Commentary

Senate headed down the wrong path on state employee pensions, healthcare?

North Carolina’s state employees would see a bleaker and more uncertain retirement under a proposal heard in the Senate Pensions and Retirement Committee yesterday. Under the North Carolina Retirement Reform Act (SB 467), the traditional pension—the bedrock source of retirement security—would cease to exist for new state employees, as would health benefits upon retirement or departure from state employment.

Although the bill exempts current state employees from these dramatic changes to retirement benefits, new state employees (those entering service after July 1, 2018) would be required to forego the guaranteed post-retirement income of the defined benefit pension in exchange for the opportunity to enroll in a new 401k plan. Even more troubling, future state employees would no longer have access to the state employee’s health system.

There are quite a few problems with this idea:

  • Way more risk with 401Ks. Shifting retirement savings from the pension to the 401k places a state employees’ retirement security at the mercy of the stock and bond markets. While the potential to earn more exists, the risk of catastrophic loss is even higher—just ask the millions of baby boomers approaching retirement in 2008 and saw their 401k values collapse in the Great Recession. By 2013, the median worker aged 56-61—e.g., those closest to retirement—saw his retirement savings drop by half after 2007. The picture is even grimmer for workers aged 50-55—the median worker saw her retirement savings lose 70 cents out of every dollar in value over the same period.
  • Less income for retirees. 401k-only plans do not provide sufficient income for retirees to make ends meet without Social Security and Medicare. According to the Employment Policy Institute, the bottom half of workers nearing retirement age (56-61) have less than $17,000 in savings; those between 50 and 55 have just $8,000. This is clearly insufficient to give any meaningful retirement security to state works, given that it takes a family of two at least $35,700 per year to make ends meet in North Carolina.
  • Weakens ability to compete with private sector. Pay for state and local government workers in North Carolina is already below the average wage for private sector employees in the same occupations, and a strong pension and health insurance has historically been a major way of attracting and retaining workers who might otherwise choose the private sector instead. SB 467 ends one this important competitive advantage for talent.

Given these issues, it’s clear that SB 467 is the wrong path for ensuring state employees’ retirement security. As the Budget & Tax Center’s Patrick McHugh aptly noted in February about similar proposals, this approach simply amounts to balancing the books on the backs of state workers at a time when the challenges facing the state’s pension system—while real—do not constitute a crisis requiring these kinds of drastic cuts to benefits.

3 Comments


  1. Guy Hutchins

    May 4, 2017 at 11:43 am

    Just another nail in the coffin of recruiting new quality state employees. Our legislators have gone crazy in writing bills that are detrimental to the environment, new employees and the citizens on North Carolina. Please vote theses idiots out of office! We’ve worked too hard to advance our great state to let it be destroyed by the incompetence of our legislators almost overnight.

  2. Walt

    May 8, 2017 at 12:47 am

    If the state maintains a 6.5% match of the 401k fund things will easily be competitive with the private sector.

    In regards to retired health care something has to be done. North Carolina currently has an unfunded liability for retiree healthcare of about $43 billion as of June 30, 2016. Removing the benefit for those entering the workforce after July 1 2018 may be our only chance to realistically deal with this giant shortfall.

    I’m glad the legislature is finally choosing to deal with this issue.

  3. Gabrielle

    May 16, 2017 at 9:06 am

    Walt, why is it that there is an unfunded liability for retiree healthcare. Is this not something people have been paying into for the entire time they’ve been employed? I am new to all of this stuff, and I truly don’t understand why it is underfunded if people have paid into it and why people who could be paying into it would no longer be allowed to do so? Does this really solve the issue?
    People who are grandfathered in would still be paying into it? Yet that money will be owed to them at a later date…
    Is it that our leaders are using those funds for other things? If that is the case… the debt may decrease slightly… but wont that debt still exist if they continue to use those funds and not put the money back?
    It’s so confusing to me.. Also it really feels like this “solution” only hurts the workers who funded this and it does nothing to remedy the problem and fails to hold those responsible for causing this increase in debt in the first place. It sounds like a mis-allocation of funds that was never paid back and now they are just trying to excuse themselves at the expense of important community workers…

Check Also

N.C. Justice Center statement on U.S. Supreme Court decision in Janus v. AFSCME

Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

A civil rights settlement forced DEQ to sample Duplin County waterways for pollution. The hard part [...]

On Friday the UNC Board of Governors rejected a proposal to return the Silent Sam Confederate monume [...]

They could be paved, mined, jammed with concrete, filled with pollutants like GenX or coal ash: More [...]

Shortly after 10 o’clock yesterday morning, a federal jury in the hog nuisance case Gillis vs. Murph [...]

One can imagine a scenario in which it might be possible to take North Carolina Republican leaders s [...]

The post How the Grinches stole the 9th District appeared first on NC Policy Watch. [...]

Fayetteville is my hometown more than any – I was born here to military parents, this is where my gr [...]

It’s long been understood by those who pay attention to public policy debates that the age-old conse [...]