Pension plans for 1.5M on shaky ground
WASHINGTON — Despite an improving economy, retirement plans covering about 1.5 million workers are severely underfunded, threatening benefit cuts for retirees, a federal watchdog agency warned on Monday.
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation said multi-employer plans, which are collectively bargained retirement plans maintained by more than one employer, are most at risk. “Plan insolvencies ... are now both more likely and more imminent than in our last report,” the report said.
At the same time, the agency said single-employer pension plans — covering just more than 30 million participants — are on firmer financial footing and are likely to remain so at least during the next 10 years.
The report concluded that the outlook is slightly better than it was a year ago as the nation's economy gradually improves from the severe 2007-09 recession.
“In the past year, economic conditions have improved significantly, and most plans are projected to remain solvent,” said the agency, which was established under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.
But, it added, that research during the past year had made clear that, for some multi-employer plans, “even the improving economy will not be sufficient to maintain their solvency.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- John Nash, wife, ‘A Beautiful Mind’ inspiration, die in N.J. taxi crash
- Iraqi troops lack ‘will to fight,’ Secretary of Defense Carter says
- Navy divers to salvage remains of Confederate warship in Georgia
- Exhibit reproduces painter Frida Kahlo’s inspiration
- After bruising safety crisis, U.S. car watchdog shows its bite
- Cleveland protests of officer’s acquittal mostly peaceful
- Senator Warren calls for public hearings on bank waivers
- Housing authority officer shot dead in New Orleans
- Yellowstone injuries: Slips, falls outpace bear maulings
- Florida mother who refused circumcision for son, 4, freed
- Flash floods in Texas, Oklahoma kill 2; hundreds of homes gone