A book to educate labor people to argue for keeping their underfunded defined benefit plans with sprinklings of propaganda.
Yet pension plans cost governments less than 401(k)s for the same benefit amount. Most public pension plans are in sound financial shape despite media focus on the few that are not. (page 10)
At one point, I commented to a pension attorney that I didn’t think there were more than twenty-five people in the state who understood how the state employee pension plan worked. He agreed and then added that there were a lot more people who thought they did, especially politicians who were proposing reforms to it. (page 16)
Unless your doctor has told you you’re about to die, receiving a lump sum payment is almost always a terrible idea. (page 110)
Author(s): John Bury
Publication Date: 23 Mar 2022
Publication Site: Burypensions
Chicago’s municipal pension plan recently redeemed $50 million from a large-cap equity fund. Seems like a non-event. Happens all the time. But the reason the pension plan did so is chilling: It was done specifically in order to make pension benefit payments. This should be a cautionary flag to underfunded pensions and to the state and municipal governments that sponsor them.
First, when pensions are underfunded they have a tendency (or need) to take on more risk in order to try to generate higher returns.
For example, underfunded pension plans are increasing their allocations to private equity. Nothing wrong with that. But that means more of the portfolio is illiquid. It would be very unlikely that private equity positions would be sold to “make payroll,” specifically because they are so illiquid. But this leaves fewer assets that are liquid enough to be sold, and that increases the pressure on those liquid assets to be sold at a decent price. Moreover, if the plan has significant assets in liquid securities, such as large-cap equities or Treasurys, those assets can easily be sold, but then the portfolio will be out of balance and will require additional trading and rebalancing anyway.
Secondly, the pension plan must keep more cash on hand than it otherwise would. If your policy portfolio calls for a 3% allocation to cash, that is designed for diversification and dry powder. But a pension plan sponsor should be providing significant amounts of cash into the pension each year. If the sponsor is not making its contributions, then the pension plan has to carry more cash than it otherwise would.
Author(s): Charles Millard
Publication Date: 7 April 2021
Publication Site: Plansponsor
For over a decade, state employee compensation has exceeded compensation in Connecticut’s private sector by about 40 percent, the biggest gap in the nation.
The consequence is that the State Employee Retirement Fund (SERF) is drastically underfunded. It is difficult to fund such wildly overgenerous benefits, especially since the state didn’t even start to fund them until years after beginning to award them.
What now is an ongoing gravy train for state employees is ultimately a train wreck for them and the state. There are only three ways to avoid the wreck: (1) massive tax increases and/or service cuts, a disastrous option (2) significant cuts in state employee benefits and/or (3) a federal bailout.
Author(s): Red Jahncke
Publication Date: 26 March 2021
Publication Site: CT Examiner