient workforce, and antiquated technology systems, isn't that correct?

Currently, the files that our folks have to work with come in as images. They're not even searchable documents. A disability file, by the time it contains all of the medical reports that our system requires to make a good quality decision, can be a stack of papers like this. Our folks literally have to go through them, write handwritten notes, then take those handwritten notes, put them into the system, run them through whatever formula...

And the number of folks doing it has shrunk, right? Your workforce has shrunk. Tell us about that.

The workforce there has diminished by, I believe, around 30 percent. And to be a qualified examiner in the disability world requires somewhere between six months and two years of training in order to really be qualified to do these. These are complicated decisions.

So if you could fix some of the technological issues and if you could hire the workforce, you could shrink that 475 days down to something much more reasonable, correct?

Absolutely. I mean, still there's safeguards. I mean, we still have to make sure that we get all the medical exams that we need to, but again, it's one of those things where both the employers and labor are in complete agreement.

And you could do that if Congress allowed you to use your own money to hire more people and put better technology, correct?

The beauty of, yes, the beauty of the system is that we could do all that without even having to raise the tax rate to the employers, which is why the employers agree.

And because your administrative expenses are so very, very low, if we allowed you to do that, you could do it in a way that would serve people a lot better and a lot faster without jeopardizing the solvency of the fund, without jeopardizing the ability of the RRB to pay retirement or disability benefits. Is that not also correct?

If I could put it better, I would. Yes.

So just to my colleagues who are here, I hope this is something that we might explore. This is not about trying to find money in the general fund or find other tax dollars to help these guys serve railroaders better. This is an artificial cap that Congress has imposed with this self-funded program that limits them from hiring, limits them from technological upgrades that they could make without jeopardizing the solvency of the program. And if they did, they would just end up serving railroaders a whole lot better. So Senator Sanders alluded to this in his opening comments, but I wanted to just dig into this one issue, the disability determinations. We could help you fix that without jeopardizing the program, without increasing anybody's taxes. We could help you fix that and we should help you fix that. So Mr. Chair, I hope that's something that we might be able to find some common ground on on the committee. These guys are doing a good job, they could do a lot better if we would take some artificial restraints off the way they serve their valued retirees.

And for the information of Senator Kaine and the dais, we are working on that. It would give them the same status as the PBGC and the FDIC, and that is one of the objectives we're attempting to achieve.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Kaine asked the most important question. I mean, I think he's exactly right. I mean, this is, we're not asking taxpayers to foot the bill for more money, it's letting you do what you need to do to take care of your people. We have 20,567 Hoosiers who rely on their Railroad Retirement Board benefits today, and that includes retired and active railway workers who count on the RRB for their pensions and their healthcare, especially in Northwest Indiana, what we call the region outside of Chicago. The RRB is critical and we need it to function effectively. So I appreciate your testimony and Senator Kaine, the more I learn about this, the crazier it seems to me that we tie your hands to stop you from doing what you need to do. I mean, Senator Kaine already talked about the 473-day waiting period. I guess I wonder though, Mr. Chorle, what was Congress's, because I'm new around here, what was Congress's explanation to tie your hands to begin with? I mean, as foolish as it was.

When we speak to members and staffs, and by the way, the three of us together or separately have made over 100 visits to members and staffs since we took office to talk about this. I can't explain exactly what the thinking is on the part of parts of the Congress. I can't explain it, frankly.

Yeah, you can't explain it because it doesn't make sense. But does it make sense to anybody? Is there anybody out there that this makes sense to?

Not that I understand, no. I think in fairness, I think the concern is when we talk to certain members about spending quote "our own money," what they hear is that we are not in favor of congressional oversight in some manner. And that is not the case at all. We are absolutely, I mean, we make every effort to be as transparent as we possibly can. And if our detractors, House Republican, House Dem, Senate minority, majority, whoever it is, whatever it is that they're concerned about, if they were to express their concerns to us, clearly we would be more than happy to address them.

So the chairman already said we're going to fix this, but what are your very specific recommendations to us on how to do that?

Beginning with the way that our budget is scored. I mean, there's a hurdle right there to overcome. In a perfect world, yes, we would be appropriated, we would have access to these funds through the similar mechanisms that these other trust fund agencies are funded.

It's as simple as that? Yes. Easy enough, Mr. Chairman. I mean, it sounds like the chairman's serious about helping us do that and that's good for over 20,000 Hoosiers who are relying on it. Mr. Joines, some railroad workers are waiting 18 months to get their disability claims taken care of. How is that affecting their health and well-being and their families? What's the real-world effect on the families?

Well, Senator, as you explained, it can take up to 18 months to get a disability adjudicated, right, until you start receiving your money. The bad thing for us is our short-term sickness benefits run out at nine months. And so when that happens, you're sitting at home with a family counting on you to bring in some income and stability, and you can't because you can't work, you're waiting on your disability to be approved, but all the safety nets that are built in there have run out. And you know, the target at the RRB is 100 days. 100 days from the time you put in an application for disability to the time it's adjudicated and you start drawing your money. 100 days, that's the target.

Can you talk for just a quick minute about staffing shortages at field offices and how that affects you, affects your people?

It's just like the chairman said, you know, we just don't have the people to be able to do that. You know, we're at the RRB, they don't, you know, we've been, rail labor has been to Congress year after year after year after year to let us spend our own money on IT upgrades, right? Because I mean, I don't know what the hell COBOL is, but I mean, it must be bad because that's what they're using, you know. And so, you know, we need, I mean, it's things like that that will help the process, you know, more people. We're just, they're just bare bones and they're doing the very best they can, but it's our members that are suffering because when we need the RRB, most of the time we're in dire need. Thank you. My time has expired, I yield back.

Senator Alsobrooks.

All right, I want to thank Chair Cassidy and Ranking Member Sanders for hosting this committee today and certainly want to thank you so much to our witnesses for being present today and for the work that you do every day to ensure that people and businesses across our country can count on the railroad service for their transportation needs. I also want to commend the RRB for the work that you've done to improve responsiveness and service delivery to your members. In Maryland, we have 4,300 active rail workers and 7,400 rail retirement beneficiaries. And I know that these issues matter so much to each of them. So I have a first question for Chair Chorle. I can relate in so many ways to the need to get the service delivery and to make sure that your members are well-staffed, as in fact when I served as county executive, one of my new agency directors approached me early in my term and said, "You know, I enjoy working in your administration..." "...but as I have had an opportunity to look around this agency, it's a little bit like walking into 1985," is what he told me, and this was in 2018 in terms of technology and paper filing. So these technology and staffing challenges definitely hamper our ability to serve our constituents in a timely and meaningful way. So I want to commend the RRB for reducing average call wait times from 30 minutes to seven. Technology upgrades have helped improve services for the men and women who have dedicated their lives to our rail system, and you've made this progress as the RRB's budget has remained flat. And you continue to face the challenges of a 21 percent reduction in field office staff and a 58 percent increase in the number of benefit applications received. So I understand that your $170 million budget request will help increase staff and improve technology in the short term. But what will you need in the long term to ensure the high-quality level of service that your members deserve and that I know you are committed to providing?

So short term and long term. Short term, we don't even have the money to pay overtime. I mean, so during our peak season, let's say, we've made significant progress in, let's say, the phone service, which you mentioned and thank you for acknowledging that. But still, as Mr. Joines pointed out, you can still wait for as long as two hours to get a phone answered during our peak season, which is tax season and people have lots of questions around that time, obviously. We don't have the money to pay overtime. So our call system, maybe this is a little too much detail, but our call system is a national system where we have people on the East Coast and the West Coast. We could pay overtime to the people on the East Coast to answer questions from people on the West Coast, but we don't have the money to pay overtime. I mean, we've been in a self-imposed hiring freeze since at least 2023. It's not a recent thing that we've done. So long term, I think the single biggest investment that would pay long-term benefits is the technology development. And that's, I think, the answer to your question. I mean, again, long term, we could hire 20 people in disability tomorrow if we had the money for it. It would still take six months to two years for them to really get fully up to speed on what they need to know to do the job. So there's some immediate needs and then again, the longer term, I think the technology investment is probably the single best long-term investment that we can make. Thank you.

And Mr. Joines, I want to thank you as well for your service to our country and for all the ways that you've continued to serve throughout your life. In your testimony, you mentioned how Congress has not raised the RRB's ability to spend their resources in 15 years and the impacts that that has had on RRB's attempt to serve rail workers, and specifically in terms of face-to-face service. I know you answered some part of this question a moment ago, but I'd love for you to share your thoughts on how RRB's $170 million budget request will help address the reduction in field office staff and what that would mean for railroaders for both a service perspective and their morale. I imagine morale is low to know that they're able to walk into a field office and have face-to-face interactions as they make critical decisions about their long-term financial future. Can you just comment on that?

Thank you, Senator. You know, we try to talk about these things about how they impact our members and not just our members, but all railroaders. And so one of the results of the shortfall like you're talking about is, you know, they used to have retirement seminars around the country. They can't do that now. They don't have the money to put on these seminars. And so it's like that field office in Nashville that's so vital for me and other folks like me. The field offices in New Orleans, the field offices in Kansas City, the field offices in Richmond. Those are the lifelines for the workers because I have to go in and as the chairman was talking about the stack of papers that they actually have to go through when we get ready to retire, it's a stack of papers as well. And so they walk us through. And as I said earlier, it's a scary process getting ready to retire or seek disability because you can't work anymore. And so that one-on-one interaction with the people in the field offices is very important to our members to be able to get the right information because whatever we turn in from them is going to affect us for the rest of our lives. So you can understand how important it is to have the opportunities to have that one-on-one connection with the field offices. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Hawley.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the witnesses for being here. How do I pronounce your last name? Chorle. Chorle. Okay, Mr. Chorle. Thank you for being here. Let me just start with you on the subject of the Railroad Retirement Board. I actually get quite a few inquiries from constituents about the Railroad Retirement Board. And I have to say very few of them are positive. And I just want to walk through a few of them with you and maybe you can tell me what the issues are and if you need additional resources. I want to get some of this disentangled. Let's start here with a 77-year-old woman from Independence, Missouri. This is pretty typical. I'm going to put her comments up here behind me. This is pretty typical of the concerns that I hear. She says, I'm going to quote her now, "I've been waiting patiently for my increase on my ex-husband's railroad retirement pay. The website said it would be processed by July. When I called this morning, the lady told me that it could be as late as December. I'm 77 years old, I was diagnosed with cancer last year. I need that money." She goes on to say when I voiced my concern to an RRB employee, she was told, "Well, if you don't live to see it, your kids will get it." That's not good. "If you don't live to see it, your kids will get it." That's very bad. Why is this happening? The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen found that the average wait time for adjudication of RRB occupational disability claims is currently 450 days. 450. Average telephone time on hold, four hours. Why is that?

I think there's three questions in that. The comment that our employee, I'm sorry, I wasn't speaking into it. Three parts to your question. That comment that our employee made is inexcusable. And we'd love to hear who it was that said that.

So would I.

And we would follow up on it. As to the other two, it is a question of resources. We just do not have the people with our current technology in place that can make determinations any faster than they are.

Well, let me just on that point, let me just ask you this. In Missouri, you have two field offices, one in Kansas City, one in St. Louis. Both of those offices are open Mondays through Fridays from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM only. In the St. Louis field office, their website still advertises, and I quote, "Due to high COVID-19 community levels, all visitors are required to wear masks during their visit." End quote. Why's that?

I can't give you an answer to that. It shouldn't be.

No, I mean, it shouldn't be. Why are the offices only open until 3:00? I mean, you've got people who are waiting 400-some days to get an initial response. They're on the phone for hours. They're told they may as well just go die. If they go to an office, they're closed and they've got to wear a mask. It's not good.

No.

Here's another Missouri railway worker. He says... "I became disabled in 2022. I filed for disability 16 months ago. When I call RRB for updates, it's the same answers. We are understaffed and it's a minimum of 480 days to process any applications." He goes on, "I'm not looking for a handout. I worked my tail off to be able to utilize this program that I paid into for situations like this one." ...worker in Missouri told me that she waited 475 days before she got any response. 475 days. It's like a year and a half. Another Missourian told me they wanted to change their withholding. They called RRB three times to ask about the proper form to fill out, and four months later, they still haven't heard an answer. What are we going to do about this?

So I can't quarrel with the delays, and as I said earlier, they're inexcusable. I mean, there's no reason that people should wait 480 or I mean, 470 days is the average.

But Mr. Chorle, if I may interrupt, and I'll give you a little extra time. In your earlier testimony, you spoke about how Congress needs to give you the resources and the resources should be there. Could you elaborate on that for Senator Hawley?

Oh, no, absolutely. I mean, the delays in technology and the office and the office hours in certain offices are limited, again, because of the staffing levels that we have. I mean, a single-person office or even a two-person office is going to be closed part of the time. I don't know what to say about the fact that there's a sign up in one of our offices that says—

It's on the website.

—that we're still under COVID protocol. I—

Here's the bottom line for me. Listen, if you need more resources to staff your offices, I'm all for doing that. If you need more offices in my state, you've only got two. I mean, we're a geographically pretty large state. We cover a lot of territory. I'm all for doing that. But what is absolutely inexcusable to me and has nothing to do with funding levels is people being told on the phone that, you know, hey, if you die, good luck to you, at least your kids will get it. Offices that aren't open. Offices that are still observing so-called COVID protocols. I mean, I just—you can understand the frustration, and I hear it regularly from people in person and on the phone who come to see me, and they are beside themselves, beside themselves. And this has got to change.

Senator, I think the vast majority of our people do a pretty good job day in and day out. And if that person who spoke to your constituent that way did that, for that I apologize. It's inexcusable. And again, when things like that are brought to our attention, we will follow up and we will act accordingly. So again, other than apologizing at this point, I don't know what I can do other than that.

Well, I hope that—I'm finishing with this, Mr. Chairman. But listen, I hope that what you'll do is come back to us, and I'd ask you to come back to me for the record and to submit for the record a plan to make sure that you're actually addressing the concerns of these folks. I want to know how it is—in fact, I'd like to see the protocols for how it is you address people on the phone. Surely there are written protocols that you have for your employees. I want to see them. I want to see your protocols for your offices. I want to see your training materials. I need to see all of it because at this point, my constituents are not getting the—it's not the services that they deserve in some general sense. It's what they have paid for. It's what they have worked their lives for and paid for. And they're angry about it, and I'm angry about it. And I want to see some results. And if you need more funding, I'm happy to give you more funding, but I tell you what, I want some answers. So I'm going to ask you to come back. I'll have more questions for you for the record, but I want to see some stuff in writing. And as soon as I see it in writing, I'm going to make it public because there have got to be changes. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say this for the record. There have got to be changes. This cannot go on like this for the people of my state. It just cannot go on. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Hawley, thank you. Senator Moody.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I didn't realize we had lost the other side of the dais. Appreciate you calling this hearing, and I appreciate our witnesses for being here today. Sometimes when we have these hearings and we're talking about oversight of agencies and other government programs in Congress, as you heard, we're focusing on what we can do better for Americans, American taxpayers. I know we also want to talk about how we can improve and maybe examine ways we've gotten things right, and maybe that can be a model that we can replicate in other programs. So I appreciate having that discussion with Senator Hawley. And you know, in Florida, we have 27,000 railroad retirement beneficiaries. We have the opportunity to discuss sometimes how in that specific program we've gotten it right. I think when we talk about solvency of that program or funding of that program, I like to examine—it's a unique program, certainly. And so I like to go back and go, okay, what have we done right here, and how might we use some of those things for other programs that we have? I think there's a bipartisan success story in there of the Railroad Retirement Board as an answer to age-old problems. And given the uncertainty of current times, millions of Floridians who are planning for retirement are concerned with what the golden years will look like for them. Many have private pensions, retirement accounts, and have made preparations, but many don't. And in Congress, our number one job is minding the nation's purse. And mismanagement in previously has put some of our trust funds that protect our most vulnerable in danger of insolvency. And I want to make sure we take where programs have not become insolvent or how we've gotten that right and maybe apply those lessons to some of these funds where we're facing real challenges in the future. The President is fully committed, leadership here in the Senate is fully committed to making sure that we are examining how we're spending money, what the future in terms of stability of this country's success looks like, and making sure that we're being meaningful stewards of taxpayer money. So business as usual may not cut it as we move forward because we are in—many would say we are facing extraordinary financial challenges as a nation. And it is up to us to fix it. So I always appreciate an opportunity like this to discuss programs and where we might have some things to learn. And so I appreciate you being here to talk about the Railroad Retirement Board, what it's gotten right, and how we might translate that to success elsewhere. So Mr. Chorle, in your testimony, one of the ways in which the Railroad Retirement Board has remained solvent and fiscally healthy is through investment. In 2001, Congress permitted the RRB to invest in private sector securities. And I believe you would say this has led to the major factor of maintaining solvency of the RRB. In the Working Families Tax Cut Act, we created tax-advantaged Trump accounts, direct investments in our youth's future. These funds are invested in the market and become available at 18, and they create opportunity for young adults. And some folks out there, some analysts have done math and estimate if you invested $7,000 at the birth of a child, by the time they reach retirement, they could have over $1,000,000. And I just think that's exemplary of what prudent investing can do in the private market. So harnessing the power of the American market, which has always trended up over multi-decade intervals, seems to be a great way of ensuring fiscal health, and certainly we've seen that in the RRB. So Mr. Chorle, do you think it's worth exploring similar investment strategies in some of our other trust funds of the nation?

I hesitate to advise Congress on how they should expand this program, but I can talk about the success of the program that we have in place here. And I can speak to my personal experience when I was the chairman of a state public pension fund years ago, where expanding the asset classes of investment in the long term is a sound investment theory. I leave it to Congress to determine whether to expand our success and its principles to other trusts, but I can tell you, as I have earlier, that it's worked for us. And it works best when you're investing for the long term, which is the whole principle of pension funds and pension fund investing. So that's—

And you believe that change and that tweak by Congress at that time led into one of the big factors of solvency now?

Oh, absolutely. I mean, again, you weren't here, Senator. The numbers are thus: $21,000,000,000 in 2001. They sent us $35,000,000,000 since their inception, and yet they've gone from a balance of $21,000,000,000 of assets under management to $29,000,000,000. Had they sent us the $35,000,000,000 that they did and still invested during that whole period in fixed income securities, in government securities at three and a half percent, they would have gone broke in 2021. So the principle of market investing, I think, is a sound one, and it's worked for us. And I would hope that if the Senate, if the Congress expands it to other fields, that it works for them as well.

Thank you, sir. Thank you for being here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Senator Moody. Thank you both for being here. For any Senator wishing to ask additional questions, questions for the record are due 5:00 PM Friday, February the 20th. Again, thank you for being here. Although Senator Moody, Mr. Joines would like to say go Gators, I'll say go Tigers. Anyway, and the committee stands adjourned. [Gavel sounds.]