_________________________________________________________________

  E M P L O Y E E   B E N E F I T S ,   C O M P E N S A T I O N
                    &   P E N S I O N   L A W
                  Vol. 6,  No. 11: June 2, 2005
_________________________________________________________________

Publisher:     Employment, Labor, Compensation & Pension Law Journals
               a division of
               Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. (SSEP)
               and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)

Editor:        PAMELA PERUN
               Urban Institute
               Mailto:pamela@planetnow.com

Copyright:     SSEP, Inc. 2005. All rights reserved.

Leading Social Science Research Delivered To Your Desktop
               http://www.SSRN.Com/

   ___________________________________________________________

                      Topic of This Issue:
                       Employee Benefits
   ___________________________________________________________


SEARCHING THE SSRN ELECTRONIC LIBRARY
 To search the entire SSRN eLibrary, please visit:
 http://papers.ssrn.com/

 To browse all abstracts published in this journal, please visit:
 http://www.ssrn.com/link/benefits-compensation-pension-law.html

 To ensure delivery of this journal, please add LSN@SSRN.com to
 your email contact list.

REDISTRIBUTION
 Individual and professional subscriptions to the journal are for
 single users. It is a violation of copyright to redistribute
 this document electronically or otherwise without the explicit
 permission of Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc.
 Site licenses for organizations are available by contacting
 Mailto:Site@SSRN.Com

SIGN OFF
 SUBSCRIPTION MANAGEMENT
 You can change your journal subscriptions by going to the SSRN
 User HeadQuarters. Please enter the email address where you
 received this email in the "Your Email Address" field and
 click "Submit". Click on your name on the next screen, and your
 User ID and Password will be emailed to you. Once you have
 successfully logged in, you will be able to change your journal
 subscriptions. If you have questions or problems with this
 process, please email UserSupport@SSRN.com or call 877-SSRNHelp
 (toll free 877.777.6435).

ALIGNMENT
 If this document is misaligned, please set type face to a
 non-proportional font such as Courier 10.

PAPER DOWNLOADS
 If you need assistance downloading papers from our web site,
 please contact Mailto:Support@SSRN.Com


T A B L E   of   C O N T E N T S
_________________________________________________________________


NEW and FORTHCOMING ARTICLES

"Female Dual Labour Markets and Employee Benefits"
      Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 52, No. 1, pp.
      18-37, February 2005
     TERESA GHILARDUCCI
        University of Notre Dame
        Department of Economics
     M. LEE
        University of Notre Dame
        Laboratory for Social Research


"The Promise and Peril of Ownership Society Health Care Policy"
      Tulane Law Review, Vol. 80
     AMY MONAHAN
        University of Missouri at Columbia
        School of Law


"The Impact of HSAs on Health Care Reform: Preliminary Results
 After One Year"
      Wake Forest Law Review, Vol. 40, No. 4, Winter/December
      2005
     EDWARD J. LARSON
        University of Georgia School of Law
     MARC DETTMANN
        University of Virginia Health Services Foundation

WORKING PAPERS

"Employee Cost-sharing and the Welfare Effects of Flexible
 Spending Accounts"
     WILLIAM G. JACK
        Georgetown University
        Department of Economics
     ARIK M. LEVINSON
        Georgetown University
        Department of Economics
        National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
     SJAMSU RAHARDJA
        Georgetown University
        Department of Economics


"The Implicit Costs and Benefits of Family Friendly Work
 Practices"
     JOHN S. HEYWOOD
        University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee
        University of Birmingham
        Department of Commerce
     STANLEY SIEBERT
        University of Birmingham
        Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)
     XIANGDONG WEI
        Lingnan College


"Are Firms or Workers Behind the Shift Away from DB Pension
 Plan?"
     STEPHANIE R. AARONSON
        Government of the United States of America
        Macroeconomic Analysis Section
     JULIA LYNN CORONADO
        Federal Reserve Board - Research & Statistics


"What's in Your 403(b)? Academic Retirement Plans and the Costs
 of Underdiversification"
     JOHN ANGUS
        Claremont Graduate University - School of
        Mathematical Sciences
     WILLIAM O. BROWN
        Clarmont McKenna College - Department of Economics
     JANET KIHOLM SMITH
        Claremont Colleges
        Department of Economics
     RICHARD L. SMITH
        Claremont Graduate University - Drucker Graduate
        School of Management


S S R N   I N F O R M A T I O N
_________________________________________________________________

          * Partners in Publishing
          * Administrative Information
             - Missing issues & change of address
             - Solicitation of abstracts
          * Directors
          * Subscription to SSRN Journals
_________________________________________________________________

ACQUIRING PAPERS
 Download papers directly from the included web address or contact
 the author or other contact person directly. Provide an address
 to which the author or other contact person can send a paper
 copy and mention that you saw the abstract in SSRN. Some of
 SSRN's Partners in Publishing require a subscription or charge a
 fee for electronic downloads.



EDITORIAL POLICIES
 To provide the broadest coverage of research in Employee
 Benefits, Compensation & Pension Law we do not referee working
 papers. We accept abstracts of working papers in Employee
 Benefits, Compensation & Pension Law whose topics suit the
 coverage of the journal and which are part of the worldwide
 scholarly discourse.


N E W   and   F O R T H C O M I N G   Articles
_________________________________________________________________

"Female Dual Labour Markets and Employee Benefits"
      Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 52, No. 1, pp.
      18-37, February 2005

      BY:  TERESA GHILARDUCCI
              University of Notre Dame
              Department of Economics
           M. LEE
              University of Notre Dame
              Laboratory for Social Research

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=672742

 Contact:  TERESA GHILARDUCCI
   Email:  Mailto:TERESA.GHILARDUCCI.1@ND.EDU
  Postal:  University of Notre Dame
           Department of Economics
           Notre Dame, IN 46556  UNITED STATES
   Phone:  219-631-7581
 Co-Auth:  M. LEE
   Email:  Mailto:Mary.J.Lee.82@nd.edu
  Postal:  University of Notre Dame
           Laboratory for Social Research
           945 Flanner Hall
           Notre Dame, IN 46556  UNITED STATES

ABSTRACT:
 The American workforce and the role of employee benefits have
 changed dramatically since the 1980s when economists seriously
 considered dual labour market models to describe pay and
 employment patterns. Then, dual labour market models described
 men's labour markets, but not women's and the tests applied to
 wages and salaries, not total compensation including employee
 benefits. Applying a switching regression technique using the
 2000 Current Population Survey and including women workers and
 employee benefits, we find that the dual labour market
 hypothesis is consistent with both female and male labour market
 structures, especially when total compensation is considered.

______________________________

"The Promise and Peril of Ownership Society Health Care Policy"
      Tulane Law Review, Vol. 80

      BY:  AMY MONAHAN
              University of Missouri at Columbia
              School of Law

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=711361

 Contact:  AMY MONAHAN
   Email:  Mailto:monahana@missouri.edu
  Postal:  University of Missouri at Columbia
           School of Law
           Missouri Avenue & Conley Avenue
           Columbia, MO 65211  UNITED STATES
   Phone:  (573) 882-6753

ABSTRACT:
 There has been a fundamental shift in tax policy over the past
 many years away from paternalistic social policies to the
 embrace of personal responsibility and ownership. The shift in
 retirement savings tax policy has received the most attention,
 but the shift which is taking place in health care tax policy is
 just as profound. Ownership society proponents believe that
 introducing market incentives into the demand-side of health
 care financing will help to control increasing costs, while
 having the additional benefit of allowing tax-favored individual
 ownership of health care savings. In 2003, the tax code was
 amended to grant tax benefits to the ownership society version
 of health care - a tax-favored health savings account coupled
 with high deductible health insurance coverage. This tax policy
 shift is consistent with the broader fundamental shift in social
 tax policy that has taken place over the past several years.

 This article considers both the promise of this fundamental
 shift in health care policy, as well as the potential perils.
 There is much that is appealing about ownership society health
 care policy. It empowers individuals to make their own medical
 spending decisions, rather than putting such power in the hands
 of physician gatekeepers or health insurance administrators. It
 also promises to lower costs, by creating for the first time
 incentives for Americans to be cost-conscious in their medical
 spending decisions. Unfortunately, as the article concludes,
 there are many perils that must be adequately addressed and
 dealt with if ownership society health care is to truly effect
 health care reform.

______________________________

"The Impact of HSAs on Health Care Reform: Preliminary Results
 After One Year"
      Wake Forest Law Review, Vol. 40, No. 4, Winter/December
      2005

      BY:  EDWARD J. LARSON
              University of Georgia School of Law
           MARC DETTMANN
              University of Virginia Health Services Foundation

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=692882

 Contact:  EDWARD J. LARSON
   Email:  Mailto:EDLARSON@UGA.EDU
  Postal:  University of Georgia School of Law
           Department of History
           Athens, GA 30602  UNITED STATES
   Phone:  706-542-2660
     Fax:  706-542-2455
 Co-Auth:  MARC DETTMANN
   Email:  Mailto:MD8J@hscmail.mcc.virginia.edu
  Postal:  University of Virginia Health Services Foundation
           Charlottesville, VA 22903  UNITED STATES

ABSTRACT:
 Over one year having passed since Congress authorized the
 creation of the first individual Health Savings Account (HSA),
 this article reviews the context, structure, promise, and impact
 of this new type of tax-advantaged accounts. Proponents of these
 accounts claim that, coupled with high-deductible health
 insurance policies, HSAs can increase access to and decrease
 cost of health care. Opponents counter that HSAs could decrease
 access and raise cost for some. The article begins by
 summarizing current trends in health-care access and cost. It
 then analyzes the HSA legislation itself, H.R. 2596 (2003), and
 how HSAs operate. After reviewed the claims made for HSAs when
 H.R. 2596 passed, the article takes a preliminary look at the
 impact of HSAs one year after their creation.

 The enactment of H.R. 2596 may benefit some individuals and
 families by providing an additional tax-subsidized
 health-insurance option that may better fit their needs than
 other options. For some, it may make the difference between
 having health insurance and not having health insurance. For
 others, it may result in lower costs or better quality. Despite
 the claims of proponents, however, the record so far suggests
 that HSAs will have little overall impact on rising health-care
 costs or on shrinking health-care access. Fundamental
 health-care reform will not be so easily or painlessly
 implemented.


JEL Classification: I18, J32, H20
______________________________

W O R K I N G   P A P E R   Abstracts
_________________________________________________________________

"Employee Cost-sharing and the Welfare Effects of Flexible
 Spending Accounts"

      BY:  WILLIAM G. JACK
              Georgetown University
              Department of Economics
           ARIK M. LEVINSON
              Georgetown University
              Department of Economics
              National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
           SJAMSU RAHARDJA
              Georgetown University
              Department of Economics

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=716081

Paper ID:  Georgetown Economics Working Paper No. 05-12
    Date:  May 2, 2005

 Contact:  WILLIAM G. JACK
   Email:  Mailto:WGJ@GEORGETOWN.EDU
  Postal:  Georgetown University
           Department of Economics
           ICC 580
           Washington, DC 20057  UNITED STATES
   Phone:  (202) 687-0773
 Co-Auth:  ARIK M. LEVINSON
   Email:  Mailto:AML6@georgetown.edu
  Postal:  Georgetown University
           Department of Economics
           Washington, DC 20057  UNITED STATES
 Co-Auth:  SJAMSU RAHARDJA
   Email:  Mailto:rahardja@georgetown.edu
  Postal:  Georgetown University
           Department of Economics
           Washington, DC 20057  UNITED STATES

ABSTRACT:
 In recent years, employees have been shouldering an increasing
 share of the costs of employee-provided health care. At the same
 time, more and more employers have been allowing employees to
 pay their out-of-pocket health care costs using pre-tax
 earnings, through tax-subsidized flexible spending accounts
 (FSAs). We use a cross-section of firm-level data from 1993 to
 show empirically that these FSAs can explain a significant
 fraction of the shift in health care costs to employees, and
 that this shift may be efficient, given the distortionary
 effects of the existing tax-subsidy to premiums. Correcting for
 selection effects, we find that FSAs are associated with
 insurance contracts with coinsurance rates that are about 7
 percentage points higher, relative to a sample average
 coinsurance rate of 17 percent. Meanwhile, coinsurance rates net
 of the subsidy are approximately unchanged, providing evidence
 that FSAs are welfare-neutral.


JEL Classification: D60, H21, I18
______________________________

"The Implicit Costs and Benefits of Family Friendly Work
 Practices"

      BY:  JOHN S. HEYWOOD
              University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee
              University of Birmingham
              Department of Commerce
           STANLEY SIEBERT
              University of Birmingham
              Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)
           XIANGDONG WEI
              Lingnan College

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=719923

Paper ID:  IZA Discussion Paper No. 1581
    Date:  May 2005

 Contact:  JOHN S. HEYWOOD
   Email:  Mailto:HEYWOOD@CSD.UWM.EDU
  Postal:  University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee
           210 N. Maryland Avenue
           Milwaukee, WI 53211  UNITED STATES
   Phone:  414-229-4437
     Fax:  414-229-3860
 Co-Auth:  STANLEY SIEBERT
   Email:  Mailto:W.S.Siebert@bham.ac.uk
  Postal:  University of Birmingham
           Birmingham B15 2TT,    UNITED KINGDOM
 Co-Auth:  XIANGDONG WEI
   Email:  Mailto:xdwei@ln.edu.hk
  Postal:  Lingnan College
           8 Castle Peak Road
           Hong Kong,    CHINA

ABSTRACT:
 This paper posits that the provision of family friendly
 practices is, on balance, costly to firms and valuable to
 workers. As a consequence, we anticipate the emergence of a
 hedonic equilibrium in which workers provided with such
 practices face an implicit reduction in their earnings. Using
 WERS98 linked employer-employee data, we show that the ability
 to confirm this compensating wage differential depends
 critically on an appropriate treatment model designed to purge
 typical estimates of the income effect. We find that family
 friendly jobs may be associated with as much as a 20 percent
 reduction in earnings. Our estimates can be used to inform
 impact assessments of new UK legislation extending family
 friendly practices.


JEL Classification: J31, J32
______________________________

"Are Firms or Workers Behind the Shift Away from DB Pension
 Plan?"

      BY:  STEPHANIE R. AARONSON
              Government of the United States of America
              Macroeconomic Analysis Section
           JULIA LYNN CORONADO
              Federal Reserve Board - Research & Statistics

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=716383

Paper ID:  FEDS Paper No. 2005-17
    Date:  April 2005

 Contact:  STEPHANIE R. AARONSON
   Email:  Mailto:stephanie.r.aaronson@frb.gov
  Postal:  Government of the United States of America
           Macroeconomic Analysis Section
           20th & C. St., N.W.
           Mailstop 80
           Washington, DC 20551  UNITED STATES
 Co-Auth:  JULIA LYNN CORONADO
   Email:  Mailto:JCORONADO@FRB.GOV
  Postal:  Federal Reserve Board - Research & Statistics
           Washington, DC 20551  UNITED STATES

ABSTRACT:
 One of the most striking changes in the composition of household
 retirement savings over the past 20 years has been the shift
 from defined benefit to defined contribution pension plans.
 Understanding the factors underlying this shift is important for
 determining its impact on retirement saving adequacy. Yet
 previous research, which has mostly focused on factors affecting
 all firms, such as regulation or increased longevity, has
 yielded little consensus. In this study we estimate the
 contribution of changing workforce characteristics and
 production environments to the shift in pension coverage. Our
 findings suggest that, while aggregate factors explain a large
 part of the movement, changes in worker demand, due to evolving
 workforce characteristics, also contributed notably. On the
 supply side, we find support for the theory that technical
 change has reduced the value of DB plans. These supply and
 demand factors are particularly important for explaining the
 significant variation in cross-industry trends in pension
 coverage.


JEL Classification: J32, J41, J26
______________________________

"What's in Your 403(b)? Academic Retirement Plans and the Costs
 of Underdiversification"

      BY:  JOHN ANGUS
              Claremont Graduate University - School of
              Mathematical Sciences
           WILLIAM O. BROWN
              Clarmont McKenna College - Department of Economics
           JANET KIHOLM SMITH
              Claremont Colleges
              Department of Economics
           RICHARD L. SMITH
              Claremont Graduate University - Drucker Graduate
              School of Management

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=733804

    Date:  June 1, 2005

 Contact:  JANET KIHOLM SMITH
   Email:  Mailto:janet_smith@mckenna.edu
  Postal:  Claremont Colleges
           Department of Economics
           500 E. Ninth St.
           Claremont, CA 91711-6420  UNITED STATES
   Phone:  909-607-3276
 Co-Auth:  JOHN ANGUS
   Email:  Mailto:john_angus@cgu.edu
  Postal:  Claremont Graduate University - School of Mathematical
           Sciences
           150 E. Tenth Street
           Claremont, CA 91711  UNITED STATES
 Co-Auth:  WILLIAM O. BROWN
   Email:  Mailto:wbrown@benson.mckenna.edu
  Postal:  Clarmont McKenna College - Department of Economics
           500 E. Ninth St.
           Claremont, CA 91711-6420  UNITED STATES
 Co-Auth:  RICHARD L. SMITH
   Email:  Mailto:Richard.Smith@cgu.edu
  Postal:  Claremont Graduate University - Drucker Graduate School of
           Management
           1021 N. Dartmouth Ave.
           Claremont, CA 91711  UNITED STATES

ABSTRACT:
 Many college and university 403(b) plans restrict the menu of
 investment choices to funds offered by TIAA-CREF, the current
 manager of over half of all 403(b) contributions. Further, in
 the face of Internal Revenue Code changes that will take effect
 in 2006 and will make 403(b) plan ERISA compliance more
 difficult, some sponsors are dropping their existing
 alternatives to TIAA-CREF. Using eight years of historical
 performance data, we study the efficiency of the TIAA-CREF
 opportunity set relative to a somewhat larger set that includes
 several standard index funds, and we estimate the lifetime
 opportunity losses to participants who are constrained to invest
 only in TIAA-CREF. Based on efficient frontier analysis, and
 assuming optimal rebalancing by a loss-averse individual as time
 to retirement approaches, our analysis demonstrates that the
 opportunity losses are economically significant. Depending on
 loss-aversion, and diversification constraints, over a
 forty-year work-life an employee who is restricted to TIAA-CREF
 would lose approximately half of terminal wealth, compared to
 investing in the expanded menu that includes index funds.
 Moreover, limiting the choices to TIAA-CREF does not appear to
 help even unsophisticated investors. TIAA-CREF equity funds
 offer little meaningful diversification and are no less risky
 than the alternative index funds. Even when a naive
 diversification strategy of equally-weighting (1/n) all
 available funds is applied, the expanded menu outperforms the
 restricted portfolio by about 26 percent over the employee's
 work-life. The findings have direct implications for the over
 6.8 million enrollees in 403(b) plans, who currently make around
 $27 billion in annual contributions, and indirect implications
 for the much larger population of 401(k)-type defined
 contribution plans.