Does the Church Have a Pension?

[mirkwood]

What goes through my mind when someone pulls the TR:

 

"Do you want me to write VOID across that?"

 

"Are you going to tell your bishop or do you want me to tell him?"

 

 

 

[clbent04]

3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

I'm horrified that people might be out there living their lives, carefree and happy, thinking the church is going to take care of them when they need it.   What a scary prospect.

To clarify, I don’t think she was ever banking on being able to count on the church for her retirement.

I only suggested it to her when she out of the blue asked me for my advice on what she should do.  I don’t have any experience with church employment, but I thought that would be a good place to look into considering her lack of options.

[clbent04]

6 hours ago, Backroads said:

I don't know if we can really fault them, but I've noticed an odd little pattern among some very generous and selfless people: some of them are so generous and desiring to help others they are incapable of helping themselves. I know of a girl who has become a burdern to her landlady because she spends all her money on helping those less of than her that she can't eat healthy, can't maintain a job, can't pay her rent, etc.

Difference here is my aunt has always paid her debts. I don’t think she’s ever put someone in a situation like what you’re referencing. She’s just trying to understand what her retirement options are at this point, which sadly looks limited at best if not nonexistent. 

Edited November 2, 2021 by clbent04

[Backroads]

12 hours ago, clbent04 said:

. She’s just trying to understand what her retirement options are at this point, which sadly looks limited at best if not nonexistent. 

I can't quite remember the name, but is it possible the Church has one of those late start retirement programs where a percentage of the paycheck is taken out? If she could at all afford to live on quite less, this could be an option.

[NeuroTypical]

Regardless of whether the church is doing it or not, "catch up contributions" are a thing for anyone over 50 earning a paycheck.  If the employer has a 401k, you can do catch up contributions.  You can also contribute more to an IRA this way, regardless of what your employer does.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/catchupcontribution.asp

https://www.fidelity.com/viewpoints/retirement/catch-up-contributions

[estradling75]

The bottom line is if your Aunt wants to retire she needs to figure out how to make it happen... If her family wants her to retire then they need to figure out how to make that happen.

As an employee there is probably something... but there is no guarantee that it is going to be enough.  What ever the employer offers (aka the Church) is what it offers and then remainder has to be covered in other ways...  This is why it is not recommended that a person waits to plan for their retirement.

 

[Just_A_Guy]

On 11/1/2021 at 11:11 AM, clbent04 said:

It's all good advice you're saying here, but if the person in need of support was someone in the scriptures like Paul, would this advice be just as applicable?  Sorry, Paul, should've thought about contributing to that matching 401K before giving your only pair of shoes away to the other homeless guy on the street.

For those who truly live selflessly in this life at the cost of not building up a nice little nest egg for themselves, how can we fault them when their treasure isn't of this Earth?

She's meeting with the temple GA to discuss if she hasn't already. I think cases like these would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.  How has this person lived their life?  What have they used their money for?  How long have they been in the employment of the Church?  

When I think of my aunt, I think of Matthew 6:26 in relation to how she's lived her life:

She said she hasn't received any promptings to retire yet, so maybe she will work until she draws her last breath.  She's barely able to cover her living expenses right now with social security and her paycheck from the Church, so I really don't see how retirement is possible without help.

Well, there’s The Church’s Corporate Entities, and then there’s The Church.  Your aunt works for the former (in a temple, to be sure; but she’s paid by the corporate entity).  Going to any employer and saying “hey, I just now after twenty years figured out that I really don’t have my financial future under control, so can you please dig into your budget and find me an extra few hundred thousand dollars above and beyond what I already contractually agreed to accept?”—that’s just not a thing.  And frankly, it’s not fair to sucker-punch an employer with that kind of eleventh-hour demand.  (Oh, there’s nothing wrong with her asking, I suppose; but I wouldn’t see the Church’s Corporate Entities as morally bound to grant such a request.)

Now, the above pertains to The Church’s Corporate Entities; but The Church is another matter.  I am confident that The Church would not let your aunt go hungry or naked or homeless or without critical medical care.  But those needs would be administered through the standard Church programs that are designed to help anyone in her situation, regardless of who their employer is or has been—and under current Church practice that means The Church’s ward-level welfare program and not a DMBA investment account or pension fund.

Edited November 3, 2021 by Just_A_Guy

[clbent04]

On 11/3/2021 at 11:05 AM, Just_A_Guy said:

Well, there’s The Church’s Corporate Entities, and then there’s The Church.  Your aunt works for the former (in a temple, to be sure; but she’s paid by the corporate entity).  Going to any employer and saying “hey, I just now after twenty years figured out that I really don’t have my financial future under control, so can you please dig into your budget and find me an extra few hundred thousand dollars above and beyond what I already contractually agreed to accept?”—that’s just not a thing.  And frankly, it’s not fair to sucker-punch an employer with that kind of eleventh-hour demand.  (Oh, there’s nothing wrong with her asking, I suppose; but I wouldn’t see the Church’s Corporate Entities as morally bound to grant such a request.)

Now, the above pertains to The Church’s Corporate Entities; but The Church is another matter.  I am confident that The Church would not let your aunt go hungry or naked or homeless or without critical medical care.  But those needs would be administered through the standard Church programs that are designed to help anyone in her situation, regardless of who their employer is or has been—and under current Church practice that means The Church’s ward-level welfare program and not a DMBA investment account or pension fund.

I get where you’re coming from, but to say church corporate should be considered solely as a business regardless of the fact that it’s a church seems a little off to me. Church corporate does not operate with the traditional business motive of the bottom dollar being the driving force behind everything. And to suggest it’s beyond the business side of the church to be charitable is contradicting to the church’s mission statement.

Edited November 5, 2021 by clbent04

[Backroads]

I certainly don't claim to know enough about the Church and its proceedings and mission as I probably should know, but I will relate a thought I've had about charity and most churches in general and those looking for said charity.

I don't think the primary purpose of most churches/religions is to help others.

There, I said it.

They're... religions. For worshipping. Spiritual matters.

So when I hear people saying "Why isn't this church giving out three meals a day? Why isn't that church doubling as a homeless shelter? Why isn't that there church providing for XYZ needs?" I feel confused. 

Yes, many churches do include serving others and attempting to aleviate various mortal needs as part of their ministry and they have a spiritual reason for doing so. 

But churches are generally formed for worship and the pondering of spiritual matters, not formed to be the local charity and soup kitchen.

[NeuroTypical]

Starting around 1982, we were big on the "threefold mission of the church", which was Proclaim the Gospel, Perfect the Saints, Redeem the Dead.   Charity, service, and support to the poor and needy were considered folded into the first and second mission, depending on whether the recipient was a member or not. 

Then in 2009, we added "Care for the poor and needy", and it became the 4th mission of the church. 

(And yes, 2009 was 12 years ago.  I can't be the only person weirded out by stuff like that.)

[Just_A_Guy]

On 11/4/2021 at 3:41 PM, clbent04 said:

I get where you’re coming from, but to say church corporate should be considered solely as a business regardless of the fact that it’s a church seems a little off to me. Church corporate does not operate with the traditional business motive of the bottom dollar being the driving force behind everything. And to suggest it’s beyond the business side of the church to be charitable is contradicting to the church’s mission statement.

Do you have a specific “mission statement” in mind?  Are you thinking of something Deseret Management or Ensign Peak or some similar entity has released?

I hope this doesn’t sound dismissive, but . . . are the Church’s corporate entities really required to give freebies worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, to every person they do business with who claims they are responsible for the support a senior citizen on a fixed income?  Particularly when another wing of the Church has already provided for the support of that same senior citizen?

[clbent04]

30 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Do you have a specific “mission statement” in mind?  Are you thinking of something Deseret Management or Ensign Peak or some similar entity has released?

I hope this doesn’t sound dismissive, but . . . are the Church’s corporate entities really required to give freebies worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, to every person they do business with who claims they are responsible for the support a senior citizen on a fixed income?  Particularly when another wing of the Church has already provided for the support of that same senior citizen?

I’m not saying the Church is required to do anything. I agree with the design of the Church that the Church proceeds as it sees fit at its sole discretion. Whether or not Church corporate helps my aunt is its decision alone, and I’m not expecting anyone’s outside expectations including mine to influence the Church’s decision making.

What I am saying is Church corporate and the Church share the same 4-prong mission statement: proclaim the gospel, redeem the dead, perfect the saints, and care for the poor and needy. To suggest otherwise is contrary to the entire foundation and establishment of the Church. 

Edited November 6, 2021 by clbent04

[Backroads]

8 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Starting around 1982, we were big on the "threefold mission of the church", which was Proclaim the Gospel, Perfect the Saints, Redeem the Dead.   Charity, service, and support to the poor and needy were considered folded into the first and second mission, depending on whether the recipient was a member or not. 

Then in 2009, we added "Care for the poor and needy", and it became the 4th mission of the church. 

(And yes, 2009 was 12 years ago.  I can't be the only person weirded out by stuff like that.)

I stand clarified on the Church's position.

[estradling75]

12 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I hope this doesn’t sound dismissive, but . . . are the Church’s corporate entities really required to give freebies worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, to every person they do business with who claims they are responsible for the support a senior citizen on a fixed income?  Particularly when another wing of the Church has already provided for the support of that same senior citizen?

Indeed..  The corporate side of the church does have an obligation...  The obligation it to whatever it agreed to/offered as part of it employee compensation... whatever that might be.  (It seems clear that no one here can really answer that question)

The idea that the corporate side church should "do more" then its obligation raises the very logical question of where does that end?  After all the command for charity does not end with a singular persons aunt.  If they "do more" for her then they should do more for everyone else.  And if they are busy funding everyone retirement what is happening to our Temples, the temple work, the church building and missionary work?    Funds are limited...  That work is also commanded us of the Lord.

So the church has to balance all the commands of the Lord, all of which require funding.  The church will not ignore the Aunt if she runs into problem in retirement because she neglected to prepare for it... but it will not be solving it with piles of cash... It will be in the local ward leaders trying to help her and her family solve it themselves.

[NeuroTypical]

12 hours ago, clbent04 said:

What I am saying is Church corporate and the Church share the same 4-prong mission statement: proclaim the gospel, redeem the dead, perfect the saints, and care for the poor and needy. To suggest otherwise is contrary to the entire foundation and establishment of the Church. 

Ok, fair enough. 

Hypothetical situation: Your aunt retires, hears from her employer what benefits are there and aren't there, and it's not enough to live on for the rest of her days.  

Question: Should that hypothetical situation come into reality, will you believe that the church is not fulfilling it's 4th prong in regards to your Aunt?

[Backroads]

Tangent question: How popular are pensions these days? It seems in some circles they are a relic of the past. With fewer people remaining with one employer during their careers, many seem to prefer to handle their own retirement.

Could be a chicken and egg scenario (are employees doing their own retirement because of the lack of pensions or is there a lack of pensions because people are handling their own retirements?). But is it possible the Church didn't think pensions were a big thing?

[NeuroTypical]

1 minute ago, Backroads said:

Tangent question: How popular are pensions these days?

In the business world, pensions began disappearing around a decade ago or more.  The days of people graduating college, and being hired by a firm for whom they would work for the rest of their lives, is basically over in the corporate world.   People want portable 401k's, with hefty employer contributions.   

That said, if someone started working and had a pension, often the business will not take it away, it'll still be there for that person.  Just anyone hired these days will find it not an option for most places.

[clbent04]

On 11/6/2021 at 8:09 AM, NeuroTypical said:

Ok, fair enough. 

Hypothetical situation: Your aunt retires, hears from her employer what benefits are there and aren't there, and it's not enough to live on for the rest of her days.  

Question: Should that hypothetical situation come into reality, will you believe that the church is not fulfilling it's 4th prong in regards to your Aunt?

The church would be fulfilling it’s 4th prong regardless of the what action the church does or doesn’t take in relation to financially assisting my aunt in her retirement.

When I suggested to my aunt to contact her employer, the church, I did so knowing the church obviously isn’t your typical employer.  And who knows?  But she needs to start somewhere to uncover which options she may have.  I have no idea which options those will be, but it’s better to at least attempt to turn over each stone rather than remain ignorant.

Maybe my suggestion to her doesn’t get her anywhere, and maybe there are some ultra, super-seasoned, employment specialists on here who have a better way than me to pull that rabbit through the hat for my aunt in her situation. 

Edited December 14, 2021 by clbent04

[JohnsonJones]

On 11/6/2021 at 10:06 AM, Backroads said:

Tangent question: How popular are pensions these days? It seems in some circles they are a relic of the past. With fewer people remaining with one employer during their careers, many seem to prefer to handle their own retirement.

Could be a chicken and egg scenario (are employees doing their own retirement because of the lack of pensions or is there a lack of pensions because people are handling their own retirements?). But is it possible the Church didn't think pensions were a big thing?

Depends on the Nation.

In the United States they have been disappearing for some time.  In some other nations they are generally there for people (though, those nations also normally have free healthcare which actually tends to help those in dire need FASTER than they are in the United States in some situations, as well as having some other items which are distinctly not found in the US.  On the otherhand, they also don't have as much freedom of speech, press, and other freedoms that some take so much for granted in the United States either...so it can be a tradeoff on what one feels is or is not important I suppose).

[Still_Small_Voice]

On 11/2/2021 at 11:04 AM, estradling75 said:

As an employee there is probably something... but there is no guarantee that it is going to be enough.  What ever the employer offers (aka the Church) is what it offers and then remainder has to be covered in other ways...  This is why it is not recommended that a person waits to plan for their retirement. 

Time is literally money with investments.  The earlier you can start (even around the age of 21) the better.   Forty years of an investment giving an average of annual 8 to 10 percent annual interest rate really adds up.

If you started with $6,000 sum at the age of 23 and got an annual interest rate of 8% every year adding only $1,000 per year your money could accumulate to around $389,000 by the age of 63. 

My wife and I only have about eighteen to twenty years left until we hit the age of 67.  I am really trying to catch up now as we are behind.  Start saving now and not tomorrow.  Pay the LORD first and pay yourself second.

[NeuroTypical]

4 hours ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

Pay the LORD first and pay yourself second.

This is so true.  Every paycheck, every bonus, every unexpected bit of money from everywhere:

1.  Pay tithing.
2. Move a chunk into savings/retirement.
3. Then look at the money - that's what you have to pay bills/buy houses/get married/eat food/etc.

Along with staying the crap out of debt, it's a wonderful plan.