House Committee on Education and Labor
U.S. House of Representatives

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-CA), the senior Republican on the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee, today expressed concern about the solvency of some unionized workers’ pension plans after a new report exposed serious funding shortfalls that could leave workers vulnerable in retirement. Even more troubling, McKeon noted, is that some pension plans serving rank-and-file union members appear to be significantly less well-funded than the plans established for those same unions’ officials.

“Congress passed legislation two years ago to ensure that unions and employers would keep the promises made to their workers about the security of their retirement,” said McKeon.  “This new report casts serious doubt about whether that’s actually happening, particularly for many of those workers whose pensions are overseen by their unions.”

The report, Unions vs. Private Pension Plans: How Secure Are Union Members’ Retirements?, examines the funded status of several collectively bargained pension plans.  It offers comparisons with the funded status of pension plans provided only to union officials, and also to benchmarks for non-union pension plans.  Released today by the Hudson Institute, the report uncovers a troubling pattern of funding shortfalls that could leave workers without the retirement benefits they have earned.  The disparity between the funded status of plans for rank-and-file workers and that of union officials is especially troubling, McKeon noted, leading to questions about why workers appear to have a less secure retirement than union bosses.

“While some rank-and-file workers’ pension plans are secure and well-funded, in far too many instances union pension plans appear to be insufficiently funded to provide workers with the retirement benefits they have been promised,” said McKeon.  “For workers who rely on their unions to negotiate and oversee their pension plans, these findings are extremely troubling.  That union worker pensions appear to be at a considerable funding disadvantage raises serious questions, and certainly warrants further investigation.”

# # #