Is it All About Access? Perceived Access to Occupational Pensions in Germany

Q3 Social Sciences Social Security Bulletin Pub Date : 2013-12-12 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2366733
Bettina Lamla, M. Coppola
{"title":"Is it All About Access? Perceived Access to Occupational Pensions in Germany","authors":"Bettina Lamla, M. Coppola","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2366733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides an empirical analysis of what determines access to occupational pensions as perceived by workers. We investigate this issue in Germany, where workers have the legal right to an occupational pension since 2001, but many might lack the incentive or the ability to gather and process the relevant information to make use of their right. In particular, if workers rely exclusively on the information available at their firm, employers will continue to regulate access despite workers’ rights. Our findings suggest that the current regulation in Germany has not resolved the problem of workers’ ignorance of their access to occupational pensions. Only about half the workers are aware of having access to an occupational pension. We find that there is important heterogeneity in workers’ perceptions, and that this heterogeneity is directly related to worker and firm-side factors as well as outcomes of the employer-employee match. Distorted perceptions have important consequences for workers, policy makers and firms. Workers can only make optimal savings decisions if they are aware of their savings possibilities. Policy makers could help by making information material about occupational pensions mandatory and/or by defining standardised information. A low level of knowledge of employees might also be frustrating for employers, as this would suggest that workers do not appreciate their occupational pension, limiting the power of occupational pension as a Human Resources tool.","PeriodicalId":39542,"journal":{"name":"Social Security Bulletin","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Security Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2366733","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

This paper provides an empirical analysis of what determines access to occupational pensions as perceived by workers. We investigate this issue in Germany, where workers have the legal right to an occupational pension since 2001, but many might lack the incentive or the ability to gather and process the relevant information to make use of their right. In particular, if workers rely exclusively on the information available at their firm, employers will continue to regulate access despite workers’ rights. Our findings suggest that the current regulation in Germany has not resolved the problem of workers’ ignorance of their access to occupational pensions. Only about half the workers are aware of having access to an occupational pension. We find that there is important heterogeneity in workers’ perceptions, and that this heterogeneity is directly related to worker and firm-side factors as well as outcomes of the employer-employee match. Distorted perceptions have important consequences for workers, policy makers and firms. Workers can only make optimal savings decisions if they are aware of their savings possibilities. Policy makers could help by making information material about occupational pensions mandatory and/or by defining standardised information. A low level of knowledge of employees might also be frustrating for employers, as this would suggest that workers do not appreciate their occupational pension, limiting the power of occupational pension as a Human Resources tool.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
这一切都是为了获取吗?德国对职业养老金的感知获取
本文提供了一个实证分析是什么决定了获得职业养老金的感知工人。我们在德国调查了这一问题,自2001年以来,德国的工人就有领取职业养老金的合法权利,但许多人可能缺乏收集和处理相关信息以利用其权利的动力或能力。特别是,如果工人完全依赖公司提供的信息,雇主将继续不顾工人的权利来规范获取信息的途径。我们的研究结果表明,德国目前的监管并没有解决工人对他们获得职业养老金的渠道一无所知的问题。只有大约一半的工人知道自己可以获得职业养老金。我们发现,员工的认知存在重要的异质性,这种异质性与员工和企业方面的因素以及雇主-员工匹配的结果直接相关。扭曲的认知对工人、政策制定者和企业都有重要影响。只有当员工意识到自己的储蓄可能性时,他们才能做出最佳的储蓄决策。政策制定者可以通过制定强制性职业养老金信息材料和/或定义标准化信息来提供帮助。员工的知识水平低也可能让雇主感到沮丧,因为这表明工人不欣赏他们的职业养老金,限制了职业养老金作为人力资源工具的力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Social Security Bulletin
Social Security Bulletin Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Introduction: Present Principles Industrial Life Assurance Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Pensions Finance of the Social Services National Health Insurance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1