Pension Flexibility: Alaska

Pensions Policy

Goal

The state should ensure that pension systems are portable, flexible and fair to all teachers.

Nearly meets goal
Suggested Citation:
National Council on Teacher Quality. (2015). Pension Flexibility: Alaska results. State Teacher Policy Database. [Data set].
Retrieved from: https://www.nctq.org/yearbook/state/AK-Pension-Flexibility-74

Analysis of Alaska's policies

Alaska provides a defined contribution pension plan for teachers. As of July 1, 2006, Alaska closed its defined benefit plan to anyone hired after this date, and its defined contribution plan is the only one available to new teachers. Its current plan is fully portable, flexible and fair to all workers.

Vesting in a defined contribution plan entitles teachers to permanent rights to their own contributions and any available employer contributions. Teachers in Alaska vest immediately in their own contributions plus earnings from investments. They vest in employer contributions based on the following schedule: 25 percent after two years of service, 50 percent after three years, 75 percent after four years and 100 percent after five years. This means that after three years, the vesting point recommended by NCTQ, teachers earn half of their employer accounts (equal to 3.5 percent of salary plus gains or losses from investments). While ideally teachers would be entitled to their full employer contribution at this point, Alaska's sliding scale is a reasonable compromise.



Citation

Recommendations for Alaska

Maintain its fully portable, flexible and fair pension system.
Alaska should maintain its defined contribution system and work diligently to educate teachers about their investments, especially because teachers in Alaska do not contribute to Social Security and may more heavily depend on their employer pension than other retirees.


State response to our analysis

Alaska was helpful in providing information that enhanced this analysis.

Research rationale

Anachronistic features of teacher pension plans disadvantage teachers early in their careers.

Nearly all states continue to provide teachers with a defined benefit pension system, an expensive and inflexible model that neither reflects the realities of the modern workforce nor provides equitable benefits to all teachers. To achieve the maximum benefits from such a plan, a teacher must begin and end his or her career in the same pension system. Teachers who leave before vesting—which is as much as 10 years in some states—are generally entitled to nothing more than their own contributions plus some interest. This approach may well serve as a retention strategy for some, but on a larger scale it fails to reflect the realities of the current workforce. At present, the United States is experiencing an explosion in school-age populations in some states, while other states are experiencing a decline. The nation's workforce needs to be able to respond to these changes. The current workforce is increasingly mobile, with most entering the workforce expecting to change jobs many times. All workers, including teachers, may move to jobs in other states with no intention of changing careers. To younger teachers in particular, a defined benefit plan may seem like a meaningless part of the compensation package and thus fail to attract young talent to the profession. A pension plan that cannot move across state lines and that requires a long-term commitment may not seem like much of a benefit at all.

There are alternatives. Defined contribution plans are fair to all teachers at all points in their careers. These plans are more equitable because each teacher's benefits are funded by his or her own contributions plus contributions from the employer specifically on the individual employee's behalf. This is fundamentally more equitable than defined benefit plans, which are generally structured to require new teachers to fund the benefits of retirees. Moreover, defined contribution plans are inherently portable and give employees flexibility and control over their retirement savings. It must also be noted that defined benefit plans can be portable and fair, if structured as cash balance plans or plans that permit the withdrawal of employer contributions.

Pension Flexibility: Supporting Research
NCTQ's analysis of the financial sustainability of state pension system is based on actuarial benchmarks promulgated by government and private accounting standards boards. For more information see U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2007, 30 and Government Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 25.

For an overview of the current state of teacher pensions, the various incentives they create, and suggested solutions, see Robert Costrell and Michael Podgursky. "Reforming K-12 Educator Pensions: A Labor Market Perspective." TIAA-CREF Institute (2011).

For evidence that retirement incentives do have a statistically significant effect on retirement decisions, see Joshua Furgeson, Robert P. Strauss, and William B. Vogt. "The Effects of Defined Benefit Pension Incentives and Working Conditions on Teacher Retirement Decisions", Education Finance and Policy (Summer, 2006).

For examples of how teacher pension systems inhibit teacher mobility, see Robert Costrell and Michael Podgursky, "Golden Handcuffs," Education Next, (Winter, 2010).

For additional information on state pension systems, see Susanna Loeb, and Luke Miller. "State Teacher Policies: What Are They, What Are Their Effects, and What Are Their Implications for School Finance?" Stanford University: Institute for Research on Education Policy and Practice (2006); and Janet Hansen, "Teacher Pensions: A Background Paper", published through the Committee for Economic Development (May, 2008).

For further evidence supporting NCTQ's teacher pension standards, see "Public Employees' Retirement System of the State of Nevada: Analysis and Comparison of Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution Retirement Plans." The Segal Group (2010). Can be accessed at: http://docplayer.net/16288272-Public-employees-retirement-system-of-the-state-of-nevada-analysis-and-comparison-of-defined-benefit-and-defined-contribution-retirement-plans.html