California to fund 401(k)s for prison guards on top of CalPERS pension in ‘major policy change’
One of the biggest changes presented in the tentative agreement between the
The state would make a one-time contribution of
By granting members access to both a state-funded pension and a 401(k) plan, the CCPOA agreement “fundamentally changes the state’s retirement benefit,” according to the LAO’s analysis.
“Such a change warrants serious and extensive deliberation,” the analysis read.
The CalPERS pension represents a “defined benefit” plan, which provides a fixed and predetermined amount of money for employees upon retirement. The employer bears the responsibility for investing and funding these traditional pension plans. Retirees often value the sense of security that comes with a guaranteed income each month.
In contrast, a 401(k) is the most common form of a “defined contribution” plan, which puts the investment burden largely on the employee. Employees fund their own accounts with pre-tax dollars, and the employer typically matches an employee’s contribution up to a certain amount. In the 1990s, the defined contribution plan surpassed traditional pensions as the dominant form of retirement plan.
As part of those deliberations, the LAO report prompts the Legislature to consider what problem the proposal is trying to address, in addition to whether there should be a vesting requirement on the 401(k) plans. The analysis also poses the question of whether the state should decrease pension benefits for state workers who also receive employer-funded 401(k)s.
Former state finance director
“If one guy can get it, why can’t the other guy get it?” Genest said. “That’s the way this stuff works.”
The proposed agreement doesn’t include any reduction of pension contributions. Genest suggested the state could’ve used the introduction of 401(k)s to lower the financial burden placed on it by an underfunded pension fund. In July, CalPERS reported that the fund was approximately 72% funded, meaning it could pay only 72% of the benefits it owes if it had to pay them out today.
“It’s a missed opportunity,” Genest said.
If the state were to change its mind and choose to decrease its CalPERS contribution, it would face significant hurdles due to the so-called California Rule — the longstanding legal precedent that bars public agencies from cutting retirement benefits without offering workers additional compensation. The state would have to give CCPOA another perk, such as increasing the 401(k) benefit further, if it wanted to decrease the pension liability, Genest said.
On Wednesday afternoon, the Assembly budget committee were expected to consider the tentative agreements for bargaining units represented by CCPOA,
©2023 The Sacramento Bee. Visit sacbee.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
LAKO: The back-door Roth IRA strategy: Pitfalls and potential tax consequences
Southern Trust Insurance Chooses Duck Creek OnDemand for its Cohesive and Comprehensive Full-Suite Capabilities
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News