Supplementary Plans and Pension Shortfalls in Alberta

Alberta and the rest of the Western Premiers are Pushing for new Pension Plan

It is a great idea but how will it be funded?

The Fraser Institute figures that already we work more than 5 months before we start to save money for ourselves. How can we save more money for the Supplementary Plan?
Fraser Tax Freedom Day Video

As a self-employed individual I pay into the CPP (Canada Pension Plan)at the rate of 9.9% of my income, up to the YMPE. It provides me with a replacement of 25% of the YMPE.

Where can I come up with more money to pump into a government run pension plan? The only way is to reduce the taxes I pay every year. This would leave me more money to fund into my personal plan. However, this will never happen because I have several public sector pension plans I need to fund.

In Alberta the public sector pension plans are billions short. This despite the fact that over the past 30 years taxpayers have funded billions into these plans. Alberta's Public Sector Plans Short Billions

The public sector pension plans pay a replacement income of 70% of final salary for life. There are thousands of public sector retirees earning more than $100K per year in pensions. And they pay much less into their pension plans than self employed taxpayers pay into the CPP program.

Great idea lets hope we can make it work.

Pensions battle for profits

Earlier in the week my Pension Socialism blog touch on the large ownership interests that pension have in our country.

One of the threats that I see is the large pools of capital that are being accumulated and invested by public sector pension plans. They love monopoly or oligopoly type investments. Profits are high with a lack of competition .

The type of investment they like include public infrastructure or utility type companies. Many of these have a very high level of entry because of the capital required to build the systems. Think of the monopoly Bell had to build Canada's phone system.

In the next few years many of these monopolies will be moving into the hand of Canada's public sector pensions.

The Ontario Teachers plan was very eager to get Bell Canada last year. Telecommunication in Canada is a very restricted industry with huge profits for its players. Any encroachment in those industries will affect profitability. The cost of monopoly in Canada

It was interesting to see how the telecommunications industry oligopoly is protecting its interests. A Globe and Mail article cited this information:

Rogers Communications Inc., Canada's biggest wireless company, has asked the federal regulator to conduct intensive public reviews of two new entrants to the marketplace.

Rogers, as well as Telus Corp. and BCE Inc.'s Bell Canada, have won third-party status at the CRTC hearings Sept. 23 and 24 to determine Globalive's future. They are arguing that the Toronto-based company, which has received its financial backing from Egyptian telecom giant Orascom Telecom Holding SAE, does not meet foreign ownership and control rules.

And of course cut dramatically into profits. The door must be closed to competition at all costs!

The decision and recommendations on this policy will be made by bureaucrats who happen to be members of a pensions fund that just happens to own major shares in all of Canada's telecommunication companies.

What do you think the decision will be. It is a foregone conclusion.

The Double Dip Party Continues

A news article caught my attention today. Pension + Salary — how’s that for a “retention bonus”?

It is an issue that is rising is concern across the US. My hope is that it will soon be addressed in Canada as well. My recent blog called Canada promotes double dipping covered the basics of the issue.

If you see any Canadian articles about double dipping, please let me know.

Some NY lawmakers collect pension pay and salaries
State Legislators Double-Dip Salaries, Pensions; Lone Holdout Honored
In Utah - Double dippers adding to the pension fund problem?

USA Today - Our view on ‘double dipping’: Public sector ‘retirees’ draw a pension — and a paycheck
Auditor: 'Double dipping' costs Del. $17M a year
Florida limits 'double-dipping' for state workers

California Pension Dust Up!

Last week I wrote Pension Reform In California about pensions reform in California. What happens in California will have an impact on pensions across North America.

On Thursday in the Los Angeles Times there was an article called Why did Schwarzenegger bail on pension reform? The article speaks about Schwarzenegger backing out of a commitment he made to reforming pensions in California.

In the LA Times article, two advocates for pension reform address the issue. The first is an analyst with American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. The secound perspective is countered by the head of California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility. The article makes for interesting reading.

On Friday there was a follow-up article called CalPERS: a looming disaster? This article once again features the perspective on the two sides in the previous article. It addresses the huge shortfalls of Calpers, the largest California public sector pension fund.

Almost all public sector employees defined benefit pensions are suffering serious shortfalls and are perceived to be overly generous.

The articles together do a good job of describing in a comprehensive way the main issues surrounding pension reform. Pensions reform is coming to North America and the battle is on to see what it will look like in its final form.

One interesting note to keep in mind when you read these articles is that Calpers covers 1.6 million members and has accumulated $191Billion. In Ontario the biggest pension plan is Ontario Teachers and at the end of last year they had over $110 Billion but only had 284,000 members. Calculate the average amount of assets per member for each plan. You will see how generous Ontario taxpayers have been funding public sector pensions.

Dig deep and keep working there is lots more to pay!

Pension Primer - Some of the concepts explained

When I began to study pensions many years ago there were some concepts that I did not initially understand and were confusing but became clearer after I studied them in action.

Pension Types
In Canada there are two types of pensions. There are defined contribution plans and there are defined benefit plans.

The best description for the difference in these is the definitions given by Oxford Dictionary of pensions.
1) a regular payment made by a government to people above a specified age... or to such a person's surviving dependents - Public Sector pensions
2) a regular payment from a fund to which the recipient has contributed - private sector pensions - Private Sector pensions

Pension Income
With the defined contribution plan the retirement income determination of this plan is easy. Whatever you have accumulated in the plan at retirement you can draw down on for income. So as a basic example if, at retirement, you have $250,000 accumulated you could draw down $25,000 per year for 10 year. Of course we have an expectation that the fund will generate investment income and can pay more over our retirement.

Most Canadians have the contributory kind while those in the public sector have the defined benefit pensions. In my opinion defined benefit plans are not really pensions at all but a guaranteed income at retirement.

In the public sector the level of defined benefits or guaranteed retirement income is set at 70% of retirement income. The usual public sector formula is 2% of income per working year. Therefore the usual retirement is set for 35 year producing the 70% replacement income. Some pensions typically for police and firefighters are accelerated to allow for retirement after 30 years.

Currently the Federal government pays an average of over$80,000 per year to it's employees. The average employee therefore will earn a guaranteed income of $56,000 per year in retirement. These plans are "integrated" with CPP (Canada Pension Plan) which is around $10,000 per year. So the pension will pay $46,000 of this income with the CPP covering the rest.

In Ontario a teacher retires in the highest income group at over $90,000. Therefore they will receive a pension in excess of $60,000 per year.

Pension Provisions or Formulas

The public sector defined benefit plan is designed to pay 70% of income during retirement. In addition is offers.

Life time - It funds "income" for the life of the retiree
Indexing - It increases every year for life. Based on "inflation" which is set at some arbitrary number selected by government employees.
Survivor benefits - The surviving spouse of the retiree is guaranteed generally 60% of the income. This is regardless of whether or not they have other sources of income, including a public sector pension.
Trips - Free trips to Florida or Arizona every year (just joking)

Pension Boosting or Pension Spiking
Public sector pensions are a continuation of income into retirement years. The public sector pension attempts to replace 70% of the retirees income. Most formulas for pension income are based on an average of the past few years working income.

We saw recently the release of the Sunshine List in the Province of Ontario. This is the list of the employee who earned over $100,000. There was a fair amount of coverage in the press over those employees who made it to the list from jobs with a base rate much less than $100,000.

Since the retirement income is based on a percentage of working income the higher the final pay rate in the final years the higher the pension. Toronto Star reports on bus drivers in the Sunshine List These employees earning overtime have discovered that 70% of $100,000 is a much better pension than 70% of the $60,000 base rate. This is pension boosting.

Double Dipping
Public sector pensions have a much earlier retirement date than the private sector. Many public sector employees retire in their early 50's. Today the life expectancy has increased to over 80 years of age. Many of these "seniors" are able to continue working and I think should be able to continue working. Take the mayor of Mississauga for example, Hazel is a prime example of a very active, intelligent and capable 80 year old.

Public employees can trigger their pensions and find a new job. When they earn both pension and working income they are "Double Dipping". Report from the Toronto Sun

Taxpayer or Pension Liability
There is a common principle for all defined benefit pensions. Employees may make some contributions but the final liability of funding the pension is with the employer. The employer for public sector pensions is of course governments that are funded by taxpayer money. Ultimately all taxpayers are responsible for public sector pensions.

These numbers are very flexible and are manipulated based on the needs of the pensions at the time.

For example, this came from a Google search America's Intelligence Wire - Mar 21, 2006 - Last week, the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan announced it currently faces a $32-billion funding shortfall. Many factors contribute to the looming crisis . This was at a time when the pension saw an new government coming into power that was beholding to them and they wanted to leverage that IOU into more cash.

A year later the political opposition to large amounts of money being pumped into the plan started to rise. The plan then used it's magic and "The Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan is cutting back on inflation protection for some future retirees to eliminate a $12.7-billion funding shortfall reported" After a large injection of cash from Ontario taxpayers the shortfall estimates were changed.

Then this year after a disastrous year on the markets. It lost $19 Billion on the markets and it lost the return for the year. The expected returns on the $100 Billion plan should have been around 6% or another $6 Billion. The shortfall from previous years $12B, last year's losses $19B and the loss of income from last year $6B turned into.... ta da... are you ready for this....
"London Free Press - ‎Apr 3, 2009‎ - Despite a $2.5-billion shortfall that will likely grow during the next four years, contributors to the Ontario Teachers"


Pension Dumping
Many companies in the private sector have found the burden of pensions unsustainable. In an attempt many companies have used whatever means available to escape from the liabilities of defined benefit pensions.
Many companies have looked for relief from their employees, union and to governments. As a last resort many companies have gone bankrupt.
Unfortunately this is not an option for public sector pensions. They can only dump onto the taxpayer.

Underfunded Pensions
An underfunded pension is one where the commitments to employees for future pension income is not sustainable based on the amount of money currently accumulated in the pension fund.

Pension and Public Sector Reform Gaining Steam

As the financial crisis worsens some public figures are stepping up to reform the system. It may be an impossible task but is essential to economic recovery.

All world citizens are faced with the same challenges in this financial crisis.

The Governor of the State of Rhode Island made a speech that will be instrumental in addressing the problems of the system. Complete Text: State of State Address

"In the midst of all the economic turmoil, tonight Id like to start out with
some uplifting stories.

First, what we need to do to get through this economic downturn. Second, how we better position our state for the future. And third, what we have already done to put in place the building blocks to create a stronger and more competitive.

First, we must strengthen our safety net for our most vulnerable citizens

we must reform our public employee pension and benefit plans so that they are fair and equitable, affordable and sustainable. And third, we must slow the rise of local spending by giving our mayors and town councils the ways and means to control spending and balance their budgets without raising property taxes.

I know that our proposed changes are difficult ones, and I know there are many critics.

But, the only alternative we hear from the special interests and lobbyists is raise taxes, because, they cant get by on less.

We need every department of every city and town to sharpen their pencils, tighten their belts, and be smarter about how they spend the taxpayers money! We need the unions to realize that our cities and towns cannot afford business as usual-they cannot afford the wages, the pensions, the health care, and the work rules that were bargained for. The world has changed dramatically. The cost of defined benefit pension plans and healthcare have spiraled out of control.

These costs are crushing our taxpayers - most of whom dont have such pensions and health benefits. This is not about picking on anyone-rather this is about picking up the burden together, for the sake of our children, our seniors on fixed incomes, and those truly dependent upon us. This is about pulling together to get us through this severe downturn.

Were not alone in this! Connecticut and Massachusetts are facing multi-billion dollar deficits.

California has an unemployment rate of 9+%, and a $45 billion deficit. Governor Schwarzenegger has declared a fiscal state of emergency. They are out of money!

They're postponing tax refunds, college tuition payments and requiring state employees to take 2 unpaid days off each month. We cant let this happen in Rhode Island.

I encourage every public employee union to sit down with the mayors, town managers, the city and town councils, and the school committees to become a part of the solution. Help your communities get through this! Some have already stepped forward and I thank them.

Our immediate challenge in the next few months will be to use the anticipated federal stimulus money wisely and sensibly. We must use the additional funding to bridge the deficit, support tax relief and structural reforms, grow jobs, and grow our economy.

Today, the pressing issue is growing jobs in those sectors of the economy that will bring money and investment to our state.

To illustrate why our state continues to be so vulnerable to economic downturns, I want to share a chart with you! In 1978, Rhode Island had 137,000 jobs in manufacturing which represented 34% of the entire workforce-today we have 46,000 representing under ten percent of the workforce.

I want to repeat that. The state has reduced employment by 25 percent, while the cities and towns have increased employment by 38 percent.

Ladies and gentlemen, thats why your property taxes are so high and keep rising. Thats also why it is so imperative that we find ways to consolidate services, and reduce the burden on our economy and our taxpayers. Government services consume our economy's resources --- they don't create them!

The competition, among states and countries for companies and jobs is intense. There are many factors that go into a company's decision about site selection-available workforce, energy costs, site readiness, over-all business climate, and, yes, taxes. We have been working hard on the first four - but now we need to make significant changes in our tax competitiveness.

Im tired of people writing stories about R.I. being tax hell, or ranked near the bottom in business tax competitiveness. We need to reverse the trend on that chart with bold, business friendly tax reforms.

I am firmly convinced that if we dramatically change our tax structure, our economy will produce jobs! What Rhode Island needs now is more taxpayers; not more taxes. This will only come from a tax policy that says to our business community, stay here and grow your business, and by the way, tell all of your out-of-state business friends that R.I. is a great place to do business. I want to send a loud signal that - R.I. is open for Business!!!!"

It will be a challenge indeed for all political leaders. Many cannot rise to the challenge but my hope is that those who do will be an example for others.

Forbes Article, Gilt-Edged Pensions - How much are they really worth?

Forbes came out with an article last week about the lucky stiff retiring on a public sector pension. The article tells the story of the stiff retiring four years ago at age 42 with a $65,000 per year pension. The pension is indexed for life, that is guaranteed to increase every year. Forbes places the value of that pension at $2,000,000 and most of that will be funded by taxpayers today and into the future.

In the article Forbes notes that America is "creating a nasty social problem as well. America, in case you hadn't noticed, is dividing into two nations. The 22.5-million-strong public sector (that includes retirees) is growing ever larger, and enjoying ever greater wages and benefits often guaranteed by state constitutions." This nasty little problem is not only occurring the the United States but in Canada and most countries around the world.

I have followed the pension world for the past ten years with a focus on the large gap between public sector plans and those of the average Canadian worker. In the UK (England) they have coined the phrase Pension Apartheid for the two nations that are developing.

The compensation levels of the public sector have been designed to compensate public sector workers based on a need to avoid political confrontation. They have powerful unions and whenever there is an upcoming election they make their voices heard.

Originally the union propaganda was that the public sector was underpaid relative to the private sector. However, Forbes points out:
"In public-sector America things just get better and better. The common presumption is that public servants forgo high wages in exchange for safe jobs and benefits. The reality is they get all three. State and local government workers get paid an average of $25.30 an hour, which is 33% higher than the private sector's $19, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Throw in pensions and other benefits and the gap widens to 42%."

This same analysis holds true in Canada and recently was reinforced by the Wage Watch report released by the CFIB - Canadian Federation of Independent Business.

The real bonus to public sector employment is the pension plan. The pension plan is not based on an accumulation of funds like your plan is, it is based on a continued stream of income into retirement. This stream of income is based on 70% of the wage rates at termination of employment. In the Forbes example, the worker had a pension worth about 72% of his final salary. His ending salary was $90,000 per year and he will receive a $65,000 pension indexed for life.

These type of pensions do not exist in the private sector, except for a few companies, most of which were once public sector and are now "Crown Corporations".

Forbes notes that "four in five public-sector workers have lifetime pensions, versus only one in five in the private sector. The difference shifts huge risks from government to private-sector workers." In Canada those numbers are about the same.

Check out the Forbes article it certainly will create much needed debate around this issue over the next few weeks. Gilt-Edged Pensions