The Pension Series (Part 28): The Golden Albatross Vs. Age, Tenure, and Gender

Posted on 16-September-21 by Grumpus

To justify studying Golden Albatross (i.e., stay-or-go) pensionable job decisions for my master’s program, I made an argument. I’m not talking about a Facebook or Twitter argument where everyone types in CAPITAL LETTERS and no one changes their mind. I’m talking about an academic argument. That’s right, I moved beyond my typical ranting via the interwebs and masqueraded as a social scientist for a few months. Let me tell ya, white lab coats for hairy knuckle draggers are hard to come by!

I’ll let you guess which one is me.

My thesis argued that human resources (HR) managers needed to know which pension design elements made their pensionable workers most likely to stay. Reasons they might need to know this included if pension plan re-design was required after a fiscal crisis — like the dot-com crash in the early 2000s. Since the main reason for offering a pension is to create worker retention, I reasoned that pensionable employers would want to avoid cutting design elements that most attracted workers towards staying.

Of course, the argument was hypothetical. I have neither the ear of HR managers anywhere nor the nerve to advocate cutting design elements from pensions. I simply made the argument to convince my advisor and those (un)lucky enough to grade my thesis. However, after collecting and analyzing the results from my pension survey, I was ready to declare ‘Don’t mess with healthcare!’ to any HR manager that would listen.

If you’ve read Pension Series Part 27, then you know why. Survey participants ranked ‘pension subsidized healthcare’ as the design element that made them consider staying at their job the most during their Golden Albatross decision. In fact, the final weighted score for healthcare was ten percentage points higher than the second-place design element, ‘immediate annuity.’ Therefore, the results appeared to support a ‘keep your money grubbing hands off of healthcare’ declaration.

That said, I’m glad I didn’t declare this straight away. As you’re about to find out, age, tenure, and gender are far more powerful elements during a Golden Albatross decision than any singular pension design element — even one as popular as healthcare. Continue reading →

The Pension Series (Part 27): The Golden Albatross Pension Survey

Posted on 13-July-21 by Grumpus

Would You Like To Take A Pension Survey?

I loved the Animaniacs cartoon when I was a teenager, especially one episode called “Survey Ladies.” In it, two ladies run around a shopping mall hounding the Animaniacs screaming, “would you like to take a survey?” and asking crazy questions like, “would you eat beans with George Wendt?” For those of you who don’t know, George Wendt was Norm in the sitcom Cheers.

That’s how I felt in March 2021 as I administered a pension survey to US-based pensionable workers and retirees from several personal finance Facebook groups and my blog’s email distribution list. I ran around (virtually) trying to convince pensionable workers and retirees to take my survey and answer many seemingly crazy pension-related questions. Sadly, I couldn’t figure out a way to work George Wendt or beans into it. Continue reading →

The Pension Series (Part 26): Continuance Commitment

Posted on 28-June-21 by Grumpus

An Albatross By Another Name

Guess what? I may not have needed to coin the Golden Albatross metaphor! It’s sad but true. I cried (on the inside) when I discovered that business management academics had an entire theory that captured employees’ stay-or-go psychological condition long before I arrived on the scene with the Golden Albatross. It’s called ‘continuance commitment.’

While neither as catchy as the Golden Albatross nor limited to just pensionable workers, continuance commitment fits the Golden Albatross metaphor perfectly. The only difference is that the Golden Albatross describes the situation for pensionable workers. On the other hand, continuance commitment captures the stay or go feeling that any worker might face while working any type of job.

Is this albatross masquerading as a management theory?

This post is all about continuance commitment and why I think it’s vital that pensionable workers know about it. The article starts small, with a definition of continuance commitment, and then moves on to the general theory. I then explain how continuance commitment fits into the study of voluntary employee turnover. I also link continuance commitment, voluntary turnover, and defined benefit pensions (DBPs) together. Afterward, I take a quick look at how continuance commitment ties into pension plan design, which I discussed in Pension Series Part 25. I do this to set up the discussion for Part 27 of the Pension Series. Finally, I end on a cautionary note about the types of employees continuance commitment produces. Continue reading →