Benefit Levels Of Nonfederal Retirement Programs

In response to a congressional request, GAO prepared information on retirement programs in the nonfederal sector by estimating the levels of benefits at retirement that selected nonfederal programs provide to employees by age, years of service, and salary levels. GAO found that benefit formulas for nonfederal pension plans vary considerably; therefore, it calculated the benefit amounts produced by the formulas as a percentage of final salary. GAO found little difference in the average pension plan benefits available to retirees at age 65 and age 62 when years of service and salary levels were equal. Pension plan benefits for employees retiring at age 55 with 30 years of service ranged from 72 to 84 percent of the benefits they would have received if they had retired at age 62 with the same years of service and salary levels. In state government pension plans, age 55 benefits were about 85 percent of the benefit amounts at age 62 with the same years of service and salary levels. In addition, GAO found that state government pension plans provided higher average benefits than private sector pension plans. Finally, GAO found that the capital accumulation plan component of a typical private sector retirement program can add substantial retirement benefits to participating employees. A 30-year career employee who contributes to the plan can supplement his pension and social security benefits by 16 percent or more of his final annual salary. Since states generally do not match employee contributions in their plans, GAO did not calculate any thrift plans for them. Therefore, the combined benefits for state employees were less than those received by private sector employees who participate in thrift plans.

Benefit Levels of Nonfederal Retirement Programs

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided current information on private sector and federal white-collar employee compensation packages. By law, federal employees' salaries are set at a level equitable and comparable with similar levels of work in the private sector, unless the President proposes alternative federal pay rates. There is no such requirement for benefits comparability. GAO analyzed several pay and benefits comparability studies conducted by private and federal organizations, but did not independently validate the data contained in the studies. GAO noted that an independent study found that: (1) as of 1984, federal employees' total compensation averaged 7.2 percent less than that for private sector employees; and (2) in 1985, the difference increased to 9 percent or more because the federal pay increase for 1985 was limited to less than the average pay increase in the private sector. GAO found that: (1) frequent presidential use of alternative pay rates caused pay for federal employees to lag significantly behind that for private sector employees; (2) an 18.28 percent federal pay increase would be necessary to achieve federal pay comparability in 1985; (3) the federal retirement system is better than the average private sector system because it is worth more as a percentage of the average employee's pay, and federal retirement benefits are adjusted annually to offset consumer price increases; (4) private studies indicated that private sector employers generally pay a higher share of employee health insurance premiums than does the government; (5) private sector employee life insurance programs provide more basic coverage than the federal employee program, usually at no cost to the employee; (6) while federal employees generally receive one less holiday than private sector employees, this is offset by more generous federal annual leave benefits; and (7) federal sick leave lags behind the average private sector illness and disability income plan by 0.7 percent of pay.

Includes legal decisions and opinions of the Comptroller General.