Top
Stories

Featured Article Getting Minorities to Buy In on Retirement February 13, 2012
Featured Article State Law Favored Over Feds in Overtime Case February 12, 2012
Featured Article Adopting a Social Media Mind-Set February 12, 2012
Featured Article Social Media and Collaboration Tools February 12, 2012
Featured Article Arbitration Pact Barring Class Lawsuits Violates NLRA February 12, 2012
Featured Article The Last Word: Backyard Retirement Plan February 11, 2012
Featured Article State Public Sector Retirement Plan Roundup February 10, 2012
Featured Article States Taking a Hard Look at Pensions February 10, 2012
Featured Article Wisconsin's Tough Choice February 10, 2012
Featured Article Small Employers Exploring Health Care Exchange Options February 8, 2012
Featured Article Tech Talk February 8, 2012

Latest News

Voters Reject Measures to Fund Retiree Benefits With Stock Investments

Results in South Carolina reveal how the public has become much more attuned to the risks associated with such returns.

  • November 6, 2008
  • Comments (0)

South Carolina voters this week rejected two constitutional amendments that would have allowed state and local governments to invest in stocks to fund retiree benefits. The votes show how risk-averse the public has become in recent months, experts say.

Currently, state and local governments have to set aside funds for retiree benefits and these funds are invested in low-yielding fixed-income investments. But despite warnings that by rejecting the amendments voters may have to pay higher taxes, more than 55 percent of voters defeated the measures.

In a letter Tuesday, November 4, to the editor in The Post and Courier in Charleston, South Carolina, Mayor Joseph Riley stated that voting in favor of Amendment 3, the local government amendment, would result in “tremendous savings to taxpayers.”

However, the mayor’s pleas were unheeded.

“In the current environment, a lot of people are scared stiff,” said Joe Hessenthaler, a principal at Towers Perrin. “They would rather take a fixed return of 2 percent even if it will cost them more.”

Overall, the public has become much more attuned to the risks associated with returns, said Cecil Hemingway, executive vice president and head of the U.S. retirement practice at Aon Consulting.

But just because the public is risk-averse today doesn’t mean these amendments won’t pass if they are brought to vote again in a few years, Hemingway said.

“We will all forget and then create another bubble and then remember about risk,” he said. “It’s human nature.”

—Jessica Marquez

Leave A Comment

Guidelines: Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content you post.

Daily Q&A

Are We the Only Company Laboring to Manage Our Expats?

How do we better manage our expat process? Ideally, we'd like to have some type of case-management tool that enables us to make sure we place the right people in the right overseas assignment. Could you share some pointers on how we can make sure the expat process we use works to the benefit of our company and our expats?

—Gone but Not Forgotten, HR consultant, Montreal

Read Answer

Stay Connected

Join our community for unlimited access to the latest tips, news and information in the HR world.

HR Jobs

View All Job Listings

Search