Article published on Aug 8, 2006
By
Raquel Pichardo
The
debate over replacing or supplementing public defined
benefit pension plans with defined contribution options
appears to be dying down. Some states still face the
possibility of change, but there appears to be little
enthusiasm in the wake of the unraveling of two high-profile
attempts in California and Colorado.
On the corporate pension side, companies continue to shut
down or freeze traditional defined benefit plans. But the
public arena is a different story.
Last year, the nation’s largest plan, the $210 billion
California Public Employees Retirement System,
staved off a push from Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger to convert the state plans to defined
contribution. Among the changes discussed between last year
and this were a retirement structure that offered a
voluntary defined contribution plan to supplement a reduced
defined benefit plan and a mandatory hybrid plan for new
employees. Both initiatives failed.
Meanwhile, the $34 billion
Colorado Public Employees’ Retirement Association
launched 2006 by implementing a DC plan as an alternative to
the DB plan to state employees hired after January 1, 2006.
The move passed legislature at the end of 2004 and was
backed by Gov. Bill Owens, a
Republican.
But a proposal by a Libertarian-backed group, FIX PERA,
which called for all state employees to enroll in a DC plan
was being looked at by legislators this year. In May, the
group pulled its initiative after lawmakers approved a bill
to close the system’s $11 billion unfunded liability.
“The experience in California may have resonated with other
states,” says Keith Brainard,
research director at the
National Association of State Retirement Administrators.
There are lessons to be learned from that failure. Namely,
it is more difficult to generate savings by closing DB plans
than one might expect, says Brainard. Second, it
demonstrated the political strength of employees trying to
save their plans.
During the peak of the California debate, the pension
community was taking a serious look at converting plans,
says Bill Atwood, executive
director at the Illinois State
Board of Investments. However, as that unraveled,
systems around the country realized the threat to DB plans
wasn’t as immediate as they might have expected.
Illinois Senator Bill Brady,
a Republican, last year introduced a bill that would allow
employees to opt in to a defined contribution plan. “It
never went anywhere,” says Atwood.
Public defined benefit plans are often targeted for
conversion because of low funding levels and Illinois is one
of the worst in the country at 60%. But it was this very
fact that made conversion even harder. Theoretically, if ISB
converted entirely to defined contribution plans, the
unfunded liability will come due, strapping the state, says
Atwood. If the conversion is done gradually, cash flow into
the plan will taper off, worsening the funding problem, he
adds.
Most plans calculate liabilities and earnings by using a
smoothing technique that averages the past three to five
years of returns. Moving into 2006, the year 2000 drops off
the calculations, thereby improving funding levels and
relieving the pressure to abandon defined benefit plans. An
improved equity market is one reason the push to switch
plans has waned, says Hank Kim,
executive director at the National
Conference for Public Employees Retirement Systems.
But there will always be those who see DC plans as “a
panacea for all the ills of the world,” he says. NCPERS
supports DB plans. People shouldn’t feel like the threat of
converting has disappeared, he says.
As part of his property tax and relief platform late last
month, New Jersey Senator Jon
Corzine discussed a “two-tiered system for pensions
that respects prior commitments, but introduces changes like
defined contribution plans for new employees and a change in
the retirement age. If the idea takes root, a contentious
debate could evolve, says Kim. Multiple calls to the
Senator, a former
Goldman Sachs
executive, went unreturned.
In New York, John Faso, the
Republican candidate for Governor running against incumbent
Eliot Spitzer, has also
shown interest in introducing a bill that would see new
government workers signing up for a DC plan. The discussion
is part of Faso’s property tax proposal. A DC plan would add
predictability for municipalities having to funnel money
into current systems and would be attractive to today’s
mobile workforce, says a spokeswoman for Faso.
The $140 billion
New York State Common Fund
is 100% funded. There has never been an attempt that’s
gained momentum to replace the fund, says a fund spokesman.
In Michigan, Representative Brian
Palmer continues to support converting the
Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System
into a DC plan, though his chief of staff,
Phil Browne admits “it’s a
crap shoot.” In 2005, Palmer introduced a bill offering DC
plans to new hires. It never made it to the Senate. If there
is no action taken by the end of the year, Palmer will have
to reintroduce the bill, says Browne.
Alaska was one of the only states in 2005 to eventually
consent to a defined contribution plan, effective for
employees hired after July 1, 2006, though the proposal was
originally met with resistance. And the
West Virginia State Teachers’
Retirement System went against the grain in the
pension plan space as the once-closed defined benefit system
reopened to new hires this year.
FundFire
FundFire is a copyrighted publication. FundFire has agreed to make available its content for the sole use of the employees of the subscriber company. Accordingly, it is a violation of the copyright law for anyone to duplicate the content of FundFire for the use of any person, other than the employees of the subscriber company.













