Women and Pensions
Boston Sunday Globe, August 18, 1996
Retirement pensions - once a bedrock promise to American workers for a
lifetime of toil - are today as endangered as health care benefits and job
security. Congress is considering steps to shore up pension guarantees, but
often lost in the debate are the particular retirement disadvantages faced
by women.
The poverty rate for Americans over age 65 is 12 percent, but for women
over 65 it is 27 percent, higher even than the disgraceful rates of poverty
among children, which tend to receive more attention. The reasons for the
gender disparity are three: Women live an average of six years longer than
men, so their resources need to last longer; women are far more likely than
men to live alone on a single income; women earn less than men during their
working lives and spend more years out of the workforce for child-raising
and caregiving.
This structural triple-whammy keeps older women poor. Too often they
operate in the mistaken belief that their husbands' pensions will support
them in old age. The fact is that three out of five women in America today
will reach age 65 without a husband, either through death or divorce.
According to the national Pension Rights Center, one out of five older women
has social security as her sole source of income.
"Poverty in old age, too many women are discovering, has a
distinctly feminine face," says Teresa Heinz, whose Heinz Family
Foundation is cosponsoring a series of national forums on the issue.
Times change, but not fast enough. Women are working more than ever but
they are still concentrated in lower-income service and social work jobs and
part-time positions, and they still spend an average of 11 years out of the
job market.
The first private employer pension plan was set up by American Express in
1875. But today, as businesses downsize and unions lose influence, the
number of companies offering pension benefits is shrinking. Even those that
do are moving away from so-called "defined benefit plans," which
pay out a set monthly benefit for life (similar to Social Security) and
toward "defined contribution plans," which shift most of the
financial burden to the employee. Typically, these 4OI-k-type plans require
the worker to contribute before the company will provide any benefit, a
difficult hurdle for low-income workers, most of whom are women.
There are prescriptions for change that can make old age more secure for
both sexes:
Vest employees sooner. The Massachusetts pension system for state
employees considers workers vested in their pension plans only after 10
years of employment. This is especially hard on women, who rarely work 10
years without interruption. The five years required by federal law for
private employers is more realistic.
Give credit for part-time work. Federal law requires private companies to
offer equal pension benefits to part-timers if they work at least 20 hours a
week. But it hardly seems fair that employees who work for 19 hours a week,
possibly for years on end, get no credit at all. Hours accrued for pension
purposes should be counted more equitably to ensure the system is not rigged
against women. US Rep. Patricia Schroeder of Colorado has proposed
legislation to cover part-time workers with benefits beginning at 10 hours a
week.
There are also steps women can take in their own behalf: The minimum wage
bill awaiting President Clinton's signature includes provisions allowing
women who work as homemakers to invest up to $2,000 tax-free in an
individual retirement account, for a total of $4,000 per couple. Currently,
eligible married couples can take-the tax break only for $2,250 a year.
Every woman who is eligible should take advantage of this benefit.
Women must become informed about their husband's pension arrangements before
they become widowed. By law a surviving spouse must receive 50 percent of
her husband's pension, but some workers opt for lump sums or other payout
plans. Wives must sign a waiver agreeing to such changes, but they can be
unaware of what they are signing away. Legislation requiring the IRS to
develop simple, uniform language for these waivers was watered down this
year.
In the 1970s, women entering the workforce agitated for pay equity with
the slogan "Raises, not Roses." Today, more and more women are
focusing on achieving equitable retirements. Their rallying cry: Pensions,
not posies.
|