Given that administrators are the largest net beneficiaries of
the current teacher pension system, it should come as no surprise that they are not at the barricades clamoring for change.
Podcast: Robert Costrell and Michael Podgursky talk with Education Next about ways to eliminate the peculiar incentives built into
current teacher pension systems.
Robert Costrell and Michael Podgursky talk with Education Next about ways to eliminate the peculiar incentives built into
current teacher pension systems.
Not exact matches
Ending tenure without ending the
current pension system would create some impossible pressures;
teachers nearing certain vesting thresholds, for instance, would have a target on their backs.
Our analysis, Reforming K - 12 Educator
Pensions: A Labor Market Perspective, shows that the
current systems result in very large implicit transfers from young
teachers working short teaching spells to «long termers» who spend entire careers in the same
system.
That is not the case with
current systems, where
pension - wealth accrual is highly back loaded and concentrated at certain arbitrary points in
teachers» careers.
In the area of
teacher pension reform, however, it is important to recognize that school administrators reap the largest net benefits from the
current system, which has rising costs and clear inefficiencies.
The folks at TeacherPensions.org are concerned that our
current system of
teacher pensions leaves too many
teachers without adequate funds for retirement.
Under
current pension systems, a
teacher switching to a different career after five years leaves with virtually nothing in retirement savings.
These
teachers lose out because
current public - sector defined benefit
pension systems are heavily biased toward
teachers with longevity and stability.
For
teachers (who make up over 60 percent of workers covered by New Jersey's state
pension plans) the
current pension system disproportionately allocates benefits.
In fact, the
current Teacher Retirement
System (TRS) was an attempt to fix solvency issues with the original state pension s
System (TRS) was an attempt to fix solvency issues with the original state
pension systemsystem.
Thankfully, mandatory retirement laws do not exist anymore, but
current pension systems do subtly encourage older
teachers to retire.
Neither The New York Times nor
teachers union leaders discuss how individuals lose out under
current pension systems.
The
current pension structure «pushes»
teachers out of the
system by decreasing
pension wealth for every additional year a
teacher chooses to stay in the classroom beyond normal retirement.
They do so by prioritizing defined contribution plans and limiting the future scope of the
pension system, while fulfilling commitments to
current teachers and retirees.
A proposal to reform Kentucky's
pension system would reduce benefits for
current and future retirees, and the local
teachers» union says the plan would incentivize qualified educators to leave the state.
Mandatory retirement laws do not exist anymore, but
current pension systems do subtly encourage older
teachers to retire.
Unlike the
current system, which features large financial incentives for
teachers to retire precisely at a pre-determined age (New York City
teachers who begin at age 25 currently hit peak
pension wealth at age 63), the new
system would offer
teachers a smooth wealth accrual that would allow them to time their retirement decisions as they saw fit.
As the authors make clear, the
current defined benefit
pension systems in place across the country do offer a higher maximum level of compensation for the minority of
teachers who stay in the profession and remain in the same
pension system for their entire careers.
But what these graphs illustrate is just how few
teachers are actually benefitting from the
current pension system.
Most observers of the
current teacher pension plans focus their attention on the small minority of
teachers who dedicate their careers to working in public schools in one
pension system.