The Rise and Demise of Defined Benefit Pension Plans

被引:1
|
作者
FitzPatrick, Richard C. [1 ]
Chu, Hung [1 ]
机构
[1] Manhattan Coll, Dept Management & Mkt, Riverdale, NY 10471 USA
关键词
competition; labor-management relations; pension analysis; pension plans; power;
D O I
10.1007/s10672-007-9049-8
中图分类号
F24 [劳动经济];
学科分类号
020106 ; 020207 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
The Defined Benefit Pension Plan (DBPP), once regarded as the gold standard of traditional corporate pension plans, has fallen upon hard times. Corporate sponsors regard the plans as financial drains, fountains of bad publicity, and targets for heavy-handed government regulation. Employees covered by the plans fear they will not deliver on the promises employers made to provide financial security after retirement. Legislative fixes for the system have hastened, not slowed down, the exodus of employers from DBPP. The authors of this paper agree that DBPP is, indeed, an endangered species in the private sector, but concur with the criticism that the conventional explanations for it - particularly in the trade literature - tend be self-serving, superficial and not convincing and often incomplete in their analysis. Using Porter's model of competition to identify the relative strengths and weaknesses of competing influences we endorse the conclusion that the failure of DBPP is one of strategic choice by employers whose power and influence in the global economy is not effectively counter-balanced by labor, or by forces sympathetic to labor. The growing trend towards the Defined Contribution Pension Plan (DCPP) is consonant with employers' interests but a setback for employees who had to give up the "gold standard" (DBPP). Even the paradoxical effect of ERISA hastening the demise of the pension system it was created to reform is less puzzling when examined in the context of who had influence in drafting the legislation, writing regulations and enforcing the law.
引用
收藏
页码:223 / 232
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Why do healthy firms freeze their defined-benefit pension plans?
    Atanasova, Christina
    Hrazdil, Karel
    GLOBAL FINANCE JOURNAL, 2010, 21 (03) : 293 - 303
  • [42] External cost of leverage adjustment: Evidence from defined benefit pension plans
    Kim, Tae-Nyun
    Kim, Kihun
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS, 2018, 96 : 1 - 14
  • [43] APPLICATION OF FEDERAL SECURITIES-LAWS TO NONCONTRIBUTORY, DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS
    GUNDERSON, RV
    UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW REVIEW, 1977, 45 (01): : 124 - 150
  • [44] Why do firms offer risky defined-benefit pension plans?
    Love, David
    Smith, Paul A.
    Wilcox, David
    NATIONAL TAX JOURNAL, 2007, 60 (03) : 507 - 519
  • [45] Do local governments present required disclosures for defined benefit pension plans?
    Vermeer, Thomas E.
    Styles, Alan K.
    Patton, Terry K.
    JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING AND PUBLIC POLICY, 2012, 31 (01) : 44 - 68
  • [46] ACCOUNTING/ACTUARIAL BIAS ENABLES EQUITY INVESTMENT BY DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS
    Gold, Jeremy
    NORTH AMERICAN ACTUARIAL JOURNAL, 2005, 9 (03) : 1 - 21
  • [47] An analysis of risk-taking behavior for public defined benefit pension plans
    Mohan, Nancy
    Zhang, Ting
    JOURNAL OF BANKING & FINANCE, 2014, 40 : 403 - 419
  • [48] Pension Contributions and Firm Performance: Evidence from Frozen Defined Benefit Plans
    Phan, Hieu V.
    Hegde, Shantaram P.
    FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 2013, 42 (02) : 373 - 411
  • [49] Tax avoidance in response to a decline in the funding status of defined benefit pension plans
    Chaudhry, Neeru
    Yong, Hue Hwa Au
    Veld, Chris
    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL MARKETS INSTITUTIONS & MONEY, 2017, 48 : 99 - 116
  • [50] Golden Handcuffs and Corporate Innovation: Evidence from Defined Benefit Pension Plans
    Huu Nhan Duong
    Qiu, Bin
    Rhee, S. Ghon
    REVIEW OF CORPORATE FINANCE STUDIES, 2022, 11 (01): : 128 - 168