December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
The Effect of the Current Population Survey Redesign on
Retirement-Plan Participation Estimates, p. 2
Worker Opinions About Employee Benefits: Differences
Among Millennials, Baby Boomers, and Generation X Have
Implications for Plan Sponsors, p. 12
A T
A
G L A N C E
The Effect of the Current Population Survey Redesign on Retirement-Plan
Participation Estimates, by Craig Copeland, Ph.D., EBRI
 The Annual Social and Economic Supplement to the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (CPS) is one of
the most-cited sources of income data for retirement-age Americans. The Census Bureau redesigned the income
questions starting in 2014 in response to findings that this survey has misclassified and generally under-reported
income (in particular, sources of retirement income).
 While the redesign of the survey did capture more income, especially pension income, it also significantly
lowered the survey’s estimates of retirement plan participation among those most likely to participate.
Furthermore, these new CPS participation results trended downward in contrast to other surveys on retirement
plan participation.
 The unexplainable decreases in the participation level after the CPS redesign and the conflicting time series of
the participation levels in CPS relative to other surveys raise doubts about the use of CPS data to assess future
retirement plan coverage policies.
Worker Opinions About Employee Benefits: Differences Among Millennials, Baby
Boomers, and Generation X Have Implications for Plan Sponsors, by Paul Fronstin,
Ph.D., EBRI, and Ruth Helman, Greenwald & Associates
 Millennials are less likely than Baby Boomers and Gen Xers to report health insurance as the most important
benefit they receive at work. Millennials are more likely than Baby Boomers or Gen Xers to report that they value
life insurance and paid time off as the most important benefit.
 Millennials are less likely than Baby Boomers and Gen Xers to report that the benefits a potential employer offers
are extremely important in their decision to accept or reject a job. Millennials are also more likely than Baby
Boomers and Gen Xers to be open to non-traditional ways of obtaining benefits.
 Millennials are more likely than other workers to respond that they do not know about their benefits.
Participation in various employee benefit programs is generally lower among Millennials than among Baby
Boomers and Gen Xers.
A monthly newsletter from the EBRI Education and Research Fund © 2015 Employee Benefit Research Institute
The Effect of the Current Population Survey Redesign on
Retirement-Plan Participation Estimates
By Craig Copeland, Ph.D., EBRI
Introduction
The Annual Social and Economic Supplement (fielded in March of each year) to the Current Population Survey (CPS),
conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, is one of the most-cited sources of income data for those whose ages are
associated with being retired.1 However, research has shown that this survey has misclassified certain types of
income and has generally under-reported income—and in particular, sources of retirement income.2 In response to
this research, the Census Bureau has redesigned the income questions in the CPS to address the issues from the prior
design. In 2014, researchers at the Census Bureau conducted a test of the new set of CPS-income questions by doing
a spilt-panel design, where 3/8 of the sample received the redesigned questions while the remaining 5/8 received the
traditional questions.3,4
Yet, when a questionnaire is changed, the changes can affect results from other areas of the survey that are not
changed. In this case, the questionnaire was lengthened and new information was given to respondents when asking
the additional income-defining questions. Consequently, more nonresponses could result, and if the respondents did
answer, a higher likelihood of incorrect information could be collected due to respondent fatigue and confusion from
new questions.
In addition to the income questions, the March CPS includes two questions about workers working for an employer
sponsoring a pension plan and whether the worker was included in the plan. The Employee Benefit Research Institute
(EBRI) has done annual reports on pension participation among workers based on this data.5
However, the most recent changes in the questionnaire have led to some significant anomalies in the time series of
the estimated level of participation by workers in an employment-based retirement plan. This report examines the
estimates of pension—used by the Census Bureau to mean any employment-based retirement plan—participation
from both the traditional questionnaire and the redesigned questionnaire used to address the underreporting of
income against each other and with the trend in the estimates of retirement plan participation prior to the redesign
years. It also compares the CPS results to another widely cited survey on employment-based retirement plan
participation and discusses the growing issues surrounding this and other household surveys.
Trends in the Traditional and Redesigned Survey
In the 2014 CPS, which provides results for 2013, both the traditional questionnaire and a split-sample design for the
redesigned questionnaire were used to conduct the survey. Under the traditional survey design, the percentage of all
workers found to be working for an employer that sponsored a plan was 50.2 percent, compared with 47.6 percent
from the redesigned questionnaire, a difference of 2.6 percentage points (Figure 1). For full-time, full-year wage and
salary workers ages 21‒64, the difference was even larger at 3.7 percentage points (60.8 percent traditional vs.
57.1 percent redesigned) and for public-sector workers ages 21‒64 the difference was 3.3 percentage points.
The 2015 survey continued with the redesigned questionnaire, and the percentages of workers working for an
employer that sponsored a plan were found to have decreased among each work force. In particular, the percentage
of full-time, full-year wage and salary workers ages 21‒64 working for an employer that sponsored a plan declined by
2.7 percentage points from 2013 to 2014. The other work forces had declines of these percentages of just over
2.0 percentage points, except for public-sector workers ages 21‒64 who had the smallest decline at 1.6 percentage
points.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
2
The percentages of workers participating in an employment-based retirement plan among each work force were also
found to be lower in 2013 under the redesigned questionnaire relative to the traditional questionnaire. For example,
the percentage of full-time, full year wage and salary workers ages 21‒64 participating in a plan under the traditional
survey design was 53.0 percent, compared with 49.5 percent under the redesigned questionnaire, a difference of
3.5 percentage points (Figure 2). The difference between the two questionnaires for public-sector workers ages 21‒
64 was even larger at 3.9 percentage points. The other work forces had participation-level differences of just less
than 3.0 percentage points among the two questionnaire results.
Just as the percentage of workers working for an employer that sponsored a plan declined in 2014, the percentage of
workers participating in an employment-based retirement plan in each work force did so as well (Figure 2). The
largest decline in plan-participation from 2013 to 2014 was among full-time, full-year wage and salary workers ages
21‒64, where the percentage participating was 49.5 percent in 2013 under the redesigned questionnaire, compared
with 46.6 percent in 2014. All other work forces had declines in the percentages participating from the 2013
redesigned questionnaire estimates to the 2014 estimates of between 1.0 and 2.0 percentage points.
Age—Looking at full-time, full-year wage and salary workers ages 21‒64, workers ages 35‒64 had lower
percentages participating in an employment-based retirement plan at 4.0 percentage points or more under the
redesigned questionnaire relative to the traditional questionnaire in 2013 (Figure 3). Those workers younger than
35 had percentages participating around 2.0 percentage points lower under the redesigned questionnaire. The
percentages participating were found to decline again in 2014, with those ages 25‒34 having the largest drop from
2013 at 3.4 percentage points. However, among these workers ages 35‒44 and 45‒54, the next-biggest declines
occurred at 2.9 percentage points after the near 4.0 percentage point lower estimated value under the redesigned
questionnaire in 2013.
Earnings—Workers with higher earnings showed the largest drops in the percentages participating in an
employment-based retirement plan under the redesigned questionnaire in 2013 and into 2014 (Figure 4). For fulltime, full-year wage and salary workers ages 21‒64 with $75,000 or more of earnings, the percentage participating
was 5.2 percentage points lower under the redesigned questionnaire than under the traditional design in 2013
(68.6 percent vs. 63.4 percent). This percentage was another 2.3 percentage points lower for this group in 2014,
reaching 61.1 percent. For comparison, the percentage participating was 2.0 percentage points lower under the
redesigned questionnaire in 2013 and an additional 1.7 percentage points lower in 2014 for these workers earning
$20,000‒$29,999. For those workers earning $30,000‒$49,999 and $50,000‒$74,999, the percentages participating
were lower by nearly 4.0 percentage points under the redesigned questionnaire in 2013 with an additional decline of
nearly 4.0 percentage points in 2014.
Number of Employees—Workers at larger employers had higher likelihoods of participating in an
employment-based retirement plan. Under the traditional design, the percentage of full-time, full-year wage and
salary workers ages 21‒64 who worked for an employer with 1,000 or more employees who participated in a
employment-based retirement plan was 64.4 percent in 2013, while under the redesigned questionnaire, this
percentage was 59.8 percent—4.6 percentage points lower (Figure 5). In 2014, the percentage for these workers was
an additional 3.9 percentage points lower, reaching 55.9 percent. These same types of workers at employers with
100‒499 employees had a 4.0 percentage point lower percentage participating under the redesigned questionnaire in
2013 (53.2 percent vs. 49.2 percent), with an additional 4.8 percentage point decline in 2014 to 44.4 percent from
the redesigned questionnaire for 2013. In contrast, the percentage point differences in the participation levels for
workers who worked for employers with fewer than 50 employees were less than 2.0 percentage points both in 2013
between the traditional and redesigned questionnaires and from the 2013 redesigned percentage to 2014.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
3
Figure 1
Percentage of Various Workforces Working for an Employer That
Sponsors an Employment-based Retirement Plan Using the CPS,*
Traditional vs. Redesigned Questionnaire, 2012‒2014
85%
80%
75%
81.0%
79.4%
77.7%
76.1%
70%
65%
60.8%
60.6%
60%
55%
50%
45%
57.1%
54.8%
53.5%
54.4%
51.8%
49.7%
50.2%
48.7%
47.6%
49.9%
48.5%
45.4%
46.9%
44.8%
40%
2012
2013 (T)
2013 (R)
2014
All Workers
All Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Private-Sector Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Full-Time, Full-Year Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Public-Sector Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates of the March Current Population Survey 2013‒2015.
(T)-traditional questionnaire (R)-redesigned questionnaire. Both the traditional and redesigned questionnaires were fielded in 2014 (2013 results).
The 2012 results were from the traditional, while the 2014 results were from the redesigned questionnaire.
* Current Population Survey.
Figure 2
Percentage of Various Workforces Participating in an
Employment-based Retirement Plan Using the CPS,*
Traditional vs. Redesigned Questionnaire, 2012‒2014
75%
70%
72.1%
71.6%
68.2%
65%
67.0%
60%
55%
53.6%
53.0%
49.5%
50%
45%
40%
35%
46.6%
44.5%
44.4%
41.6%
39.5%
39.7%
39.8%
37.3%
35.4%
39.4%
39.1%
36.5%
30%
2012
2013 (T)
2013 (R)
34.7%
2014
All Workers
All Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Full-Time, Full-Year Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Private-Sector Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Public-Sector Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates of the March Current Population Survey 2013‒2015.
(T)-traditional questionnaire (R)-redesigned questionnaire. Both the traditional and redesigned questionnaires were fielded in 2014 (2013 results).
The 2012 results were from the traditional, while the 2014 results were from the redesigned questionnaire.
* Current Population Survey.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
4
Figure 3
Percentage of Full-time, Full-year Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21‒64
Participating in an Employment-based Retirement Plan Using the CPS,*
Traditional vs. Redesigned Questionnaire, by Age, 2012‒2014
65%
60.9%
60.5%
60%
56.3%
59.7%
58.4%
55%
54.9%
54.0%
54.5%
53.5%
50%
51.6%
49.4%
45%
46.5%
46.1%
46.0%
43.8%
40%
40.4%
35%
30.6%
29.3%
30%
28.8%
27.5%
25%
2012
2013 (T)
21–24
25–34
2013 (R)
35–44
45–54
2014
55–64
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates of the March Current Population Survey 2013‒2015.
(T)-traditional questionnaire (R)-redesigned questionnaire. Both the traditional and redesigned questionnaires were fielded in 2014 (2013 results).
The 2012 results were from the traditional, while the 2014 results were from the redesigned questionnaire.
* Current Population Survey.
Figure 4
Percentage of Full-time, Full-year Wage Salary Workers Ages 21‒64
Participating in an Employment-based Retirement Plan Using the CPS,*
Traditional vs. Redesigned Questionnaire, by Earnings, 2012‒2014
75%
70.7%
68.6%
63.4%
65%
66.6%
61.1%
64.4%
60.8%
55%
56.9%
53.5%
53.5%
49.6%
45%
45.8%
34.0%
35%
33.8%
25%
31.8%
20.4%
30.1%
18.8%
16.2%
17.4%
15%
16.7%
15.8%
14.4%
11.8%
5%
2012
2013 (T)
2013 (R)
2014
Less than $10,000 per Year
$10,000–$19,999
$20,000–$29,999
$30,000–$49,999
$50,000–$74,999
$75,000 or more
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates of the March Current Population Survey 2013‒2015.
(T)-traditional questionnaire (R)-redesigned questionnaire. Both the traditional and redesigned questionnaires were fielded in 2014 (2013 results).
The 2012 results were from the traditional, while the 2014 results were from the redesigned questionnaire.
* Current Population Survey.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
5
Comparison With Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
As shown, significant declines in the percentages of workers participating in an employment-based retirement plan in
2014 relative to the much lower 2013 redesigned questionnaire estimates were found in the CPS data. Even given the
lower participation levels found in 2013 under the redesigned questionnaire relative to the traditional questionnaire,
the decline in 2014 was a record amount dating back to at least 1987. Assuming the same difference between the
traditional and redesigned questionnaires would have persisted into 2014, Figure 6 shows the trend from 1987
through 2014 (with the adjustment).6 The adjusted difference in 2014 relative to the traditional 2013-questionnaire
estimate for all workers was a 3.0 percentage point decline, which was a larger year-to-year difference than any other
year since at least 1987. The next-largest difference was a 2.0 percentage point increase from 1993 to 1994.
Furthermore, for full-time, full-year wage and salary workers ages 21‒64, the percentage point difference from the
adjusted 2014 participation level and the traditional 2013 participation level was a 4.3 percentage point decline. The
next-largest year-to-year difference for that group was a 2.6 percentage point increase from 2006 to 2007.
Not only were the differences larger than at any point since at least 1987, the decline contradicted the findings from
the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ National Compensation Survey (NCS).7 This survey found that the percentage of
private-sector wage and salary workers at establishments with 500 or more employees participating in an
employment-based retirement plan increased in 2014 to 77 percent from 76 percent in 2013 (Figure 7). In contrast,
using the closest direct comparison between the two surveys because of the differences in their data collection
methods, the percentage of full-time, full-year wage and salary workers ages 21‒64 who worked for an employer with
500 or more employees was found to decrease for the CPS from 63 percent for the traditional questionnaire and
59 percent from the redesigned questionnaire in 2013 to 55 percent in 2014.
What the CPS Redesign Did Do
While the redesigned questionnaire certainly had an impact (reducing) on the reported levels of workers participating
in employment-based retirement plans, it did address the issues surrounding the reported sources of income for those
ages 65 and older. Figure 8 shows the resulting decline in the percentage of all workers participating in an
employment-based retirement plan from 39.8 percent under the traditional questionnaire in 2013 to 35.4 per-cent in
2014 under the redesigned questionnaire. At the same time, the percentage of Americans ages 65 or older who had
pension income8 increased from 31.7 percent under the traditional questionnaire in 2013 to 36.6 percent in 2014
under the redesigned questionnaire. Consequently, while the redesign of the CPS questionnaire showed a less positive
picture for current workers in retirement-plan participation, it revealed a more robust picture of those receiving
pension income once they reached retirement age.
Conclusion
While the redesign of the CPS questionnaire achieved one of its primary goals of capturing more income—especially
pension income—it appears to have had a serious impact on the results of other variables within the survey. As
shown by this article, it resulted in sharp declines in the estimated retirement plan participation levels of current
workers. Furthermore, those most affected were those groups with the highest likelihoods of participation—those
older, with higher earnings, and working for larger employers.
Unless further survey modifications are made,9 what has happened in the most recent years to the estimated
retirement plan participation levels from CPS and what that means for the future estimates from the survey will make
it difficult to judge any future effects of policies addressing workers’ retirement plan coverage using the CPS. The
unexplainable decreases in the participation level in 2013 after the CPS redesign, the opposite direction of CPS’ time
series in the participation level relative to other surveys (i.e., NCS), and the findings of the misreporting of
participation by respondents relative to administrative data in a similar survey,10 all lead to this conclusion of an
uncertain efficacy of using CPS for an assessment of retirement plan coverage policies.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
6
The issues with the retirement plan participation estimates from CPS are not the only concerns facing large
government surveys. Various issues have affected virtually all of the household surveys with increases in nonresponse
rates of surveys, nonresponses to specific questions if the respondent does participate, and measurement errors from
respondents giving incorrect answers. Therefore, the use of administrative data—data from the actual administrators
of the program or accounts being examined—has become and will continue to be an increasingly important addition
to the evaluation of various economic and government program issues facing the United States.11
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
7
Figure 5
Percentage of Full-time, Full-year Wage Salary Workers Ages 21‒64 Participating
in an Employment-based Retirement Plan Using the CPS,* Traditional vs.
Redesigned Questionnaire, by Employer Size (Number of Employees), 2012‒2014
90%
80.1%
79.9%
77.0%
80%
74.3%
70%
64.6%
64.4%
59.8%
57.6%
60%
55.9%
54.7%
51.1%
50%
52.9%
53.2%
44.0%
43.6%
31.5%
31.3%
50.1%
49.2%
40%
44.4%
42.2%
37.8%
30%
29.5%
27.7%
20%
17.8%
16.7%
16.1%
2012
2013 (T)
2013 (R)
10%
14.6%
2014
Fewer Than 10 Employees
10–49 Employees
50–99 Employees
100–499 Employees
500–999 Employees
1,000 or More Employees
Public Sector
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates of the March Current Population Survey 2013‒2015.
(T)-traditional questionnaire (R)-redesigned questionnaire. Both the traditional and redesigned questionnaires were fielded in 2014 (2013 results).
The 2012 results were from the traditional, while the 2014 results were from the redesigned questionnaire.
* Current Population Survey.
Figure 6
Percentage of Various Work Forces Participating in an
Employment-Based Retirement Plan, 1987–2014
(2014 Number Adjusted for Difference Between
Traditional and Redesigned Questionnaires in 2013)
80%
77.6%
75%
75.6% 75.6%
76.3% 76.1% 76.1%
75.2%
76.7% 77.1%
74.5%
77.2% 77.2% 77.3%
75.3% 74.8% 75.8% 75.8% 74.8%
75.5%
75.4%
73.3%
70%
74.5%
72.9%
73.6%
73.2%
71.9%
71.5%
70.8%
65%
60%
58.4% 58.3% 59.0%
59.5% 58.9% 59.0%
59.6%
57.7%
57.9%
59.0% 59.2%
55%
58.3%
56.7% 57.1% 56.6%
54.8%
51.0% 51.1% 51.6%
50%
46.1% 46.2%
47.2% 47.4% 46.8%
48.2% 47.8% 48.4%
39.8% 40.0%
40.9% 41.3% 40.8% 40.4%
46.1% 46.1%
43.1%
42.1% 42.2%
37.6% 38.0%
53.7% 53.5%
54.5%
50.2%
49.8%
48.2% 48.4% 48.3%
47.0%
47.4%
46.0%
45.1%
45.5%
44.4%
41.7% 41.8%
55.3% 54.8%
54.4% 54.5%
52.7%
43.1%
43.6% 43.8%
41.0% 41.0%
39.7% 39.4%
46.7%
44.2%
40.1%
40%
38.9% 39.0%
49.1%
46.5% 46.2%
45%
35%
60.3% 60.4% 59.8%
43.0%
43.2% 43.0% 41.7%
42.0%
40.7%
40.3%
41.8% 42.0% 41.9%
40.9%
39.0%
41.5%
39.7%
40.4%
44.8% 44.9% 44.6% 44.2%
45.8%
42.7%
40.8%
39.2% 39.5% 39.2% 39.1%
39.6% 39.8% 39.7% 39.4%
40.8%
37.5%
37.8%
30%
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
All Workers
All Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Full-Time, Full-Year Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Private-Sector Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Public-Sector Wage and Salary Workers Ages 21–64
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates from the 1988–2015 March Current Population Surveys.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
8
Figure 7
Percentage of Wage and Salary Workers Working for Private-Sector Employers
With 500 or More Employees Participating in an Employment-based
Retirement Plan, CPS* vs. BLS** National Compensation Survey (NCS), 2012‒2014
80%
76%
76%
77%
76%
75%
CPS
70%
BLS-NCS
64%
65%
63%
59%
60%
55%
55%
50%
2012
2013 (T)
2013 (R)
2014
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates of the March Current Population Survey 2013‒2015.
(T)-traditional questionnaire (R)-redesigned questionnaire. Both the traditional and redesigned questionnaires were fielded in 2014 (2013 results).
The 2012 results were from the traditional, while the 2014 results were from the redesigned questionnaire. (Only CPS was redesigned. The BLS
number was entered twice for 2013.) The CPS population is restricted to those workers who worked full-time, full-year and were ages 21‒64.
* Current Population Survey.
** Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Figure 8
Comparison of the Percentage of All Workers Participating in an Employment-based
Retirement Plan vs. Percentage of Those Ages 65 or Older Who Are Receiving Pension
Income Using the CPS,* Traditional and Redesigned Questionnaires, 2012‒2014
42%
40%
39.5%
39.8%
38%
37.3%
36.6%
Pension Participation-All Workers
36%
Pension Income Receipt-Ages 65
or Older
35.9%
35.4%
34%
32%
31.7%
31.2%
30%
2012
2013 (T)
2013 (R)
2014
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates of the March Current Population Survey 2013‒2015.
(T)-traditional questionnaire (R)-redesigned questionnaire. Both the traditional and redesigned questionnaires were fielded in 2014 (2013 results).
The 2012 results were from the traditional, while the 2014 results were from the redesigned questionnaire.
* Current Population Survey.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
9
Endnotes
1
The U.S. Census Bureau conducts the Current Population Survey (CPS) for the Bureau of Labor Statistics by interviewing
about 57,000 households and asking numerous questions about individuals’ work statuses, employers, incomes, and basic
demographic characteristics. Thus, the CPS has traditionally been able to provide detailed information about workers from a
broad sample of Americans who are participating in an employment-based pension plan, making it possible to establish a
consistent, annual, and timely trend across numerous worker characteristics and the characteristics of their employers. For
more detail see, http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/about.html
While the CPS provides excellent detail on overall participation in employment-based pension plans (or retirement plans—
used interchangeably in this article), it does not provide specifics about the individual plans—such as the worker’s plan type
or whether the individual worker is eligible to participate in the plan sponsored by his or her employer or union. This makes
the definition of terms in this study important:

The term sponsorship rate is defined as the percentage of workers in the specified work force who worked for an
employer or union that sponsored a plan in a given year for any of its employees, though not necessarily for the
worker in question.

In this discussion, the term percentage of workers participating in a plan is not synonymous with the standard
retirement plan term participation rate, which is generally understood to mean the percentage of eligible workers
who participate in a plan. Consequently, participation rate is not used in this analysis; instead, the terms
participation level or percentage participating are used. To reiterate, those terms refer to the fraction of workers in
the specified work force who participate in an employment-based pension or retirement plan regardless of the
workers’ eligibility to participate in a plan. (An eligible worker is one who is offered a plan and meets the
requirements to participate.)

Lastly, the term participating in a plan (or pension or retirement plan) as used here always refers to a pension or
retirement plan provided through an employment-based arrangement, not a plan such as an individual retirement
account (IRA) that workers can fund outside of an employment-based arrangement. Furthermore, since there isn’t a
distinction made in the data between defined benefit and defined contribution plans, participation includes either
plan type.
2
For example, see Bruce D. Meyer, Wallace K. C. Mok, and James X. Sullivan. “The Under-Reporting of Transfers in
Household Surveys: Its Nature and Consequences.” Harris School Working Paper #09.03, 2009 and John L. Czajka and
Gabrielle Denmead. “Income Data for Policy Analysis: A Comparative Assessment of Eight Surveys.” Mathematica
Reference No.: 6302-601, 2008 available at http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/~/media/publications/PDFs/incomedata.pdf
3
For a complete explanation of the changes to the survey, see Jessica L. Semega and Edward Welniak, Jr. “The Effects of
the Changes to the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement on Estimates of Income,”
Proceedings of the 2015 Allied Social Science Association (ASSA) Research Conference, available at
http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2015/DEMO/ASSA-Income-CPSASEC-Red.pdf
4
See Craig Copeland, “Examining the New Income Measures in the Current Population Survey,” EBRI Notes, no. 5
(Employee Benefit Research Institute, May 2015): pp. 8–15 for another comparison of the income received by those ages 65
or older under the traditional and redesigned questionnaires.
5
For example, the most recent publication is Craig Copeland. “Employment-Based Retirement Plan Participation:
Geographic Differences and Trends, 2013.” EBRI Issue Brief, no. 405 (Employee Benefit Research Institute, October 2014).
6
Specifically, the difference between the traditional and redesigned numbers for 2013 is added to the 2014 number to give
an attempt to have a consistent time trend. This does assume that the differences between the traditional and redesigned
would remain the same if they were still conducted. This wouldn’t necessarily happen, but it gives a point of reference for a
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
10
consistent time trend. For all wage and salary workers ages 21‒64, the calculation would be the difference between the 2013
numbers from figure 2 (3.54 percent) added to the (39.73 percent) for 2014 to get 42.7 percent for the adjusted number. In
many cases, such as that just enumerated, rounding causes a potential 0.1 percentage point difference compared with just
the rounded numbers in Figure 2.
7
The National Compensation Survey (NCS) is conducted annually in March by the Bureau of Labor Statistics by surveying
Untied States business about their compensation cost trends, incidence of benefits, and detailed benefit provisions.
Estimates from the NCS are for civilian workers—workers in private industry and in state and local government—by various
employee and employer characteristics. Federal Government, agricultural, household, and self-employed workers are
excluded. For more detail on the NCS, see http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ebs/benefits/2015/overview.htm
8
Pension income includes income from traditional pension plans, defined contribution plans, and individual retirement
accounts (IRAs). The redesign of the questionnaire was better able to capture irregular withdrawals (i.e., one time lump
sums) from DC plans and IRAs that were missed under the traditional questionnaire.
9
Both the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) and the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) have modified
their pension participation questions at least once. A typical addition was a follow-up question to try to capture those
contributing to a defined contribution (401(k)-type) plan. However, adding more questions to the Current Population Survey
(CPS) would just add to the issue of the lengthening of the survey causing increasing nonresponse rates. Furthermore, the
CPS’s focus is on poverty, income sources, and health insurance ownership. Consequently, any potential changes to
improve pension participation numbers would need to be considered against adversely affecting the focus of the survey.
10
See, for example, Irena Dushi, Howard M. Iams, and Jules Lichtenstein. “Assessment of Retirement Plan Coverage by
Firm Size, Using W-2 Tax Records,” Social Security Bulletin. Vol. 71, No. 2, May 2011
www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v71n2/v71n2p53.pdf
11
For a detailed examination of this topic, see Bruce D. Meyer, Wallace K. C. Mok, and James X. Sullivan, “Household
Surveys in Crisis,” Journal of Economic Perspectives. Vol. 29, No. 4, Fall 2015, pp. 199-226.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
11
Worker Opinions About Employee Benefits: Differences
Among Millennials, Baby Boomers, and Generation X Have
Implications for Plan Sponsors
By Paul Fronstin, Ph.D., EBRI, and Ruth Helman, Greenwald & Associates
2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey Underwriters
AXA Equitable Financial Services, LLC
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
Cigna
Prudential Financial Inc.
Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company
The Segal Group, Inc.
Mercer LLC
Unum Group
Introduction
The Millennial Generation, also known as Millennials or Generation Y, is the demographic cohort with birth years
ranging from the early 1980s to early 2000s (Strauss and Howe, 1991). Compared with prior generations, Millennials
are more likely to be detached from traditional institutions (Pew Research Center, 2014). Millennials are the largest age
group to emerge since the Baby-Boom generation, and employers will have to make adjustments to how they engage
them. Employers that have depended on employee benefits as a primary tool to recruit and retain workers may need to
rethink the role that employee benefits play with Millennials. The remainder of this paper focuses on differences in
opinions regarding employee benefits. Differences among Millennials, the Baby-Boom generation (individuals born
between 1946‒1965), and Generation X members (those born between 1966–1976) are examined.
The Importance of Employee Benefits
While health insurance is by far the most important employee benefit regardless of age cohort, Millennials are less likely
than Baby Boomers and Gen Xers to say it is the most important benefit. Two-thirds (67 percent) of Baby Boomers
report that health insurance is the most important benefit, compared with 63 percent among Gen Xers, and 60 percent
among Millennials (Figure 1). Millennials are also less likely than Baby Boomers to report that a traditional pension or
retirement savings plan is the most important benefit. Millennials are more likely than Gen Xers or Baby Boomers to
report that they value life insurance and paid time off as the most important benefit. Over 12 percent of Millennials
report that paid time off is the most important benefit, compared with 6 percent of Baby Boomers.
Overall, Millennials are less likely than Baby Boomers and Gen Xers to report that the benefits a potential employer
offers are extremely important in their decision to accept or reject a job. Less than one-third (31 percent) of Millennials
reported that benefits are extremely important compared with 39 percent among Gen Xers and 41 percent among Baby
Boomers (Figure 2). Millennials are more likely to report that benefits were somewhat important.
Hence, it is not surprising that Millennials are more likely than Baby Boomers and Generation X to be open to nontraditional ways of obtaining benefits. Millennials are more likely than Baby Boomers and Gen Xers to report that they
prefer to take the money spent on employee benefits other than health insurance (Figure 3) and they are more likely
than Baby Boomers to be open to taking the money spent on health insurance (Figure 4) and decide for themselves
whether to purchase those benefits and how much to purchase.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
12
Figure 1
Most Important Employee Benefit, by Age Cohort, 2015
80%
70%
Baby Boomers
67%
Generation X
Millennials
63%
60%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
12%
11%
8%
10%
6%
4%
8%
6%
5%
2%
1%
12%
3%
0%
Health Insurance
Traditional Pension or
Defined Benefit Plan
Retirement Savings Plan
Life Insurance
Paid Time Off
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey.
Note: Categories were excluded when less than 5 percent of all age cohorts ranked the employee benefit as most important.
Figure 2
Importance of Benefits That a Potential Employer Offers
in Decision to Accept or Reject Job, by Age Cohort, 2015
45%
40%
42%
42%
41%
40%
39%
Baby Boomers
35%
Generation X
Millennials
31%
30%
25%
23%
20%
17%
14%
15%
10%
5%
3%
2%
3%
2%
1%
1%
0%
Extremely Important
Very Important
Somewhat Important
Not too Important
Not at all Important
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
13
Figure 3
Preference for Obtaining Employee Benefits
(Other Than Health Insurance), by Age Cohort, 2015
60%
Baby Boomers
Generation X
Millennials
50%
45%
45%
43%
40%
40%
39%
30%
30%
24%
20%
18%
15%
10%
0%
Employers continue to choose and pay for
benefits the way they do now
You choose your benefits from a list. Your
Your employer gives you the money they
employer then pays the same amount they
currently spend on benefits, and you decide
currently spend toward those benefits, and you whether to purchase benefits on your own and
pay any remaining amount if there is any
how much to spend
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey.
Figure 4
Preference for Obtaining Health Insurance, by Age Cohort, 2015
60%
Baby Boomers
Generation X
Millennials
51%
50%
42%
42%
40%
39%
39%
34%
30%
19%
20%
19%
15%
10%
0%
Employers continue to choose and pay for
health insurance the way they do now
You choose your health insurance. Your
Your employer gives you the money they
employer then pays the same amount they
currently spend on health insurance, and you
currently spend toward that insurance, and you decide whether to purchase health insurance
pay any remaining amount, if there is any.
and how much to spend.
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
14
Engagement
Millennials are more likely to respond that they do not know about their benefits than other workers. Millennials are,
across the board, more likely than Baby Boomers to respond that they do not know if their employer offers them
various employee benefits, and they are often more likely to respond that they do not know about their benefits than
Gen Xers. For example, Millennials are more likely than Baby Boomers to respond that they do not know if they are
offered cancer insurance, long-term care insurance, a pension plan, and stock options (Figure 5).
Participation in various employee benefit programs is also generally lower among Millennials than among Baby Boomers
and Gen Xers, when workers are offered the benefit. While there is no difference in participation by age cohort for
health insurance participation, differences are very small for dental and vision insurance, and participation in the
following benefit programs is lower among Millennials: pension plan, retirement savings plan, stock options, health
insurance for early retirees, disability insurance, life insurance, accidental death or dismemberment, critical illness, and
pre-paid legal (Figure 6). Millennials and Gen Xers report that they are more likely than Baby Boomers to have
supplemental health insurance for retirees on Medicare, long-term care insurance, home health insurance, pet
insurance, and auto insurance.
It is not surprising that Millennials are generally less likely than Gen Xers and Baby Boomers to be engaged in employee
benefits. When it comes to understanding the advantages of voluntary benefits, Millennials are less likely to report the
advantages as strong advantages, and are more likely to report them as moderate advantages (Figure 7).
Confidence and Decision Support
Millennials are more likely than Baby Boomers and Gen Xers to be extremely confident in their ability to make informed
decisions about benefits (Figure 8). However, Millennials are more likely than Baby Boomers and Gen Xers to be
extremely likely to use an employer-provided, independent, third-party benefits provider, when provided at no cost
(Figure 9), and more likely to take advantage of online programs (Figure 10). Despite the higher confidence levels and
interest in using employer-provided resources to make decisions about benefits, Millennials are more likely than Gen
Xers and Baby Boomers to report that offering separate open enrollment periods for health insurance and other
employee benefits would be useful. More than four in 10 Millennials report that separate open enrollment periods would
be useful (12 percent extremely useful; 31 percent very useful), compared with about 29 percent among Baby
Boomers, and 34 percent among Gen Xers (Figure 11).
Despite their younger ages, Millennials are more likely to be very confident that they have enough money saved to
cover expenses if a significant illness or accident caused them to be out of work (Figure 12). However, Millennials are
more likely than Baby Boomers to report that being out of work will cause great hardship (data not shown).
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
15
Figure 5
Percentage of Workers Who Do Not Know if Their Employer
Offered Them Benefits, by Age Cohort, 2015
A health savings account (HSA) that
comes with a health insurance plan
Traditional pension, defined benefit, or
cash balance plan
Retirement savings plan, such as a
401(k), 403(b), 457 or profit sharing plan
Stock options
Supplemental health insurance for
retirees on Medicare
Health insurance for early retirees
Long-term disability
Short-term disability
Long-term care insurance
Life insurance
Dental insurance
Vision insurance
Supplemental health insurance for
workers
Accident insurance
Accidental death or dismemberment
insurance
Critical illness insurance
Cancer insurance
Home health insurance
Pet insurance
Pre-paid legal services
Homeowners insurance
Auto insurance
Baby Boomers
Generation X
Millennials
7%
9%
10%
7
9
14
2
5
3
8
3
12
25
28
11
9
16
3
1
3
32
36
19
13
23
5
4
4
32
34
16
12
25
7
3
5
23
21
28
25
27
24
13
23
23
28
5
8
5
4
18
31
32
35
8
11
8
7
19
29
33
33
8
12
8
7
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary
Workplace Benefits Survey.
Figure 6
Percentage of Workers Participating in Various Benefits,
Among Workers Offered the Benefit, by Age Cohort, 2015
Health insurance
A health savings account (HSA) that
comes with a health insurance plan
Traditional pension, defined benefit, or
cash balance plan
Retirement savings plan, such as a
401(k), 403(b), 457 or profit sharing plan
Stock options
Supplemental health insurance for
retirees on Medicare
Health insurance for early retirees
Long-term disability
Short-term disability
Long-term care insurance
Life insurance
Dental insurance
Vision insurance
Supplemental health insurance for
workers
Accident insurance
Accidental death or dismemberment
insurance
Critical illness insurance
Cancer insurance
Home health insurance
Pet insurance
Pre-paid legal services
Auto insurance
Homeowners insurance
Baby Boomers
85%
Generation X
86%
Millennials
84%
40
37
45
80
65
63
88
53
81
54
78
48
11
18
65
69
16
80
81
76
21
27
66
67
32
77
83
75
21
14
50
51
28
65
77
74
31
43
22
40
32
39
61
31
27
17
8
40
38
33
64
28
33
29
15
43
26
31
51
26
24
40
41
29
47
35
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary
Workplace Benefits Survey.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
16
Figure 7
Select Advantages of Voluntary Benefits, by Age Cohort, 2015
60%
55%
50%
Baby Boomers
Generation X
Millennials
49%
49%
46%
45%
43%
40%
40%
39%
38%
37%
35%
34%
32%
29%
30%
33% 33%
31%
28%
20%
10%
0%
Strong Advantage
Strong Advantage
Strong Advantage
Moderate Advantage
Moderate Advantage
Moderate Advantage
You can choose which Purchasing benefits
You may be able to You can choose which Purchasing benefits
You may be able to
benefits you want to through your employer take the benefits with benefits you want to through your employer take the benefits with
purchase
may cost less than
you when you leave
purchase
may cost less than
you when you leave
purchasing them on
your employer
purchasing them on
your employer
your own
your own
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey.
Figure 8
Confidence in Ability to Make Informed Decisions
About Employee Benefits, by Age Cohort, 2015
60%
52%
Baby Boomers
Generation X
Millennials
50%
45% 46%
40%
30%
26%
25%
24%
24%
23%
22%
20%
10%
4%
2%
3%
0%
1%
1%
0%
Extremely Confident
Very Confident
Somewhat Confident
Not too Confident
Not at all Confident
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
17
Figure 9
Likelihood of Using Employer-Provided, Independent, Third-Party
Benefits Provider, When Provided at No Cost, by Age Cohort, 2015
40%
36%
35%
35%
36%
34%
34%
33%
Baby Boomers
Generation X
Millennials
30%
25%
20%
20%
17%
16%
15%
11%
10%
10%
9%
5%
3%
3%
2%
0%
Extremely Likely
Very Likely
Somewhat Likely
Not too Likely
Not at all Likely
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey
Figure 10
Likelihood of Using Employer-Provided Online Program,
When Provided at No Cost, by Age Cohort, 2015
50%
45%
45%
Baby Boomers
40%
Generation X
Millennials
38%
36%
36%
34%
35%
30%
28%
25%
20%
20%
17% 17%
15%
10%
10%
8%
4%
5%
3%
2%
3%
0%
Extremely Likely
Very Likely
Somewhat Likely
Not too Likely
Not at all Likely
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
18
Figure 11
Usefullness of Offering Separate Open Enrollment Periods for Health
Insurance and Other Employee Benefits, by Age Cohort, 2015
40%
Baby Boomers
36%
Generation X
Millennials
35%
32%
31%
30%
30%
28%
25%
25%
22%
21%
21%
20%
15%
12%
10%
8%
12%
9%
8%
7%
5%
0%
Extremely Useful
Very Useful
Somewhat Useful
Not too Useful
Not at all Useful
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey
Figure 12
Confidence That Savings is Large Enough to Cover Expenses
Due to Significant Illness or Accident That Caused Work Disruption,
by Age Cohort, 2015
40%
36%
35%
Baby Boomers
Generation X
Millennials
33%
30%
27%
25%
24%
25%
22% 22%
20%
20%
18% 17%
17%
15%
15%
10%
8%
7%
8%
5%
0%
Extremely Confident
Very Confident
Somewhat Confident
Not too Confident
Not at all Confident
Source: Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald & Associates, 2015 Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
19
Appendix―The 2015 WBS
These findings are part of the 2015 EBRI/Greenwald & Associates Health and Voluntary Workplace Benefits Survey
(WBS), which examines a broad spectrum of health care issues, including workers’ satisfaction with health care today,
their confidence in the future of the health care system and the Medicare program, and their attitudes toward benefits
in the workplace. The survey was conducted online June 10–19, 2015, using the Research Now consumer panel. A total
of 1,500 workers in the United States ages 21–64 participated in the survey. The data are weighted by gender, age,
and education to reflect the actual proportions in the employed population.
Previously published trend data from the EBRI/Greenwald & Associates Health Confidence Survey (HCS) may differ
from those published in more recent reports as the prior data have been recut from the total adult population to match
the survey population of the WBS: workers ages 21–64. In addition, comparisons of 2015 data with data from years
prior to 2013 should be viewed with caution due to the move from telephone to online methodology in 2013.
No theoretical basis exists for judging the accuracy of estimates obtained from non-probability samples such as the one
used for the WBS. However, there are possible sources of error in all surveys (both probability and non-probability) that
may affect the reliability of survey results. These include imperfect sampling frames, refusals to be interviewed and
other forms of nonresponse, the effects of question wording and question order, interviewer bias, and screening. While
attempts are made to minimize these factors, it is impossible to quantify the errors that may result from them.
The WBS is co-sponsored by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan, publicpolicy research organization, and Greenwald & Associates, a Washington, DC-based market research firm. The 2015
WBS data collection was funded by grants from eight private organizations. Staffing was donated by EBRI and
Greenwald & Associates. WBS materials and a list of underwriters may be accessed at the EBRI website:
www.ebri.org/surveys/hcs/
References
Pew Research Center. "Millennials in Adulthood: Detached from Institutions, Networked with Friends." 2014.
Strauss, William, and Neil Howe. Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069. Harper Perennial, 1991.
ebri.org Notes • December 2015 • Vol. 36, No. 12
20
Where the world turns for the facts on U.S. employee benefits.
Retirement and health benefits are at the heart of workers’, employers’, and our nation’s
economic security. Founded in 1978, EBRI is the most authoritative and objective source of
information on these critical, complex issues.
EBRI focuses solely on employee benefits research — no lobbying or advocacy.
EBRI stands alone in employee benefits research as an independent, nonprofit, and nonpartisan
organization. It analyzes and reports research data without spin or underlying agenda. All findings,
whether on financial data, options, or trends, are revealing and reliable — the reason EBRI information is
the gold standard for private analysts and decision makers, government policymakers, the media, and
the public.
EBRI explores the breadth of employee benefits and related issues.
EBRI studies the world of health and retirement benefits — issues such as 401(k)s, IRAs, retirement
income adequacy, consumer-driven benefits, Social Security, tax treatment of both retirement and health
benefits, cost management, worker and employer attitudes, policy reform proposals, and pension assets
and funding. There is widespread recognition that if employee benefits data exist, EBRI knows it.
EBRI delivers a steady stream of invaluable research and analysis.
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
EBRI publications include in-depth coverage of key issues and trends; summaries of research
findings and policy developments; timely factsheets on hot topics; regular updates on legislative and
regulatory developments; comprehensive reference resources on benefit programs and workforce
issues; and major surveys of public attitudes.
EBRI meetings present and explore issues with thought leaders from all sectors.
EBRI regularly provides congressional testimony, and briefs policymakers, member organizations,
and the media on employer benefits.
EBRI issues press releases on newsworthy developments, and is among the most widely quoted
sources on employee benefits by all media.
EBRI directs members and other constituencies to the information they need and undertakes new
research on an ongoing basis.
EBRI maintains and analyzes the most comprehensive database of 401(k)-type programs in the
world. Its computer simulation analyses on Social Security reform and retirement income adequacy
are unique.
EBRI makes information freely available to all.
EBRI assumes a public service responsibility to make its findings completely accessible at www.ebri.org
— so that all decisions that relate to employee benefits, whether made in Congress or board rooms or
families’ homes, are based on the highest quality, most dependable information. EBRI’s Web site posts
all research findings, publications, and news alerts. EBRI also extends its education and public service
role to improving Americans’ financial knowledge through its award-winning public service campaign
ChoosetoSave® and the companion site www.choosetosave.org
EBRI is supported by organizations from all industries and sectors that appreciate the value of
unbiased, reliable information on employee benefits. Visit www.ebri.org/about/join/ for more.
th
1100 13 Street NW · Suite 878
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 659-0670
www.ebri.org
www.choosetosave.org
CHECK OUT EBRI’S WEBSITE!
EBRI’s website is easy to use and packed with useful information! Look for
these special features:
•
EBRI’s entire library of research publications starts at the main Web page. Click on EBRI
Issue Briefs and EBRI Notes for our in-depth and nonpartisan periodicals.
•
Visit EBRI’s blog.
•
EBRI’s reliable health and retirement surveys are just a click away through the topic boxes at
the top of the page.
•
Need a number? Check out the EBRI Databook on Employee Benefits.
•
Instantly get e-mail notifications of the latest EBRI data, surveys, publications, and meetings
and seminars by clicking on the “Notify Me” or “RSS” buttons at the top of our home page.
There’s lots more!
Visit EBRI online today: www.ebri.org
Established in 1978, the Employee Benefit
Research Institute (EBRI) is the only
independent nonprofit, nonpartisan
organization committed exclusively to data
dissemination, research, and education on
economic security and employee benefits.
The Institute seeks to advance the public’s,
the media’s and policymakers’ knowledge
and understanding of employee benefits and
their importance to our nation’s economy.
EBRI’s mission is to contribute to, to
encourage, and to enhance the development
of sound employee benefit programs and
sound public policy through objective
research and education.
EBRI has earned widespread regard as
an organization that “tells it like it is,”
based on the facts. As the Bylaws state:
“In all its activities, the Institute shall
function strictly in an objective and
unbiased manner and not as an advocate
or opponent of any position.”
EBRI Employee Benefit Research Institute Notes (ISSN 10854452) is published monthly by the Employee Benefit Research
th
Institute, 1100 13 St. NW, Suite 878, Washington, DC 20005-4051, at $300 per year or is included as part of a membership
subscription. Periodicals postage rate paid in Washington, DC, and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address
th
changes to: EBRI Notes, 1100 13 St. NW, Suite 878, Washington, DC 20005-4051. Copyright 2015 by Employee Benefit
Research Institute. All rights reserved, Vol. 36, no. 12.
Who we are
What we do
Our
publications
Orders/
Subscriptions
The Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) was founded in 1978. Its mission is to
contribute to, to encourage, and to enhance the development of sound employee benefit
programs and sound public policy through objective research and education. EBRI is the only
private, nonprofit, nonpartisan, Washington, DC-based organization committed exclusively to
public policy research and education on economic security and employee benefit issues.
EBRI’s membership includes a cross-section of pension funds; businesses; trade associations;
labor unions; health care providers and insurers; government organizations; and service firms.
EBRI’s work advances knowledge and understanding of employee benefits and their
importance to the nation’s economy among policymakers, the news media, and the public. It
does this by conducting and publishing policy research, analysis, and special reports on
employee benefits issues; holding educational briefings for EBRI members, congressional and
federal agency staff, and the news media; and sponsoring public opinion surveys on employee
benefit issues. EBRI’s Education and Research Fund (EBRI-ERF) performs the charitable,
educational, and scientific functions of the Institute. EBRI-ERF is a tax-exempt organization
supported by contributions and grants.
EBRI Issue Briefs are periodicals providing expert evaluations of employee benefit issues and
trends, as well as critical analyses of employee benefit policies and proposals. EBRI Notes is a
monthly periodical providing current information on a variety of employee benefit topics.
EBRIef is a weekly roundup of EBRI research and insights, as well as updates on surveys,
studies, litigation, legislation and regulation affecting employee benefit plans, while EBRI’s
Blog supplements our regular publications, offering commentary on questions received from
news reporters, policymakers, and others. The EBRI Databook on Employee Benefits is a
statistical reference work on employee benefit programs and work force-related issues.
Contact EBRI Publications, (202) 659-0670; fax publication orders to (202) 775-6312.
Subscriptions to EBRI Issue Briefs are included as part of EBRI membership, or as part of a
$199 annual subscription to EBRI Notes and EBRI Issue Briefs. Change of Address: EBRI,
1100 13th St. NW, Suite 878, Washington, DC, 20005-4051, (202) 659-0670; fax number,
(202) 775-6312; e-mail: subscriptions@ebri.org
Membership Information: Inquiries
regarding EBRI membership and/or contributions to EBRI-ERF should be directed to EBRI
President Harry Conaway at the above address, (202) 659-0670; e-mail: conaway@ebri.org
Editorial Board: Dallas L. Salisbury, publisher; Stephen Blakely, editor. Any views expressed in this publication and those of the authors should
not be ascribed to the officers, trustees, members, or other sponsors of the Employee Benefit Research Institute, the EBRI Education and
Research Fund, or their staffs. Nothing herein is to be construed as an attempt to aid or hinder the adoption of any pending legislation, regulation,
or interpretative rule, or as legal, accounting, actuarial, or other such professional advice.
EBRI Notes is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. ISSN: 10854452 10854452/90 $ .50+.50
© 2015, Employee Benefit Research InstituteEducation and Research Fund. All rights reserved.