We would like to ensure that you are still receiving content that you find useful – please confirm that you would like to continue to receive ILO newsletters.
11 April 2012
Re-engineering the three pillars
Moving the normal retirement age
Scaling back public sector pensions
Insuring long-term disability plans
In its recent budget, the federal government revealed that it will be eliminating the penny. However, that is not the only penny that has dropped. Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced on January 26 2012 at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland that the government was looking at increasing the retirement age for the old-age security system. Now it is official: eligibility for old-age security benefits will be increased to age 67. Other notable changes in the budget are that public sector pensions are being made more fiscally responsible and long-term disability plans in the federal sector will have to be provided on an insured basis.
The government has subtly re-engineered the Canadian retirement income system. For the past 45 years, the Canadian system has been described as having three pillars:
The government has conveniently shifted the pillars due to a weakness in the second pillar. This is not insignificant and should not go unnoticed. Cracks have begun to appear in the retirement income system; by changing the pillars, the system has been made to look stronger and more sustainable.
The adjusted three pillars, as described by the federal government, are:
Part of the reason for this reorganisation is because the former second pillar (traditionally employer-sponsored defined benefit pension plans) is largely defunct – at least in the private sector. By lumping all employer-sponsored plans and private savings into the third pillar, this pillar does not look as weak, relative to the other two. In addition, the new first pillar, comprised only of the old-age security system and other non-contributory programmes funded exclusively from government revenues, can be treated separately.
In the past, the old-age security system and the Canada/Quebec pension plans (the traditional first pillar) were universal schemes which, when combined, would provide retirement income equal to about 40% of the year's maximum pensionable earnings (currently about $50,000). In 1989 the old-age security system claw-back was introduced, thereby eliminating universality.
In its budget, the government announced a further chipping away at the old-age security system, with the increasing of the normal retirement age at which full benefits will become available. Currently age 65, the age will be gradually increased to 67, starting with those born in 1958.(1) Commencing in 2023, the normal retirement age will be increased by one month every two months, such that those born in 1962 or later will not be entitled to full old-age security benefits until they reach age 67 (in 2029). The given reasons are:
The first two factors have not been a secret to demographers; the third factor is incongruous.
The increase to the normal retirement age for the old-age security system brings imbalance to the system. The Canada/Quebec pension plan is based on a retirement age of 65, as are public and private sector pension plans. Although mandatory retirement has been eliminated across Canada, the vast majority of workplaces use 65 as a normal retirement age. Insured benefits are often reduced at 65 and some, such as disability benefits, are eliminated at 65. Further, the design of many employer pension plans implicitly or explicitly accounts for old-age security benefits and the Canada/Quebec pension plan benefits starting at age 65. With this change, many employers will be forced to rethink the design of their retirement plans.
One salutary change to the old age security system will be to permit the deferral of the start date for those wishing to start their pension later and perhaps coordinate the old age security start date with that of the Canada/Quebec pension plans, which currently provide for late start dates. The proposal is to permit individuals to defer their start date by up to five years, in which case the old age security benefits would be actuarially increased. It is interesting that under the fully mature old age security system with a normal retirement age of 67, the latest start date will be age 72, which is beyond the date by which pension and registered retirement savings plan income must start being received (the end of the year in which one reaches age 71).
The government has confirmed that no changes are being made to the Canada Pension Plan. The combined employer/employee contribution rates will remain constant at 9.9%.
The government will be making changes to pensions in the public sector. It is committed to making these plans "fair relative to those offered in the private sector". However, the only changes announced are to increase the normal retirement age from 60 to 65 (not 67) for those who join the public service after 2012, and to increase gradually employee contributions to 50% of overall cost.
Few pension plans in the private sector provide for full retirement at age 60. Maintaining 60 as the retirement age for everyone currently employed in the public sector means that this extremely lucrative benefit, unique to the public sector, will be around for decades. Public sector employees currently age 25 can still look forward to full pensions at 60, some 35 years from now. The disparity between public sector and private sector plans will continue to grow as a result. The increase in employee contributions to a reasonable level has long been needed. The government is to be commended for taking this step, although it remains to be seen how long the phase-in period is.
One other change announced in the budget is to require employers in the federal sector that provide long-term disability plans to do so on a fully insured basis. Currently, some large employers provide long-term disability benefits on a 'pay go' basis, rather than insuring the benefits through an insurance company. The logic is that these employers save in the long run by not paying premiums to insurance companies. The difficulties arise in the event of bankruptcy, in which case disabled employees are left without protection. The requirement to insure benefits would provide a much needed level of security.
The materials contained on this website are for general information purposes only and are subject to the disclaimer.
ILO is a premium online legal update service for major companies and law firms worldwide. In-house corporate counsel and other users of legal services, as well as law firm partners, qualify for a free subscription.