
handle: 10419/173246
I use a detailed panel of data and a unique modeling specification to explore how public schoolteachers respond to the incentives embedded in North Carolina’s retirement system. Like most public-sector retirement plans, North Carolina’s teacher pension implicitly encourages teachers to continue working until they are eligible for their pension benefits, and then leave soon afterward. I find that teachers with higher levels of quality, as measured by a teacher’s value-added to her students’ achievement test scores, are more responsive to the “pull” of teacher pensions. Younger teachers, those with higher salaries, and nonwhite teachers are also more likely to stay during the pension “pull.” All teachers show a strong response to the pension “push,” with about a quarter of teachers leaving every year once they become eligible for their pension. I depart from other models of teacher retirement by using a Cox proportional hazard model. Given that salaries are generally fixed by the state, I find that the number of years a teacher must work before she is eligible for her full pension benefit is the major driver of variation in pension wealth. This specification has the benefit of a flexible baseline hazard that can easily capture the sharp incentives driving a teacher’s retirement decision that are dependent on her proximity to retirement eligibility, and can flexibly account for differences driven by local labor market conditions. These analyses highlight important unintended effects that inform education policies going forward to ensure the retention of high-quality teachers in all types of schools.
J26, Teacher Retirement, Nonwage Benefits, Economics, State Finance, pension, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Public Expenditure, North Carolina, teacher compensation, H75, LABOR MARKET ISSUES, Retirement and pensions, H55, teacher pensions, H72, teacher quality, K-12 Education, nonwage benefits, Teacher Pensions, Teachers and compensation, ddc:330, J32, EDUCATION, teacher retirement, public pensions, state finance, Education Economics, defined benefits, Labor Economics, teacher salaries, Public Pensions, I21, public expenditure
J26, Teacher Retirement, Nonwage Benefits, Economics, State Finance, pension, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Public Expenditure, North Carolina, teacher compensation, H75, LABOR MARKET ISSUES, Retirement and pensions, H55, teacher pensions, H72, teacher quality, K-12 Education, nonwage benefits, Teacher Pensions, Teachers and compensation, ddc:330, J32, EDUCATION, teacher retirement, public pensions, state finance, Education Economics, defined benefits, Labor Economics, teacher salaries, Public Pensions, I21, public expenditure
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
