Risk of pension meltdown grows due to inaction by U.S.
Congress
Send a link to a friend
[January 08, 2020] CHICAGO,
(Reuters) - The window is closing on the chance to avert a pension
meltdown that will slash the retirement benefits of more than a million
U.S. workers.
Lawmakers in Washington have been working on ways to protect the
benefits promised to participants in multiemployer pension plans, which
are created under collective bargaining agreements and jointly funded by
groups of employers in industries like construction, trucking, mining
and food retailing.
Last year, the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate laid out
blueprints with very different visions for solutions, and failed to
reach any agreement on a way forward.
Congress did slip a rescue package into the massive $1.4 trillion
spending bill passed last month for one plan close to failure, sponsored
by the United Mine Workers of America. (Full Story) But the House and
Senate are deeply divided on how to solve the broader problem -
Democrats are pushing for a package of low-interest loans to prop up the
funds, while Republicans want to boost insurance premiums paid by
employers, add new premiums paid by plan participants and force more
conservative accounting assumptions.
The failure of lawmakers to take broader action means any solution now
likely will wait until after the November 2020 elections - and that will
leave precious little time to avert a very damaging outcome for people
counting on pensions.
As many as 117 multiemployer pension plans covering 1.4 million
participants are underfunded and sponsors have told regulators and
participants that they could fail within the next 20 years, according to
a report issued just before the holidays by Cheiron Inc, an actuarial
consulting firm that advises multiemployer plans, public employers,
nonprofit organizations and corporations.
Seven plans failed in the past year when they became insolvent or
terminated after all the employers withdrew. And up to 12 more plans
covering 245,000 participants signaled in filings with the U.S.
Department of Labor that they are likely to fail by the end of this
year. The plans are sponsored by union locals covering truck drivers,
bricklayers and other workers.
In the past year, the amount of total underfunding has risen 15.7% to
$56.5 billion. But with action unlikely during an election year, the
problem likely will now wait until 2021 or later - and it becomes more
expensive and difficult to solve as more plans fail with every passing
year, said Gene Kalwarski, CEO of Cheiron.
Cheiron’s analysis notes that 44 plans expect to fail by 2025 - the year
when the biggest underfunded plan - the Central States, Southeast and
Southwest Areas Pension Plan - runs dry. The multiemployer fund of the
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), which backstops the plans,
would be exhausted in that year, as well. In 2025, the benefits of
639,400 workers will be at risk, Cheiron said.
An earlier attempt at reform was passed in 2014. But the Multiemployer
Pension Reform Act has faced strong resistance from retiree
organizations, consumer groups and some labor unions. That law lets
troubled plans apply for government permission to make deep benefit cuts
if they can show that the reductions would prolong plan life.
[to top of second column] |
The dome of the U.S. Capitol Building is seen as the sun sets on
Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., July 26, 2019. REUTERS/Erin
Scott/File Photo
DIVERGENT PLANS
When plans go belly-up, the PBGC steps in to pay a portion of benefits. But
insurance premiums - and benefit levels - are much lower for multiemployer plans
than for single employer plans.
The PBGC guarantee is based on a pension for each year of service a person earns
under his or her plan; the maximum guarantee is $12,870 for a worker with 30
years of service - far less than that person would receive from a solvent plan.
In July, the House of Representatives passed legislation to address the problem,
built around providing low-interest loans to struggling plans. But in the
Senate, several key committees issued a white paper with a very different focus
than the House bill. It would boost substantially the premiums that plan
sponsors pay into the system, and would add premiums paid by retirees as well,
which would effectively act as a benefit cut. It also contains reforms to the
discount rate assumptions plans use to project future health.
“Republicans view the House bill as a bailout, and Democrats think the Senate
plan would make healthy plans fail,” said Kalwarski. The Republican plan “would
in effect spell the end for multiemployer plans,” he added. “More plans would
collapse, leaving fewer plans holding the bag to pay premiums.”
IMPLICATIONS OF MINE WORKERS RESCUE
Senate Republicans may not like the idea of low-interest loans to rescue plans,
but that did not stop them from adding to the 2019 spending legislation a more
outright bailout for the pensions of 96,300 participants in the United Mine
Workers of America plan.
The fund is the fourth-worst funded plan in the multiemployer system, and was
forecast to become insolvent in 2022 before the legislation passed. But it has a
powerful political ally in Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky,
and lawmakers in other major coal-mining states.
The rescue will allow the U.S. Treasury to send up to $750 million a year to the
Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Fund. The fund, supported partly by fees paid by
coal companies, already is used to pay for healthcare for retired miners and
will now also be used to shore up the pension fund.
The fund offered a convenient route to rescue the Mine Workers plan - but it is
a taxpayer-funded bailout nonetheless. Will that have an impact on any future
debates in Congress about a broader solution for multiemployer pensions? We will
have to wait to see.
(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters)
(Reporting by Mark Miller in Chicago; Editing by Matthew Lewis)
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |