A
proposed settlement to resolve litigation over Rhode Island’s public pension
system reform was approved by a judge.
The
Associated Press reports that Superior Court Judge Sarah Taft-Carter overruled
objections to the settlement, putting an end to nearly all the lawsuits by
public-sector unions and retirees against the state over the 2011 reform. Lawmakers
must also approve the settlement.
Two
one-time $500 stipends to current retirees, with the first payment a month
after enactment and the second paid a year later;
A
once-every-four-years increase in the pensions paid to current retirees on
their first $30,000 in retirement benefits, as opposed to the first $25,000;
and
A
tweak in the retirement age, to allow workers to retire with full benefits at
age 65 after 30 years of service; age 64, 31 years; age 63, 32 years; and age
62, 33 years.
Rhode Island’s
pension reform was passed in November 2011, and it included, among other
things, a suspension of cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) for retirees, with
reinstatement depending on the financial improvements of the retirement system.
The reform sparked several lawsuits by both unions and retirees.
An annual study from Vanguard finds many retirement plan sponsors have embraced auto-features and a deeper sense of ownership over participant outcomes.
The 2015 edition of Vanguard’s “How America Saves” study
shows plan sponsors continue to aggressively evolve and refine the defined
contribution (DC) workplace savings model.
The study outlines increased use of automatic enrollment
among the Vanguard client base. At year-end 2014, 36% of Vanguard plans had
implemented auto-enrollment, a 50% increase since 2009. Today, approximately 60%
of newly hired employees participating in Vanguard 401(k) plans were
automatically enrolled.
“Moreover, although this feature was traditionally used only
with newly hired employees, sponsors of half of Vanguard plans have now chosen
to apply it to eligible nonparticipants,” the firm explains. “In addition,
seven in 10 auto-enrollment plans have implemented automatic annual
deferral-rate increases.”
Vanguard says these two approaches are leading to very
meaningful jumps in retirement readiness for participants.
“The first step in retirement savings is participation,” says
Jean Young, lead author of the report and a senior research analyst with the
Vanguard Center for Retirement Research. “Over the past decade, we’ve seen a
meaningful jump in total participation rates. Three-quarters of eligible workers
now participate in their employer’s plan, up from two-thirds 10 years ago,
underscoring the impact of autopilot plan designs.”
Another positive trend is a marked shift toward optimally
designed portfolios for participants, Vanguard says—especially the use of
automatic asset-allocation solutions based on a target retirement date or a
targeted level of portfolio risk.
“The value of age- and risk-appropriate portfolio
construction choices is most prominently reflected in the continued growth of
target-date funds [TDFs], particularly as the default investment option,”
Vanguard finds. “With 88% of plan sponsors offering target-date funds, nearly
all Vanguard participants have access to this professionally managed and
diversified investment choice, and 64% take advantage of this option. Last
year, $4 of every $10 deposited in Vanguard plans was invested in target-date
funds.”
According to Vanguard’s research, TDFs and other
professionally managed allocations “have the added benefit of reducing extreme
allocations and establishing appropriate risk levels for participants.” As of
year-end 2014, roughly one in eight employees held an extreme allocation
position. For example, 8% of participants held only equity investments, while
5% held no equity investments in their portfolios.
These numbers are still too high, Vanguard says, but 10
years ago, one in three participants held an extreme allocation position, so
things are getting better. This is also true of extreme allocations to company
stock, Vanguard notes.
“In addition to the broad adoption of diversified, balanced
investment programs, there has been a dramatic shift away from company stock,”
the study notes. “Only 8% of participants held a concentrated stock position at
the end of 2014 [employer stock or otherwise], compared with 18% a decade
prior—more than a 50% improvement.”
Additional findings from the research can be explored here.