Employment-based Health Benefits in Small and Large Private Establishments

[Excerpt] This issue of Beyond the Numbers compares health benefits data from private sector employers, showing variation between the smallest (those employing 1–49 workers) and the largest (those employing 500 workers or more) establishments in March 2012. Over 95 percent of the nearly 8.7 million private sector business establishments in the United States employed fewer than 50 workers in the first quarter of 2011; these establishments employed 47.3 million workers (45 percent of all private industry employment). In contrast, there were slightly fewer than 15,000 private establishments that employed 500 workers or more; less than half of 1 percent of all private workplaces. These largest establishments employed about 17.5 million workers

A Look at Today\u27s Pension Equity Plans

The decline in the share of workers covered by traditional pension plans over the past 35 years is marked by a variety of efforts to transform these plans into vehicles that can continue to provide retirement income to workers while stabilizing the financial responsibility for employers. For example, collective bargaining disputes often involve give-and-take on the future generosity of pension benefits. Likewise, state governments have introduced less generous pension tiers for new employees as part of fiscal belt-tightening. Among the changes in pension plans tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) since the late 1970s are different formulas for calculating benefits. One of those formula types is the pension equity plan, or PEP. These plans were first identified by BLS private industry surveys conducted in the late 1990s; today, they make up a small share of all pension plans. This issue of Beyond the Numbers examines the concept behind pension equity plans and looks at some unique features of these plans

You\u27re Getting a Pension: What are Your Options?

[Excerpt] For those workers who participate in a traditional pension plan—15 percent of private sector workers and 75 percent State and local government workers—the math exercise doesn’t end once you figure out your monthly benefit (often based on earnings and years of service). No matter how the plan calculates your benefit, retirees must have the opportunity to receive periodic payments for life and may be offered alternative forms of payment. Sound confusing? It gets worse. To really understand the options, you need to remember those “time value of money” calculations if you’ve ever taken a finance class. In a nutshell, the plan is required to have sufficient assets to be able to pay you the required benefits for your lifetime. The various forms of payment in most cases simply distribute those funds differently. In its simplest form, a plan might have $200,000 in assets designated for your pension. You might be offered a lump sum of$200,000 or monthly payments of $1,050 for life. It may not seem like it, but these two payments are equivalent. Investing$200,000 at 4 percent interest provides a $1,050 monthly payment for about 25 years. Because the options are designed to be roughly equivalent (more formally, the “actuarial equivalent”), your decision to choose one form of payment over another is not about the monetary value; other factors come into play, such as the need to provide benefits for survivors. This issue of Beyond the Numbers looks at the various payment options and what factors you need to take into account when making a decision. The accompanying charts provide a visual representation of different payment options

Restricted Work Due to Workplace Injuries: A Historical Perspective

In anticipation of upcoming data on worker characteristics and on case circumstances surrounding workplace injuries that result in job transfer or restricted work, new tabulations look at trends in the outcome of workplace injuries over the past several decade

Pro-Work Policy Proposals for Older Americans in the 21st Century

Reports that the Social Security Trust Fund will be exhausted sometime in the early part of the next century reinforce the need to make retirement policy in the United States more accommodating for those who want to work. While there is general agreement that disincentives to work at older ages in both Social Security and employer pension plans played an important role in the dramatic drop in retirement age from 1945 through 1985, skepticism exists over the ability of policy changes to both stop this trend and increase work at older ages. In this policy brief we summarize how government policy has influenced retirement since the end of World War II, show that reductions in some of the anti-work aspects of our retirement system in the 1980s appear to have ended the trend toward earlier and earlier retirement, and offer five pro-work policies which would increase work for twenty-first century older Americans

A Look at Today's Pension Equity Plans

The decline in the share of workers covered by traditional pension plans over the past 35 years is marked by a variety of efforts to transform these plans into vehicles that can continue to provide retirement income to workers while stabilizing the financial responsibility for employers. For example, collective bargaining disputes often involve give-and-take on the future generosity of pension benefits. Likewise, state governments have introduced less generous pension tiers for new employees as part of fiscal belt-tightening. Among the changes in pension plans tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) since the late 1970s are different formulas for calculating benefits. One of those formula types is the pension equity plan, or PEP. These plans were first identified by BLS private industry surveys conducted in the late 1990s; today, they make up a small share of all pension plans. This issue of Beyond the Numbers examines the concept behind pension equity plans and looks at some unique features of these plans.BLS_BTN_A_look_at_todays_pension_equity_plans.pdf: 90 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

You're Getting a Pension: What are Your Options?

[Excerpt] For those workers who participate in a traditional pension plan—15 percent of private sector workers and 75 percent State and local government workers—the math exercise doesn’t end once you figure out your monthly benefit (often based on earnings and years of service). No matter how the plan calculates your benefit, retirees must have the opportunity to receive periodic payments for life and may be offered alternative forms of payment. Sound confusing? It gets worse. To really understand the options, you need to remember those “time value of money” calculations if you’ve ever taken a finance class. In a nutshell, the plan is required to have sufficient assets to be able to pay you the required benefits for your lifetime. The various forms of payment in most cases simply distribute those funds differently. In its simplest form, a plan might have $200,000 in assets designated for your pension. You might be offered a lump sum of$200,000 or monthly payments of $1,050 for life. It may not seem like it, but these two payments are equivalent. Investing$200,000 at 4 percent interest provides a $1,050 monthly payment for about 25 years. Because the options are designed to be roughly equivalent (more formally, the “actuarial equivalent”), your decision to choose one form of payment over another is not about the monetary value; other factors come into play, such as the need to provide benefits for survivors. This issue of Beyond the Numbers looks at the various payment options and what factors you need to take into account when making a decision. The accompanying charts provide a visual representation of different payment options.BLS_BTN_Youre_getting_a_pension_What_are_your_payment_options.pdf: 20 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

Employment-based Health Benefits in Small and Large Private Establishments

[Excerpt] This issue of Beyond the Numbers compares health benefits data from private sector employers, showing variation between the smallest (those employing 1–49 workers) and the largest (those employing 500 workers or more) establishments in March 2012. Over 95 percent of the nearly 8.7 million private sector business establishments in the United States employed fewer than 50 workers in the first quarter of 2011; these establishments employed 47.3 million workers (45 percent of all private industry employment). In contrast, there were slightly fewer than 15,000 private establishments that employed 500 workers or more; less than half of 1 percent of all private workplaces. These largest establishments employed about 17.5 million workers.BLS_Employment_based_health_benefits.pdf: 130 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020