Pension Neutrality: Oklahoma

Analysis of Oklahoma's policies

Oklahoma's pension system is based on a benefit formula that is not neutral, meaning that each year of work does not accrue pension wealth in a uniform way until teachers reach conventional retirement age, such as that associated with Social Security.

Teachers' retirement wealth is determined by their monthly payments and the length of time they expect to receive those payments. Monthly payments are usually calculated as final average salary multiplied by years of service multiplied by a set multiplier (such as 1.5). Higher salary, more years of service or a greater multiplier increases monthly payments and results in greater pension wealth. Earlier retirement eligibility with unreduced benefits also increases pension wealth, because more payments will be received.

To qualify as neutral, a pension formula must utilize a constant benefit multiplier and an eligibility timetable based solely on age, rather than years of service. Basing eligibility for retirement on years of service creates unnecessary and often unfair peaks in pension wealth, while allowing unreduced retirement at a young age creates incentives to retire early. Plans that change their multipliers for various years of service do not value each year of teaching equally. Therefore, plans with a constant multiplier and that base retirement on an age in line with Social Security are likely to create the most uniform accrual of wealth.

Oklahoma's pension plan is commended for utilizing a constant benefit multiplier of 2 percent; however, teachers may retire before standard retirement age based on years of service without a reduction in benefits. Teachers may retire according to the "Rule of 90," meaning that age plus years of service equal 90, while other vested teachers may not retire with unreduced benefits until age 62. Therefore, teachers who begin their careers at age 22 can reach the "Rule of 90" with 34 years of service by age 56, entitling them to six additional years of unreduced retirement benefits beyond what other teachers would receive who may not retire until age 62. Not only are teachers being paid benefits by the state well before Social Security's retirement age, but these provisions, along with the state's early retirement with reduced benefits based on years of service, may also encourage effective teachers to retire earlier than they may otherwise, and they fail to treat equally those teachers who enter the system at a later age and give the same amount of service.

Recent legislation moves the system closer to neutrality. Teachers entering the system on or after November 1, 2011, may retire with the "Rule of 90" at a minimum age of 60 or with any years of service at age 65. This moves the state's retirement eligibility closer in-line with Social Security, but retirement based on years of service remains. In addition, the annual financial report stated that these changes to retirement eligibility were not taken into consideration for the current valuation because some of the language was unclear, and as a result the bill may be clarified and reintroduced in 2012. 

Citation

Oklahoma Teachers Retirement System, Client Handbook, January 2010 http://www.ok.gov/TRS/documents/Client%20Handbook%20V%201%200.pdf Teachers' Retirement System of Oklahoma, Annual Actuarial Valuation as of June 30, 2011 http://www.ok.gov/TRS/documents/June%2030%202011%20Actuarial%20Report.pdf

Recommendations for Oklahoma

End retirement eligibility based on years of service.
Oklahoma should change its practice of allowing teachers whose age and years of service equal 90 to retire at any age with full benefits. If retirement at an earlier age is offered to some teachers, benefits should be reduced accordingly to compensate for the longer duration they will be awarded.

Align eligibility for retirement with unreduced benefits with Social Security retirement age.
Oklahoma allows all teachers to retire before conventional retirement age, some as young as 56. As life expectancies continue to increase, teachers may draw out of the system for many more years than they contributed. This is not compatible with a financially sustainable system (see Goal 4-H).

State response to our analysis

Oklahoma was helpful in providing NCTQ with facts that enhanced this analysis.