ILNews

Attorneys must financially prepare for life during retirement

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Focus

Retirement is nothing new, but what attorneys do once they leave fulltime practice is changing.

When partners were given the gold watch in the past, they usually kept their office at the firm, maybe taking an of counsel position. They came in regularly and attended all the partner meetings.

Now retirement can mean continuing to practice law, or quitting completely and traveling, or starting another career in a different field. Some young attorneys are setting savings goals so they can retire early to pursue other passions.

“I don’t think there is a normal anymore,” said Ken Kobe, executive director of Barnes & Thornburg LLP. “It all kind of depends on people’s personal situation.”

While life after retirement may vary, one primary tool used to save for the golden years has remained the same. Many law firms, like many businesses and nonprofits across the country, offer a defined contribution plan like a 401(k) plan to their employees to help them tuck money away for life after they exit the workforce.

BrightScope, a financial information and investment research company based in San Diego, looks at 401(k) plans in several sectors including the legal industry. The company recently released a report identifying the Top 25 law firms with the highest-ranked 401(k) plans containing more than $100 million in assets.

Barnes & Thornburg LLP, headquartered in Indianapolis, ranked 24th. Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, which has an office in the Circle City, ranked 10th on the list.

Despite the economic recession which decimated many retirement savings, financial experts and attorneys who handle financial matters maintain defined contribution plans are good vehicles for preparing for life after work. They are likely here to stay and unlikely to undergo any significant alterations.

If anything has changed, it is the increasing importance for employees to participate in their company’s plans and pay attention to their own investments. Workers need more sophistication than just following such often-heard advice that employees nearing retirement should become more conservative in their financial decisions.

Individuals have to plan through retirement, said Nadine Givens, Indianapolis Director of PNC Wealth Management. Retirees do not want to outlive their income – the financial industry advises to plan for a life expectancy of 95 years of age.

Largely, law firms have an employee base who better understands the complexity of 401(k) plans. Still, firms are proactive in both monitoring their plan offerings and educating their workers so when retirement comes, the attorneys and staff members can do what they want and not what their savings allows them to do.

Shifting attitudes

In compiling the list, BrightScope mined Form 5500s filed with the U.S. Department of Labor and audited financial statements of 401(k)s with 100 or more participants, according to Brooks Herman, head of research at the California company. It then analyzed things such as company generosity in matching contributions and plan administration fees to determine how quickly or how slowly participants in a particular 401(k) could meet their retirement goals.

The Top 25 are the plans that BrightScope’s methodology has indicated will get participants to retirement quicker.

Defined contribution plans put the onus on the participant. Historically the pension plans that were in vogue 50 or 60 years ago placed all the investment risk on the employer. The employer assumed the liability, and the worker got a periodic statement about their retirement benefits.

However, with 401(k) plans, participants have to take an active role. They decide how much income to defer into the plan and how that money is allocated among the options available.

As a group participating in 401(k)s, lawyers are distinctive, Herman said. They tend to be intelligent, well-compensated and typically save a tremendous amount for retirement. On their own, they may possess a lot of financial savvy or they work with financial advisers.

Bob Hicks, Indiana partner-in-charge at Taft, has noticed a change in attitudes toward 401(k)s that mirrors the larger shift among workers in all industries. His firm, then Sommer Barnard, introduced its 401(k) and profit sharing plans in the 1990s.

Taft came to Indiana when it merged with Sommer Barnard in 2008.

Years ago, contributions to 401(k)s, in general, were low because people were of the mindset that someone else would take care of them, Hicks explained. Today, employees understand the need to save for their own retirement, especially with the continued questions about the long-term stability of Social Security.

“It has been a sea change,” Hicks said, as workers have ceased to think about defined benefit plans like pensions and shifted their focus to 401(k)s.

Education

Hicks described his firm’s plan as generous but quickly noted the business is not being benevolent solely for altruistic reasons. Having a solid retirement savings plan available helps attract and retain talented attorneys and staff members.

“It’s a good business decision for your employees to have a plan to be able to retire,” he said.

Barnes & Thornburg has structured its retirement plan to make attorneys and staff members want to participate, Kobe said. The firm provides access to consultant services, primarily through meetings and webinars, to help employees understand and navigate the 401(k) options.

Taft also educates its employees. Written notices and seminars help the participants make informed decisions about their retirement savings. Hicks noted the firm works to strike the balance between helping its employees maneuver the 401(k) and pushing them into participating.

Education is vital, said PNC’s Givens, because today’s 401(k) plans are not your father’s plans. Earlier choices of where to allocate retirement funds were traditionally limited to stocks and bonds, but now the options have exploded to include commodities, emerging markets, real estate and Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities.

The complexity of these plans makes determining the right asset allocation more arduous. Although many participants do not have the competency to understand how they should invest, law firms tend to do a better job of assisting their employees in gaining the necessary knowledge, Givens said.

In addition to giving the employees resources to handle their 401(k), Barnes & Thornburg also pays attention to the plan itself. The firm meets with an outside investment adviser quarterly to review the plan’s performance by looking at such aspects as the options in the plan and the associated fees. Two times a year, the committee meets with the plan administrator to go over what Kobe called the “nuts and bolts” of the plan, which includes whether account information is being given to the employees in a timely manner.

A challenge for businesses has been keeping employees participating in 401(k) plans, especially as the economy tanked. To benefit from the market’s rebound, workers have to have their money invested, Givens said. Otherwise they are sitting on the sidelines just watching.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT