.

SmartMoney Blogs

Encore
A blog about living in and planning for retirement

Private Sector Defined Benefit Plans Vanishing

iStockphoto

Alicia Munnell, the director of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, is a weekly contributor to “Encore.”

In some ways, it’s old news. Defined benefit plans in the private sector are disappearing. But the extent to which this shift has occurred in the last several years is stunning. According to Towers Watson, only 13 of this year’s Fortune 100 companies offered new employees a traditional defined benefit plan in 2011, compared to 58 in 2000.

Retirement Plans for New Hires among This Year’s Fortune 100 Companies

Plan 2000 2011
Total DB Plans 72 30
Traditional 58 13
Hybrid 14 17
DC Plan Only 28 70

Source: Towers Watson. 2011. “Prevalence of Retirement Plan Types in the Fortune 100 in 2011.” (July)

The shift in pension coverage from defined benefit plans to 401(k)s has been underway since 1981. Originally, this shift reflected three developments: 1) the addition of 401(k) provisions to existing thrift and profit sharing plans; 2) a surge of new 401(k) plan formation in the 1980s; and 3) the virtual halt in the formation of new defined benefit plans.

Until the last 10 years, a conversion from a defined benefit plan to a 401(k) plan was an extremely rare event. The only companies closing their defined benefit pension plans were facing bankruptcy or struggling to stay alive. However, the collapse of the dot-com bubble at the turn of the century created a “perfect storm” of low equity prices, which reduced assets, and low interest rates, which increased liabilities. In the wake of that storm, healthy companies began either closing their defined benefit plan to new entrants or ending pension accruals for current as well as future employees. The 2008 financial collapse, which created a second “perfect storm” of low asset values and low interest rates, provided another push in the shift to defined contribution plans.

The pressures created by the financial markets reinforce other explanations that have been offered to explain the shift away from defined benefit plans since the turn of the century.

A Desire to Cut Compensation. Shifting from a defined benefit plan to a 401(k) plan generally will reduce required employer contributions from 7% to 8% of payrolls to a 3% employer match. The economists’ model would predict that lower pension contributions should lead to increased wages. However, employers shifting from a defined benefit plan to a 401(k) plan have not announced an offset of higher cash wages.

A Response to Growing Healthcare Costs. Another explanation for the freezing of defined benefit plans assumes that the goal is not to cut total compensation but rather to restructure compensation in response to the enormous increase in healthcare costs. That is, the rapid acceleration in health care costs is driving out pension benefits.

Concern about Financial Implications of Defined Benefit Plans. Sponsors of defined benefit plans bear significant costs and risks. The employer bears the investment risk as it invests accumulated contributions over the employee’s working life; the employer bears the risk that interest rates will be very low — and therefore the price of liabilities very high; and the employer bears the risk that the retiree will live longer than projected. In addition, the employer bears the risk that accounting or legislative changes may make sponsoring a defined benefit plan more difficult.

The Evolution of a Two-Tier Pension System. The enormous divergence in pay and the emergence of non-qualified plans as the main form of pensions for upper management may have reduced the firm’s interest in the pension plan that benefits the rank and file. From the perspective of upper management, the separateness of the two systems makes it less worthwhile for the firm to absorb the costs and risks associated with providing a defined benefit plan for its employees. Interestingly, the nonqualified plans almost always take the form of a defined benefit plan based on final salary and years of service, while rank-and-file employees have increasingly been transferred into defined contribution arrangements.

There are more than enough explanations for the trend away from the traditional defined benefit plan. Given that the employer-sponsored pension system is a voluntary arrangement, nothing is likely to stop the remaining companies from following suit and closing down their defined benefit plans.

Comments

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers. Please comply with our guidelines. Our blogs do not require the use of your real name.

Comments (5 of 16)

View all Comments »
    • Hello! fdbfddb interesting fdbfddb site! I’m really like it! Very, very fdbfddb good!

    • Very nice site!

    • Hello! fdbekde interesting fdbekde site! I’m really like it! Very, very fdbekde good!

    • Loss of DB Plans hurts, but it’s a function of a more competitive economy. The fact that companies are able to provide different pensions to different employees is a problem. It’s a function of an economy where the rewards are focused on the best in every area.

    • This loss of the DB Plans, is huge. It is not appreciated by the younger generations, they only think of the moment, and instant gratification. Unfortunately there may come a day,when they will realize what their parents had with the DB, was more secure in the long run. I know that I wish my children would have the stability and security of what I have.

      This is not a space for the spam adds, but for just thoughtful comments.

About Encore

  • Encore examines the changing nature of retirement, from new rules and guidelines for financial security to the shifting identities and priorities of today’s retirees. The blog also explores news that affects retirement, from the Wall Street Journal Digital Network and around the web. Lead bloggers are reporter Catey Hill and senior editor Jeremy Olshan. Other contributors include The Wall Street Journal’s retirement columnists Glenn Ruffenach and Anne Tergesen; the Director for the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, Alicia Munnell; and the Director of Research for Pinnacle Advisory Group, Michael Kitces, CFP.

.