Richard Hiller
Senior Fellow, Reason Foundation
Richard Hiller is a senior fellow with Reason Foundation's Pension Integrity Project.
Hiller is principal of Retirement Policy Consulting, LLC, and has worked on income-focused retirement plan designs for more than 35 years.
-
Public retirement plans need to evolve
Optional retirement plans would've prevented the creation of unfunded liabilities, met the needs of today’s increasingly mobile workers, and aided in recruiting.
-
Public pension plans need to better communicate the benefits of their defined contribution plans
A robust communication, education, and advice strategy will enable an employer to educate employees and prospects on a plan’s features and benefits.
-
Public pension reforms often fall short of what is needed
Making funding improvements to public pension systems without also making structural reforms often proves inadequate.
-
Public pension plans should not get into the private retirement annuity business
Creating new, complex, government-run enterprises in each state would not improve retirement security for private sector workers.
-
Public sector unions continue to advocate for pension plans that don’t benefit most members
The workforce has changed and policymakers should focus on retirement plan options that offer long-term financial security for the broadest cohort of public employees.
-
Comparing the Ohio PERS defined contribution plan to gold standards
The Ohio Public Employee Retirement System's Member Directed Plan meets several best practices but needs improvement in other key areas.
-
Comparing the Ohio State Teachers Retirement System’s offerings to gold standards in retirement plan design
Ohio STRS is a national leader in offering flexibility and choice to workers but can make improvements.
-
Public pension systems need to reduce debt and modernize design for today’s workforce
The traditional pension system still used by most state and local governments no longer meets the needs of most workers or employers.
-
States can learn from pension plan design colleges and universities use for professors
Modern public retirement plans need to reflect realistic employment patterns, focus on income replacement, and meet individual needs.
-
Alaska’s defined contribution retirement plan is better for most workers than defined benefit plan
While the defined contribution plan in place in Alaska could be enhanced, it is a plan that recognizes the reality of the modern workforce.
-
A return to old-fashioned pensions won’t help Alaska retain or recruit public workers
Retirement plans that can move with employees from job to job and meet their long-term financial needs are more critical than ever.
-
Public pension fund trustees have a perfect path to avoid the politics of ESG investing
ESG is a political construct and has no direct correlation to how a pension system should invest its assets.
-
A better public sector retirement plan for the modern workforce
The new PRO Plan meets the needs of public workers, helps government employers recruit and retain workers, and stops public pension debt from growing.
-
Webinar: The Personal Retirement Optimization Plan
A plan for incorporating the benefits of 401(k)-style solutions into modern-day public sector retirement plans that give their workers flexibility and predictability of their benefits.
-
Politics and ESG endanger public pension plans and workers’ retirements
Attempting to impose politically-motivated investment controls of any kind on public pension plans violates core fiduciary standards.
-
How Alaska’s defined contribution plan and supplemental annuity plan compare to the gold standard
Alaska's retirement plans meet best practices in some areas but need some improvement in other areas.
-
Retirement plans’ impact on recruiting and retention in the public market
Public employers should adopt plans that best meet the realistic career patterns of employees and prospective employees.
-
Examining the populations best served by defined benefit and defined contribution plans
The claim that a defined benefit plan is more efficient than a defined contribution plan, purely on a basis of cost, overlooks a larger and more meaningful perspective regarding benefit distribution.