The decline of defined benefit plans and job tenure

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 259-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALLISON SCHRAGER
Keyword(s):  
Pension Plan ◽  
Job Turnover ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Job Tenure ◽  
Benefit Plan ◽  
Job Separation ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Defined Contribution Pension Plan ◽  
Defined Contribution Plan

AbstractThis paper investigates the consequences of relying on assets accumulated in a defined contribution pension plan compared to an annuity based on salary from a defined benefit plan. Although a defined contribution plan varies with asset returns, it may be more desirable than a defined benefit plan when wage variability and job turnover are adequately considered. It is found that both job separation rates and wage variance increased in the 1990s. The new calibrations of these variables are used in a life-cycle model where a worker chooses between a defined benefit and a defined contribution plan. It is shown that the increase in job turnover made defined contribution the dominant pension plan.

scholarly journals Life After Defined Benefit Plans

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin A. Goldberg ◽  
Robert E. Wnek ◽  
Michael J. Rolleri
Keyword(s):  
Pension Plan ◽  
Profit Sharing ◽  
Pension Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Cash Balance ◽  
Benefit Plan ◽  
Defined Contribution Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Recent Developments

Employers have moved from traditional pension plans to cash balance and other alternative defined benefit plans. However, it may be that the best approach lies beyond defined benefit plans completely. The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) was enacted to protect workers. Its focus was on the defined benefit plan, which at that time meant a traditional pension plan that provided lifetime income to retired workers. Over the years traditional pension plans have declined in number, often due to their increasing costs. Many of these plans have been replaced by the 401(k) plan, a profit-sharing plan partly or wholly funded by employee contributions. There has also been a rise in hybrid plans, plans that have features of both defined benefit and defined contribution plans. Recent developments highlight the weaknesses in traditional pension plans. Replacing a traditional pension plan with a cash balance plan, a hybrid plan that qualifies as a defined benefit plan, does not fully address all the problems. It may be that there is limited advantage to the continued emphasis on defined benefit plans. Instead, defined contribution plans that contain some features of defined benefit plans may better address the current retirement-plan issues.

scholarly journals Lessons for public pensions from Utah's move to pension choice

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 285-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
ROBERT L. CLARK ◽  
EMMA HANSON ◽  
OLIVIA S. MITCHELL
Keyword(s):  
Cost Savings ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
The State ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Public Employment ◽  
Potential Cost ◽  
Active Choice ◽  
Defined Contribution Plan ◽  
New Hires

AbstractWe explore what happened when the state of Utah moved away from its traditional defined benefit pension. In its place, it offered new hires a choice between a conventional defined contribution plan and a hybrid plan option, where the latter has both a guaranteed benefit component and a defined contribution plan where employees bear investment risk. We show that around 60% of new hires failed to make any active choice and, as a result, were automatically defaulted into the hybrid plan. Slightly more than half of those who made an active choice elected the hybrid plan. Post-reform, employees who failed to actively elect a primary retirement plan were also far less likely to enroll in a supplemental retirement account, compared with new hires who actively selected a plan. We also find that employees hired following the reform were more likely to leave public employment, resulting in higher separation rates. This could reflect a reduction in the desirability of public employment under the new pension design and an improving economic climate in the state. Our results imply that public pension reformers must consider employee responses in addition to potential cost savings, when developing and enacting major pension plan changes.

Operating costs of pension funds: the impact of scale, governance, and plan design

2007 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
JACOB A. BIKKER ◽  
JAN DE DREU
Keyword(s):  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Pension Funds ◽  
Operating Costs ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Plan Design ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The Impact

AbstractAdministrative and investment costs per participant appear to vary widely across pension funds. These costs are important because they reduce the rate of return on the investments of pension funds and consequently raise the cost of retirement security. This article examines the impact of determinants of these costs, such as the size, governance, pension plan design and outsourcing decisions, using data on all Dutch pension funds across the 1992–2004 period, including more than 10,000 observations. We find that economies of scale dominate the strong dispersion in both administrative and investment costs across pension funds. Industry-wide pension funds are significantly more efficient than company funds and other funds. The operating costs of pension funds' defined contribution plans are lower than those of defined benefit plans. Higher shares of pensioners make funds more costly, whereas the reverse is true when relatively many participants are inactive.

Which Teachers Choose a Defined Contribution Pension Plan? Evidence from the Florida Retirement System

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew M. Chingos ◽  
Martin R. West
Keyword(s):  
Science Teachers ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Revealed Preferences ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Advanced Degrees ◽  
Retirement System ◽  
Plan Choice ◽  
Defined Contribution Pension Plan

Since 2002, public school teachers in Florida have been permitted to choose between a defined benefit (DB) and a defined contribution (DC) retirement plan. We exploit this unique policy environment to study new teachers’ revealed preferences over pension plan structures. Roughly 30 percent of teachers hired between 2003 and 2008 selected the DC plan, despite the fact that teachers not actively deciding within six months were defaulted into the DB plan. The share choosing the DC plan was higher among teachers with advanced degrees, math and science teachers, and teachers in charter schools. It was lower among special education teachers and especially among black and Hispanic teachers. There was only a slight relationship between plan choice and teacher value added to student achievement, with teachers in the bottom value-added quartile roughly 2 percentage points less likely to choose the DC option.

Pension type, tenure, and job mobility

2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 609-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
KELLY HAVERSTICK ◽  
ALICIA H. MUNNELL ◽  
GEOFFREY SANZENBACHER ◽  
MAURICIO SOTO
Keyword(s):  
Private Sector ◽  
Panel Study ◽  
The United States ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Defined Contribution ◽  
Job Tenure ◽  
Defined Contribution Plans ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Dramatic Shift ◽  
Using Data

AbstractOver the last 25 years, the United States has seen a dramatic shift in the private sector away from defined benefit plans and towards defined contribution plans. While commentators constantly cite an increase in labor mobility as a major reason for the shift in the private sector from defined benefit to defined contribution plans, researchers to date have not been able to document any difference in mobility by pension type. This study argues that the inability to find such a relationship stems from ignoring the important role of job tenure. Using data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) and the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID), the results of duration analyses that include the interaction of job tenure and pension type reveal that workers with between five and ten years of tenure at a firm are 23% more likely to leave a job with a defined contribution plan than with a defined benefit plan. This difference is consistent with differences in the timing of benefit level entitlement between the two types of plans.

Getting More from Less in Defined Benefit Plans

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel W. Wallick ◽  
Daniel B. Berkowitz ◽  
Andrew S. Clarke ◽  
Kevin J. DiCiurcio ◽  
Kimberly A. Stockton
Keyword(s):  
Interest Rates ◽  
Pension Plan ◽  
Defined Benefit ◽  
Portfolio Risk ◽  
Defined Benefit Pension Plan ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Investment Returns ◽  
Defined Benefit Plans ◽  
Asset Class ◽  
Reduced Costs

As global interest rates hover near historic lows, defined benefit pension plan sponsors must grapple with the prospect of lower investment returns. We examine three levers that can enhance portfolio outcomes in a low-return world: increased contributions; reduced investment costs; and increased portfolio risk. We use portfolio simulations based on a stochastic asset class forecasting model to evaluate each lever according to two criteria: the magnitude of impact and the certainty that this impact will be realized. We show that increased contributions have the greatest and most certain impact. Reduced costs have a more modest, but equally certain impact. Increased risk can deliver a significant impact, but with the least certainty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document