Ending Mandatory Retirement for Tenured Faculty The Consequences for Higher Education (1991) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Pages 103-112
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 103... ...
All of the uncapped colleges and universities with data report that the proportion of faculty over age 70 is less than 1.6 percent. At some research universities a high proportion of faculty would choose to work past age 70 if mandatory retirement is eliminated.
|
From page 104... ...
The committee notes that new fields of scholarship are a source of vitality for research and teaching and that colleges and universities enter new fields and expand their coverage of fields by hiring new faculty. Research universities at which a significant number of faculty work past age 70 would have fewer available positions and thus would be less able to hire either prospective junior faculty or more senior faculty from other institutions, which would limit their ability to enter new fields.
|
From page 105... ...
In sum, the elimination of mandatory retirement could limit hiring flexibility and adversely affect some institutions, particularly some research universities. The committee believes that Congress and institutions of higher education need to seek nondiscriminatory ways to avoid those adverse effects.
|
From page 106... ...
RETIREMENT POLICIES Retirement Incentive Programs Retirement incentive programs are clearly an important tool for increasing turnover; they should be considered by any college or university concerned about the effects of faculty working past age 70, including reduced faculty turnover and increased costs. Retirement incentive programs are specifically designed to encourage faculty turnover.
|
From page 107... ...
However, the legal status of some features of retirement incentive programs may still need clarification; Congress and the responsible federal agencies could assist colleges and universities by clearly preserving several options. The committee recommends that Congress, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission permit colleges and universities to offer faculty voluntary retirement incentive programs that: are not classified as an employee benefit, include an upper age limit for participants, and limit participation on the basis of institutional needs.
|
From page 108... ...
The committee recommends that TIAA-CREF, other private pension plan providers, and state retirement systems work with institutions of higher education to develop pension plans that provide continuing retirement incomes within the committee's suggested range. We suggest a maximum as well as a minimum goal for inflation-protected pension income in the interest of best allocating scarce resources and limiting inadvertent incentives to postpone retirement.
|
From page 109... ...
Institutions can share the cost of retirement health care with retirees by allowing them to remain In college or university group insurance plans at their own expense. The committee recommends that administrators and faculty seek affordable ways to improve retirees' medical coverage, such as redirecting funds from other retirement benefit programs or establishing taxsheltered health savings plans for faculty to save for their own retirement health costs.
|
From page 110... ...
The committee believes that if colleges and universities- with assistance from Congress and regulatory agencies, states, and pension plan providers- vigorously pursue the recommendations in this report, all but a few institutions of higher education will adjust to the elimination of mandatory retirement without significant effects. For those few universities at which a high proportion of faculty members are most likely to work past age 70, the greatest adverse effects will occur during an initial adjusunent period when turnover will be most reduced.
|
From page 111... ...
Given that these steps can be taken, there is no strong basis for continuing the exemption for tenured faculty. The committee recommends that the ADEA exemption permitting the mandatory retirement of tenured faculty be allowed to expire at the end of 1993.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.