The 401k plan is often maligned by pension and retirement advocates. There’s is no guarantee with a 401k and it requires participants to take responsibility, contribute and to take the investment risk. That’s all true but there is more to the story.
I live on a pension as do some HD readers and writers. Would I trade my current fixed pension for a 401k plan, would you? Not back in 1961 I wouldn’t have, but if I was entering the workforce today, I think it might be different.
My pension plan was started in 1911, funding began in 1967. It is well funded. Like me it is a dinosaur. My pension is based on nearly 50 years of service with one company and the benefit is calculated on five years of my highest salary, and a portion of cash bonus compensation as well – those days are long gone. Even my old employer no longer offers such a plan.
Pensions were generally confined to heavily unionized companies – and governments. The majority of Americans never had a pension so the 401k is a great benefit.
The value of a defined benefit pension plan is based on pay, length of service and the plan formula. Long employment with the plan sponsor is key both in accumulating the benefit, but also in earning a non-forfeitable right to what has been accumulated – vesting.
Defined benefit simply means the plan promises a benefit, and the cost of funding is variable. Defined contribution plans fix the funding cost – if any – for the employer, but make no promise for the eventual benefit.
Pension plans are designed to reward long service with the plan sponsor, they are typically backloaded meaning the greater benefits are accumulated later in a career.
There has not been a significant change in employment tenure over the years, it is and has been about four years plus or minus a year. That means that a pension plan has little or no value for the average worker because vesting typically occurs after 5 to 7 years of employment.
A typical pension plan requires funding equal to about 8% of covered payroll – many government plans require an employee contribution too. The average employer match in a 401k is 4-6% of salary – the bad news is nearly 60% of employers do not provide a match, but it is highly likely such employers never offered a pension.
This is why a 401k is a valuable retirement tool and certainly much better than no plan at all. Unlike most pensions, a 401k is portable and flexible. Some plans now offer an annuity option within the 401k – the best of both worlds it seems.
I conclude that a 401k is the best option for most workers today with greater value added if there is an employer contribution – matching or otherwise.
I agree that I think most people are probably better off with the 401k for the reasons you mentioned. Your arguments are pretty similar to those the federal government offered when the federal CSRS retirement plan was replaced by FERS in the early 1980’s. Basicly, the federal pension was reduced by half but federal employees started participating in social security and received a 5% match in the thrift savings plan. Some folks were better off under the old plan, but some folks were better off under the new plan. It really depended on whether you spend an entire career as a fed, or only a partial career. In the case of a partial career (consistent with the modern reality) the newer plan was generally considered better.
What I like about FERS, its not an either/or: its both a pension and 401k.
Thanks for this interesting article and conversation, Dick and others. I didn’t know some of the information. We were caught by the change from pensions to 401ks more than some of the HD folks. Luckily none of the mistakes we made were fatal, but it took a long time to catch up. Chris
I have a DB pension, a 401k and SS – the traditional three legged stool. Unfortunately, since the pension has no COLA, that leg keeps getting shorter. Of course, the ideal would be a DB pension with a COLA plus SS, but apparently that has never been available in the private sector in the US (unlike the UK).
While I agree that a DB pension isn’t a good fit in a world where companies no longer want to retain employees long-term, and employees often prefer startups or the gig economy, I don’t think the 401k is an especially good substitute. It wasn’t even designed as a substitute. We see occasional fixes, such as automatic signup and even automatic investment choices, but it still relies too heavily on the financial knowledge and disciplin