Retirement plans today tend to be designed with features so the average person can begin saving with little effort. Yet, it’s seemingly not working for many employees. Instead of easier, do we need to make it harder to avoid?
When 401(k) and other defined contribution (DC) plans came into existence, the industry focused on access. The thought was that if only employees had these plans available, everyone would immediately become retirement and investment experts on their own. That generally didn't happen. So, we spent the last 10-20 years focusing on making the process to save for retirement easier for employees. The use of automated features, including automatic (auto) enrollment, and Qualified Default Investment Alternatives (QDIAs) was used by plan sponsors to help take advantage of human inertia and get people enrolled in their plans. Target date funds (TDFs), which are built to help ensure asset allocation would adjust automatically over time, have typically become the standard QDIA for many plans. The problem now is that while this helps, it doesn't solve the issue for everyone. That same inertia that is counted on to get people into the plan can also be what keeps people out of the plan, particularly if they miss the auto enrollment period.
The “easy button” plan features haven’t been working
The reality is nearly half of U.S. workers don’t participate in a retirement plan.
Many employees don’t enroll in their employer’s retirement plan due to a lack of information and confidence in basic investment terminology. Only 30% say they’re comfortable investing money. Unsurprising, age and salary impact the decision to contribute to a retirement plan. Many also say they have too much debt and need to pay down some or all their debt before they can start to save for retirement.
I have not started to save for retirement
48%
Gen Z (ages 18-27)
38%
Salary < $50,000
Employee choice remains
Some employers feel it’s too controlling and paternalistic to implement automated features into the plan design. I argue the opposite. Being paternalistic to me means helping and educating employees to make the best decisions for themselves and their future. Nothing suggested above disallows employee choice. Those employees who are actively engaged in their plan, choosing their investments and savings rate can continue to do so. Those who decide time and again to avoid the plan can continue to do so, but it’ll become much harder to make that choice. Time counts in a defined contribution plan. Every year someone fails to save in the employer-sponsored retirement plan in their 20’s could decrease their future income by thousands of dollars.
Discover more
Dive deeper into why employees don’t take advantage of their employer’s retirement plan with our new research, Principal® Retirement Security Survey—Nonparticipants.
It’s important to work with a retirement service provider who understands and has the expertise to consult on options to help deliver the desired results. If you’re looking for options that could work in building a more robust retirement plan—reach out to your Principal® representative.