Cover: Public Employee Retention Responses to Alternative Retirement Plan Design

Public Employee Retention Responses to Alternative Retirement Plan Design

South Carolina Teachers and State Public Employees

Published Mar 22, 2021

by David Knapp, Beth J. Asch, Michael G. Mattock

Download eBook for Free

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.8 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Policy makers in South Carolina are considering changes to retirement benefits for public employees to make employer costs more predictable, reduce risk and uncertainty, and to shore up long-run funding of their pension system. These reforms typically involve prospective benefit reductions, contribution increases, or both for future entrants. Typically, alternative proposals are assessed in terms of their effects on pension cost and risk. We evaluate the impact of a range of potential pension reforms on employee retention. Using estimated economic models of the retention behavior of South Carolina public employees, we simulate the retention responses of these employees.

We find that changes in pension design, especially changes in the design of the defined benefit (DB) plan, create behavioral responses that influence how long these employees remain in public service. Further, reforms to the state's DB plan influence its relative value compared to the state optional alternative retirement plan, a defined contribution plan (DC), leading to shifts in employee choice between these plans.

We also considered recent reform proposals which have included an enhancement to the DC plan and a hybrid DB/DC plan. Both plans are predicted to lead to relatively small changes in employee retention, suggesting limited impact to employee turnover and longevity relative to the status quo. We find that our example hybrid plan comes closest to achieving no change in employee retention relative to the current DB plan with a slight increase or decrease in the average length of service depending on the group of public employees examined. The key implication of our analysis is that pension reform proposals should consider not just the effects of the proposals on pension funding and risk but also the effects on retention and the experience mix of the workforce.

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was sponsored by by The Pew Charitable Trusts and conducted by RAND Education and Labor.

This report is part of the RAND working paper series. RAND working papers are intended to share researchers' latest findings and to solicit informal peer review. They have been approved for circulation by RAND but may not have been formally edited or peer reviewed.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.