The liability grows every day for every current and past employee with a pension, and periodically goes down a little when one passes out of pension coverage, either by quitting before vesting or by passing away.
-
Show this thread
-
This mismatch in reserves and liabilities has caused the "Pension Tsunami", because almost everyone got a rosy report from their actuaries as to what the pension would cost, took the suggested reserve levels those actuaries thought might possibly cover, and *did not* save it.
4 replies 5 retweets 44 likesShow this thread -
The Post Office has relatively unique pension treatment, because it is quasi-governmental and part of the spinoff was Congress deciding that the Post Office should not be able to transfer unfunded pension liability to taxpayers.
1 reply 1 retweet 35 likesShow this thread -
So Congress passed a law saying "You don't get to pay-as-you-go. Instead, you need to model out costs for current and previous employees over a 50 year window from retirement date, and reserve adequately against those projected costs."
1 reply 3 retweets 43 likesShow this thread -
Defenders of the Post Office, 10+ years ago, said that this was unfair, because it is relatively unique treatment. The policy was instituted specifically to avoid transferring $100B+ in pension liability to the taxpayer.
1 reply 6 retweets 41 likesShow this thread -
Here's something I wrote eight years ago:pic.twitter.com/PJcbVqUmAM
4 replies 6 retweets 46 likesShow this thread -
"The Post Office would be profitable if only..." is, to be blunt, a lie. It is an accounting fiction. The Post Office was never profitable. It can never be profitable. The interesting argument to have is "OK, then who covers the shortfall here? We lied. We can lie no more."
3 replies 10 retweets 98 likesShow this thread -
This is not a situation unique to the Post Office. It will apply to almost every public pension. It is hitting the Post Office first because the Post Office is constrained by statute to lie a little less blatantly than most public pensions.
5 replies 26 retweets 152 likesShow this thread -
For more reading on pensions, which are going to be the largest financial crisis the world has ever seen, see http://pensiontsunami.com The site is 15 years old, and this was generally well understood the day they opened and for decades before that.
7 replies 26 retweets 149 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @patio11
Is this why those of us in the workforce NOW are no longer getting pensions, at all... we are lucky if we get a 401k, and even luckier if that comes with a match?!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes, the expense of pensions and the tightening accounting/regulatory regime to avoid massive underreserving is exactly why private employers have largely stopped offering defined-benefits pensions.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.