By Sheryl Smolkin

Today I’m interviewing actuary Karen Hall for savewithspp.com. Prior to her recent retirement, she was a vice president at the consulting firm Aon Hewitt, based in Vancouver. In addition to enjoying her retirement, she is continuing to explore cost effective and easy ways to create a steady income out of defined contribution (DC) pension savings.

Karen has 35 years of professional experience in the areas of pension actuarial consulting, flexible benefits consulting, senior management and HR leadership. She is also the author of the book, Risk Management Strategies for an Aging Workforce available on Amazon. Thanks so much for joining me today, Karen.

 

Q: Most Canadians in the private sector today have defined contribution pension plans. Tell me how a DC plan works.
A: Well, Sheryl, defined contribution means the contributions going in are defined or fixed. The member and her employer each contribute to the plan. The member often chooses how the money is invested from a number of investment options provided by the plan. Then, when the member comes to retire, she has a lump sum amount saved.

Q: On retirement, the conversion of DC assets into retirement income is for the most part left up to retirees. Why is that a problem?
A: If you buy an annuity you don’t get much in income for the amount you saved. The only other alternative is doing it yourself, that is, choosing investments, deciding how much to withdraw and figuring out how to make the money last for your lifetime. If you rely on advisers for any of this, you’re typically paying a substantial fee of at least 2% of your assets every year. The average person is just not equipped to make these decisions. I find it complicated enough and I’ve been living and breathing pensions for 35 years.

Q: Frequently, insurance companies or other DC or Group RRSP carriers, have group registered retirement income funds that retiring members of client group retirement plans can move their money into at retirement. Do these plans resolve some of these issues of high retail fees and poor financial literacy that you identified in our last question?
A: I don’t think they do. It would depend, of course, on the deal. But, often the fees are still quite high, near 2%, and the individual is still making all of the decisions I just mentioned.

Q: So how common are Group RRIF’s established for retirees of just one employer and what are the pros and cons of these types of arrangements?
A: Based on my experience, they aren’t that common. I can see why plan sponsor companies don’t want the ongoing administration. But I do think it would be great if the retiree could basically just stay in the plan and get the same investment options and fee deals as when they were active.

What I do see more often is where the insurance company that is the record keeper for the plan will have options for the member to transfer into their individual RRIF products, perhaps with a modest reduction in fees as compared to a retail purchase.

Q: How much clout do individual DC plan sponsors have in negotiating fees for their former members in rollover plans or single organization Group RRIF’s?
A: Well, as with everything, it depends on the size of the employer and on how much the employer wants to push for such a service. I do know of large employers who have negotiated such services.

Q: How should investment options be structured in rollover plans and single company Group RRIFs to maximize value from a DC plan in the decumulation phase?
A: In my view, the same options as when the member was active should generally be fine. The plan could add a target date type option for accounts and payments. But I think the typical choice of a range of balance funds and funds with conservative to moderate risk. You are going to live a fair number of years in retirement, so your time horizon isn’t that short.

Q: Saskatchewan and several other provinces, plus federal pension legislation, now allow payment of a variable pension from a DC plan – that means a stream of income that tries to simulate a defined benefit pension. Could you briefly explain to me how it works?
A: Well, it does depend on the plan and the legislation how they set it up, but very generally such an arrangement would allow the plan to provide payments to retirees. Like you said, it would simulate a defined benefit type of pension. There would generally be monthly payments and the amount of each payment would vary depending on plan experience.

For example, one client I know determines the amount of the monthly payment once a year. The amount is leveled for the year, so it’s paid every month at a level amount, but then it gets recalculated every January and depends on how well the fund did in the previous year. Generally – hopefully – it usually goes up or slightly or stays about the same. However, if it was a really bad year like 2008, the monthly pensions would likely be reduced.

Q: And how do they draw down funds in terms of various funds or investments the members are invested in or cash or whatever is actually sitting in the member’s account?
A: Well, in this particular one, when you retire and choose a variable pension, you have a lump sum amount and that lump sum amount gets translated into a number of units in the fund. Then, the fund pays a pension based on a dollar amount per unit, so the dollar amount per unit times the number of units you have, that’s what you get.

And what’s happening in this one is they’re insuring the mortality, so you don’t actually see your lump sum getting drawn down, you’re guaranteed to get that amount however long you live, and then the mortality is spread amongst the group.

Q: Oh, that’s really interesting. So it’s not just a matter of investments being sold and your money being distributed once a year, like if you had your own individual RRIF.
A: Right. So the plans can offer an individual RRIF and in those circumstances you’d see your money getting drawn down. But these variable pension ideas are to do with pooling the mortality risk.

Q: So to what extent have employers taken advantage of their ability to pay variable pensions to enhance the value of their DC plans to plan members in this all important decumulation phase?
A: As far as I know, not many have done so. Well, I know the one I gave in my example, but I don’t know of any other examples.

Q: And why do you think that’s the case?
A: Well, I think that it’s just new, right? CAP Guideline Number 8 says that plan sponsors should help members transition, but it’s new and sponsors are still considering their options. They are watching to see what others will do.

Q: Is there a real cost or a potential liability to employers that take on this responsibility?
A: That’s the big issue. For example, if you don’t have a big enough group, it’s hard to pool the mortality risk. The other thing is I’m not sure members are clamoring for variable pensions. Plan sponsors will pay attention when it affects active members and their appreciation of the benefit. I know there are plans that are interested in designing this and we’ll probably see how it develops in the next few years .

Q: Do you think it will be more of interest to public sector or private sector?
A: I think the public sector will have more ability to implement these and I think that union groups without a defined benefit plan might be interested.

Q: How important is effective employer communications in adding value to DC benefits for retirees in the decumulation phase?
A: Some employers are doing more to help members understand their options and prepare for retirement in the decumulation phase. For example, they provide one to three day retirement preparation seminars that can help considerably. I do still think, however, that individuals are not equipped to make many of these decisions. And you can put design features into DC plans that would help members better with the decision making.

Q: Could you give me an example of one or two of those?
A: Auto enrollment, auto escalation, and the design feature that we were just talking about — variable pensions — that would assist members with decision making in the decumulation phase would help.

Q: What role can annuity purchases play using all or part of the money in the plan members, DC account or RRIF to enhance the orderly draw down funds after retirement?
A: Annuities are expensive when the person is first retiring. However, I would definitely consider purchasing an annuity after about my mid 70’s. At that point, the insurance element becomes more interesting and significant because you don’t know if you’re going to live a few more years or a couple of more decades.

And the financial impact of living 2 or 20 years more is huge. The security that an annuity can give becomes much more worthwhile. So one strategy could be to separate your savings into two buckets: A: the amount you will need at age 80 saved via the annuity and B: the RRIF or the amount you’re going to spend between now and age 80. This is a bit easier to deal with, because the time frame’s better defined.

Q: That’s interesting. So do you have any other comments or suggestions that people are approaching retirement with a DC pensions or group/individual RRSPs to think about?
A: Well, focusing on just the DC pension is helpful, but I do think it’s also an incomplete solution. If the person has properly saved for retirement, he/she doesn’t have just one DC or Group RRSP account.

Even if they combine savings from previous employers, the spouse probably has registered savings, both spouses might have their own tax-free savings account and they probably have non-registered money too.

All these sources of income must be coordinated so the individual can meet their retirement and personal financial goal. Either the person has to educate themselves to manage on their own or they need help in finding an appropriately qualified financial adviser to assist them.

Right now in Canada, the price of such assistance is, in my view, unreasonably high. I also feel that many financial advisers do not have much experience with effective decumulation of retirement savings. Individuals have to look hard to find the right person.

Well, thank you very much. I really appreciate that you spoke to us today, Karen.

You are very welcome. It’s a pleasure, Sheryl. Thank you for asking me.

—
This is the edited transcript of an interview conducted by telephone in July 2015.

By Sheryl Smolkin

Today, I’m pleased to be interviewing Greg Hurst for savewithspp.com. Greg is a pension consultant and pension innovator based in Vancouver. He’s held many roles in the pension industry with large international and small regional consulting firms and a major Canadian insurer.

He’s a member of both the editorial advisory board of Benefits and Pensions Monitor and Benefits Canada’s online expert panel. In fact, two of his articles were among the five most widely-read Benefits Canada pension articles of 2013.

Today, Greg is going to share his thoughts with us on the federal government’s  surprising pre-election proposal to study allowing Canadians to voluntarily contribute to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) to supplement their retirement savings.

Thank you for joining me today, Greg.

Glad to be here Sheryl.

Q: Were you surprised to hear of the federal government’s announcement in May that they are going to reconsider a voluntary top-up to the Canada Pension Plan?
A: It was totally unexpected. Since 2011, the federal government has consistently said it’s not the right time for changes to the CPP, and even more recently – in fact, just before the announcement – they characterized CPP contribution rate changes as a “pension tax hike.”

Q: Interesting. So, why do you think that the Minister of Finance, Joe Oliver, announced these consultations after the government and the provinces previously rejected similar proposals?
A: Well, an election is coming up. The federal Conservatives recognize that CPP expansion will be a significant election issue. In the 2014 Ontario election pensions were front and center, and Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals won with her promise of the Ontario Registered Pension Plan (ORPP), which grew out of the federal government’s refusal to consider CPP expansion in spite of a consensus amongst the provinces. Canadians have come to love the CPP. It delivers on its benefit promises and the CPP Investment Board consistently delivers good news on its investment returns.

Q: Now, in an article you wrote that was published May 27th on the Benefits Canada website, you suggest that “the devil is in the details.” The closing date for the consultations on a voluntary CPP top-up is September 10th and the election will be held on October 19th. Do you think a detailed blueprint for adding a voluntary tier to CPP will be available for public scrutiny prior to the election?
A: It is unlikely. October 19th is the next fixed election date, and that would leave less than six weeks to build and publish the blueprint. It would also require input from the provinces. It would be very irresponsible for the federal government to publish proposals for CPP changes without first consulting the provinces.

Q: Ontario has gone ahead and passed legislation to establish the ORPP. What do you think of those proposals?
A: Well, I really favor mandatory employer and employee contributions for pension benefits. It’s taken a lot of political courage and leadership from Ontario, which has been absent elsewhere in Canada for many, many years to implement the ORPP. But there again, the devil is in the details. I might have different ideas on how to build the ORPP, but I really don’t have any interest in criticizing those who exhibit this leadership in pensions.

Q: In your view, is it likely that other provinces will jump on the bandwagon once the Ontario plan is up and running?
A: I think there’s a good chance of that, particularly if the Conservatives win the upcoming federal election, because they’ve been consistently intransigent in their opposition to workplace pensions with mandatory employer contributions. But if the Liberals or NDP wins, they’re more likely to build on the leadership of Ontario and proceed with CPP expansion, which I think would make the ORPP unnecessary.

Q: Were you surprised by the federal announcement that the Harper government would not help Ontario administer the ORPP?
A: I was quite surprised. To me, it amounted to a juvenile temper tantrum. It seems to be extremely bad policy for the federal government to torpedo any provincial pension initiative, particularly in this way. Administration of contributions could easily be accommodated in the same way as provincial income tax collection. And in terms of tax deductibility, the feds could readily accommodate ORPP contributions in the current tax-assisted framework like they already do for the Quebec Pension Plan and the Saskatchewan Pension Plan.

Q: Do you believe a voluntary supplement to the CPP should be an option for Canadians to save for retirement? Is this something you would use to increase your retirement savings?
A: Well, to answer questions about the concept of a voluntary CPP supplement, I first have to suspend my disbelief that the federal government – and particularly a Conservative government – would actually choose to compete with the financial services industry, which already has a wide spectrum of products and services designed for retirement savings.

I think that the expectations amongst the public with this announcement are that it would be a savings and investment vehicle, in which case my answer would be, no, I wouldn’t use it to increase my retirement savings and, no, I don’t think they should bother.

Q: Why do you say that?
A: Well, although many Canadians might be excited by the possible opportunity to share in the investment results that the CPP Investment Board has achieved — particularly if the cost of investing is similar to the Board’s current cost — that’s not what they would get from a voluntary supplement under the CPP. It would require a different investment mandate from the CPP Investment Board, with the degree of difference dependent upon how much administrative flexibility the plan has. It would be far more expensive at the end of the day and would likely not have much to differentiate it from retirement investment options already available in the marketplace.

Q: And what about the design of a potential voluntary top-up? What do you think? Should the money be locked in? And should there be basic required contributions, or some variability? I mean what should this thing look like?
A: Well, you know, it depends on how they actually design it. They could do it as a standard savings and investment vehicle, or they could do it as a prepaid annuity vehicle, which might be more interesting. So, I think, first off, Canadians would generally choose good, old-fashioned RRSPs over CPP supplements as a savings and investment vehicle, unless the CPP had the same flexibility with no locking-in, in which case the cost would be almost the same as traditional RRSPs. But if a voluntary CPP supplement were designed around the prepaid annuity concept, contributions could be flexible so you could buy as many prepaid annuities as you want, perhaps within some limits; and full locking-in would perhaps be appropriate under that kind of a design.

Q: Now, in a previous question, you referred to the integration of a voluntary CPP into the current income tax rules. Do you think that that’s problematic, or it would be fairly easy to do?
A: I think it could be fairly easy to do within the current income tax rules. If you really wanted to make it work as a prepaid annuity concept, you could put it on top of the existing RRSP limits. It would just be another added-value pension saving that wouldn’t impact your RRSP limits.

Q: That might make it more attractive to particularly people who have topped up their RSP limits already.
A: Absolutely.

Q: So, who do you think should be responsible for investing the contributions made to a voluntary CPP supplement?
A: If it was designed around a prepaid annuity concept, it would be the CPP Investment Board.

Q: How important is keeping costs low to the success of this proposal?
A: Well, it’s fundamentally important if it’s a savings and investment vehicle, which means that it would be very difficult to do without having some sort of subsidy from the government. MERs aren’t really applicable to paid up annuities. But certainly the cost would then likely be comparable to the current costs of the CPP Investment Board services.

Q: When you discuss a “prepaid annuity,” what do you mean? Do you mean that it would operate like a defined-benefit pension as far as the consumers are concerned?
A: Yes. Once you purchase it – so, you come in with “this is the amount of contribution I have. This is my age.” And then that would purchase a certain amount of fixed pension payable at your retirement date of age 65, or maybe 67, assuming that becomes the new normal retirement date. So, when you buy the annuity, you would know how much you’re getting when you reach that retirement date — like a defined-benefit plan.

Q: Do you think that this voluntary top-up to CPP is ever going to see the light of day? Will that depend on who forms the next government?
A: No. Even if it’s a prepaid annuity, I don’t think there will be enough of a market appetite for the concept to proceed. If it were a saving and investment type of program, it would have costs that are too high to really compete with the current, private-sector marketplace. But if the Liberals or the NDP form the government, I believe then we’d see a mandatory form of CPP expansion.

Q: Thank you very much, Greg. I really appreciated talking to you today.
A: My pleasure, Sheryl.
—
This is the edited transcript of an interview conducted by telephone in July 2015.

By Sheryl Smolkin

Today I’m interviewing Saskatchewan Ombudsman and Public Disclosure Commissioner Mary McFadyen for savewithpsp.com. She assumed these positions on April 4th, 2014.

Prior to returning to her home province of Saskatchewan to serve in this capacity, Ms. McFadyen was Deputy Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada and before that, Director General Legal Services for the office of the Ombudsman for the Department of National Defense and Canadian Forces.

She has a Law Degree from the University of Saskatchewan and an LLM. from the University of London, the London School of Economics.

Today we’re going to talk about her role as Ombudsman, when her office can and can’t help you, and some examples of cases and investigations conducted by her office, including a recent report about the care provided to Mary Warholm.

Thank you for joining me today, Mary. 

Thank you very much for having me.

Q: Now what exactly is an Ombudsman?
A: Well, an Ombudsman is an independent, impartial public official who has the authority and the responsibility to receive and investigate or formally address complaints about government actions, omissions and decisions. When appropriate they can also make findings, recommendations and publish reports.

Q: So tell me a little bit about the mandate of Ombudsman Saskatchewan and the problems your office can help provincial residents resolve.
A: Well, the mandate of Ombudsman Saskatchewan is to take complaints about government actions, decisions or omissions that affect people personally. Most of the government institutions like the Ministries, the Crown corporations, the agencies and the boards fall under our jurisdiction.

We have very wide powers of investigation and we have the ability to talk to anybody to get any documents to determine whether or not the decision was fair or if we can recommend or suggest that it be changed because it was not fair.

Q: You’re primarily provincial. What complaints and government concerns can you not deal with?
A: We can’t deal with anything that’s in the federal jurisdiction or private interest between citizens of a private nature. That’s for the courts. There are very few provincial organizations that do not fall under our jurisdiction but there are some. Rural and urban municipalities are examples of areas that do not fall under our jurisdiction.

Q: If a Saskatchewan resident wants to file a complaint with your office, what is the process they have to follow and is there anything they should do first?
A: Usually an Ombudsman office is one of last resort, which means that people should try to work out the problem that they have with the institution that they have issues with. For example, most organizations have some kind of customer service or complaint resolution office already in their office and those offices are there to hopefully resolve people’s problems to their satisfaction so they don’t need to call us. Those situations should work themselves out. Otherwise we can help.

Q: So do all complaints get investigated and resolved?
A: Out of the complaints that we get (about 2,500 a year) we estimate that about 80% we deal with at the first instance, within a couple weeks. Sometimes it’s just a misunderstanding between what someone heard and what they think someone said to them. About 20% of complaints would actually go on to be investigated in our office.

Q: And how long would they take?
A: Well, our objective is to get 90% of our files closed within 90 days and we’re pretty good at meeting that. We try to do the big investigations within six months like we did with the recently Margaret Warholm case. Sometimes, depending on a lot of circumstances it can take longer. But we do try to be timely.

Q: So you’ve got offices in Regina and Saskatoon, but I notice you took a road trip to Kindersley and Meadow Lake at the beginning of the year. Was there a particular reason you traveled to these towns or do you regularly set up appointments throughout the province to meet complainants?
A: Well, one of the goals when I was appointed is I wanted to have a look at where complaints come from throughout the province because not everybody lives in Regina and Saskatoon. That was the reason for our road trips to Meadow Lake and to Kindersley.

Q: Interesting. In April of this year, you filed your first annual report. Can you give me examples of a few cases of unfairness that your office investigated and resolved?
A: This year there was a case that very much attracted the public’s interest. It was a senior citizen who had a direct debit to pay her SaskEnergy account.

Every month the bill came and it was paid directly from her checking account. And this went on for ten years. She didn’t really pay much attention to it but she just knew that it got paid. And then after ten years she got a letter from SaskEnergy saying that she now owed $13,000 immediately.

Q: Wow…
A: So that was a lot and as a result she contacted us. What had happened was the pre-authorized payments had been coming out of somebody else’s account for over ten years.

The other person died and when his estate was settled the executor found this mistake and contacted SaskEnergy realizing that this money had been paid someone else’s bills. So we looked at it and we agreed that it was obvious that this person did owe the money and that SaskEnergy did have the right to collect it.

But we tried to resolve the problem in the best way possible for her. It ended up that SaskEnergy agreed to a smaller lump sum because they understood that they had some responsibility as well because it had been going on for ten years. So the complainant who came to our office paid the lump sum and was very happy to have the issue resolved.

Q: Interesting. Now in mid May of this year, your report “Taking Care, An Ombudsman Investigation Into the Care Provided to Margaret Warholm While a Resident at the Santa Maria Senior Citizen’s Home” was tabled in the legislature and the report included 19 recommendations. What triggered this investigation? What was the issue here?
A: Well, what triggered this investigation is that back in November of 2014 Mrs. Warholm’s family actually went public with concerns about their mother’s care while she was a resident at Santa Maria. They had tried to get information after she died about her care and they found that the answers they received from Santa Maria were not satisfactory and they went to the legislature to express their concerns. The Minister of Health referred the matter to our office for investigation.

In Saskatchewan we have standards of care in the regulations that all long-term care homes must follow when they’re providing care. So we looked at the care Margaret care received when she was at the home and including her bed format, her pain management, nutrition and hydration.

We made ten recommendations directly to Santa Maria that they had to implement. One covered the care of bed sores, because her bed sores were very, very severe.

When we announced we were doing this investigation we got about 89 calls from all over the province, which led us to believe these were not issues for just one long-term care facility within just one health region.  People weren’t sure where to complain and if they did complain they were afraid that there may be reprisal against their loved ones and they wouldn’t be properly cared for.

When we looked at how the whole long term care system works in Saskatchewan we found about 100 care standards that the Ministry of Health has enacted that all long-term care facilities are to follow. Throughout this whole system there was actually nobody monitoring or making sure that the standards of care were actually being met.

Q: That’s frightening because we’re all going to be there eventually.
A: It is. That is a very good point because we did make recommendations that the Ministry of Health and the health regions have to make sure that people actually understand what it means and that the homes are actually putting processes in place to make sure that they are meeting the standards of care for each resident.

Because we had a really tight time frame for doing this investigation, there were lots of things that were mentioned to us that we just did not have an opportunity to look at, nor necessarily was my role to do so as an Ombudsman.

The last recommendation that we made was that they really have to determine what the future needs of long term care patients in Saskatchewan are and come up with a plan to address it because, you’re right, we’re all getting older and because this problem is not going to go away, it needs to be tackled.

Q: So how do you enforce your recommendations?
A: Well, as an Ombudsman we only make recommendations. But in this case, we notified the organizations, the Ministry, the health regions, and Santa Maria that we will follow up within six months to see how they’re progressing with the recommendations.

One of the benefits of being an Ombudsman is we do have the power to go public with what we recommend. Lots of times just shining attention on an issue is enough to get the government moving on something.

Q: That sounds like you’ve made a tremendous contribution to the province and if you can keep the heat on….
A: Yes, I think it was. We tried to write our report so that it was very reader-friendly.  Our goal was  to set out some very basic information about how long-term care works in the province to facilitate a good discussion about going forward and how we’re going to tackle this issue.

Q: Well, that’s really interesting. Thank you very much, Mary for talking to me today.
A: You’re welcome.

By Sheryl Smolkin

Today I’m interviewing Lisa Taylor, the president of Challenge Factory for savewithspp.com. The Challenge Factory offers a broad range of services to both employers dealing with an aging workforce, and individuals looking for a career change or transition. We are going to talk about how career timelines have changed, and how you can define and embrace encore or second act careers. Welcome, Lisa. 

Thank you. It’s a pleasure to be here.

Q: Lisa, tell me a little bit about your own background, and when and why the Challenge Factory was born.
A: In 2003 and 2004, the question that intrigued me the most, was why was it, even in fantastic companies, so many people were successful in their jobs but not satisfied. They were seeking something else, but also not willing to take the risk to make a move. As a result I did some research. That led me down the path of really understanding demographics and the workplace.

Q: When did you actually start the Challenge Factory?
A: The Challenge Factory started in 2009. It really grew from my initial experience meeting people who wanted to figure out how to make meaningful change later in their careers. 

Q: What other professionals do you have on your team?
A: Challenge Factory is made up of a wide variety of professionals. We have career coaches, HR and management strategy professionals and analytic specialists that work with our corporate clients to help model out what the cost would be of shifting the workforce around in different ways. 

With our individual clients, we have a really unique body of over 160 experts who are top in their own jobs, and they agree to take on Challenge Factory clients for one day test-drives.

If you’re in one occupation, and thinking that you might want to do something totally different, the best way for an adult to make decisions is to do a dry run. This gives our clients an opportunity to spend a day with an expert in that particular field to find out if their assumptions are really true and whether the job is really as great as they thought it would be. Between our coaches, our consultants, and our test-drive experts, we have a really diverse group of people who are all there to support the clients that work with us. 

Q: Do you draw on these experts on an as-needed basis?
A: Yes, based on what’s relevant to each individual client or group that’s going through the program. 

Q: We hear more and more in the media about encore, or second act, or legacy careers, tell me what those terms mean for you.
A: Whether it’s an encore career, a second act or a legacy career, I think what the terms are demarking is that this isn’t just an extension of mid-career or mid-life. It’s not just doing the same thing you’ve been doing but doing it longer.

A lot of times when people hear about working longer, they sigh and say, “Oh my goodness, I’m ready to be out of here.” But they’re not actually ready to stop making a meaningful contribution. I think that those terms help us to draw the line in the sand, to say it’s okay to think about these next 20 or 25 years differently than you’ve thought about the last 20 or 25 years. 

Q: Is the encore idea only focused on paid work?
A: Not at Challenge Factory, and not from my perspective. The purpose isn’t necessarily to define paid work that people can move into. For some people, that’s a very core part of their plan for their 50s, 60s, even into their 70s and beyond. For other people, it’s really about coming up with the right portfolio of activities. We call that the career portfolio plan. 

The encore concept really says, “What’s the balance between stable work, hobbies and interests, and risky or entrepreneurial ventures — things that may or may not pay off in the future, but you know what, you’d love to give them a try and see what happens.” 

Q: How do new careers in later life typically differ from the kind of careers people embark on right out of school, or the careers they left behind?
A: I think the biggest difference, when you’re making a transition and it’s later in life, compared to when you’re right out of school, is how significant what you do, or what you have been doing, is tied into your sense of identity. 

We introduce ourselves by using what we do as the social placeholder so that we can figure out quickly who everyone is at the cocktail party or at the meeting. Even at the family barbecue when there’s someone new, we often will ask as a very first question, “It’s nice to meet you. What do you do?” 

After decades of explaining what you do, starting to identify what else you could really do and what you want to do separate from that particular way of describing yourself is very difficult. 

Q: Is an encore career a luxury for people who’ve saved enough money so they have choices, or is the concept relevant for a broader group of people?
A: The relevance of an encore career for everyone is to recognize that it’s not about an aging workforce. It’s about the benefits and the impact longevity brings. The longer we live, the more time we have to contribute in different ways. There is a way for anyone to think about how they want to spend the next 20-25 years of their life.

Q: Do you think the desire to work at something different later in life is more a factor of knowledge workers, or does it also include trades people, independent business owners, blue collar people etc.?
A: It’s assumed that it’s really just for the professional sector. But it’s not true. The Challenge Factory works with individuals looking for their legacy career, for their next step, and they come from all different sectors. We also work on the other side of this equation — inside organizations to see how career paths can change so that their workforce can continue to contribute and deliver value for longer periods of time. 

Q: You provide career exploration services on both a group and a one-on-one basis. Your offices are in Toronto. How do you accommodate people outside your geographic area?
A: Challenge Factory is headquartered in Toronto, but we offer services in cities across the country, North America and Europe using technology.

Q: Participants complete 19 assignments using an online collaboration tool. Can you briefly tell me a little bit about these assignments?
A: Sure. Different programs have different numbers of assignments. Our whole career transition program has 19. These assignments are short, but very pointed questions that require our clients to go out and experience something new, talk with friends and family and then reflect on the responses, or do some reflective writing on their own. 

We have an online collaboration site where our clients complete their assignments, and their coach and anyone else that they’d like to can see their responses as they work their way through the program. This is in between the coaching sessions. 

If they are not meeting with their coach, or their group isn’t meeting again for another two weeks, but they’ve just had a real significant breakthrough, and have written something that’s very meaningful, their coach will see that and be able to respond back to them online within a short period of time.

Q: Can you give me an anecdotal example of a client who went through your program, and his before and after careers?
A: Sure. Frank was the COO of a family-run print business. He had been with the organization for a very, very long time, had really loved his career, but had started to find that he was ready for something new. He was pretty sure he wanted to make a radical change. 

In talking with us, one of the things that he found was that there were a couple of aspects of his career that had always made him really excited. One of them was in a particular sector that provided services to his company. 

On further exploration, he actually found that there was an organization that was looking for senior-level expertise to help them improve their relationships with their customer base. He was able to step out of his COO role and move over into an organization he had always held in high esteem, in a totally different sector, by leveraging the experience he had by being a client for so many decades.

Q: How long do encore careers typically last? After all, retirement has been described as three stages: go-go, slow-go, and then no-go, although the age span will be different for everyone.
A: This new segment, this language, of encore, or legacy or second act careers, helps to differentiate that you’re not in retirement for decades. That period of time at the end of your life where you actually withdraw from, whether it’s paid or voluntary contribution to society, is a specific moment in time because it’s time for you to start to take care of yourself and to really focus on what’s important as you get to the end of your days. This instead of putting a line in the sand that says, “You know what, by the time everyone is 71, that’s got to be finished.”

Q: Thank you very much for your insights, Lisa. It’s been a pleasure to talk to you.
A: And with you.

 

By Sheryl Smolkin

Today I’m interviewing Saskatchewan financial planner Chet Brothers for savewithspp.com. He formed Brothers and Company Financial, an independent planning and wealth management firm in 1994 after spending a number of years at the wealth management subsidiary of a large Canadian financial Institution. He’s experienced in all aspects of personal finance and wealth management.

Brothers has dedicated his professional career to educating the public and financial advisers about the importance of comprehensive financial planning. His professional qualifications include Certified Financial Planner and Registered Financial Planner designations. He also served his profession as past president of the Institute of Advanced Financial Planners and he is currently on the board of the Canadian Institute of Financial Planners.   He came to my attention as Wealth Professional Magazine recently named him one of only two Saskatchewan financial planners on their Canada’s Top 50 Advisers’ list in 2015.

Thank you so much for joining me today Chet.

You’re welcome.

Q. How did you get into the business of financial planning?
A: I started in investment sales and was looking for a career that offered lifetime learning opportunities. So I upgraded and moved into the financial planning area.

Q. How do you think Canadians can benefit from working with a financial planner?
A: I think a financial plan really makes the most efficient use of all the resources that an individual or a family has at hand to enable them to realize the hopes and dreams they have for themselves, their family, and their community.

Q. Are your clients typically close to retirement or do you work with a broad spectrum of clients developing financial plans?
A: I would say if you looked at the bell curve, the peak would be people either five years before or five years after retirement. But we do deal with the entire spectrum. Often as people get closer to retirement, the importance of financial planning becomes clear to them and they seek out advice.

Q. What should people who require financial planning services be looking for? What questions should they be asking?
A: First, I think you want to make sure you are dealing with an accredited person with a professional designation — either the CFP or RFP or hopefully both. You want to make sure that they have some experience. Let them practice on someone else. I started at a large financial institution, essentially apprenticing. They also need to have a defined and tested investment strategy and a comprehensive approach. If someone wants to talk to you just about your investments and hasn’t asked you about your will or your power of attorney, I’d run.

Q. Do you sell products like securities or insurance or are you an independent adviser?
A: I am an independent adviser who is licensed in securities and insurance. In order to implement a financial plan in this country, you need to be licensed to sell individual securities, mutual funds or insurance. So, we do implement plans and we are licensed.

 Q. How are you compensated? Do people pay a flat fee or an hourly rate to have a financial plan developed or are you on commission?
A: To develop a financial plan, we charge an hourly rate of $175/hour. At that point, the client can do what they want with the plan. If they choose to implement with us, then we will use the products and services available to us and we’ll offset that fee. If someone were to use our investment services, any revenue that we receive from the investments or insurance would offset the fees that they paid for the financial plan in first 18 months.

 Q. If a client has little knowledge of investment products how do you educate them or how can they educate themselves so they make wise investment choices?
A: Investing is not rocket science. There are two basics: ownership or “loanership.” After that, explaining how markets work is not all that complicated. I think the industry makes it unnecessarily complicated for people. Most people grasp pretty quickly that if they are buying a fraction of a business, they have to identify what are good businesses. It’s a lot harder to determine whether it’s the right price to pay or not.

Q. How important is asset allocation from a risk management perspective? In other words, what portion of a client’s portfolio should be stocks, bonds or other assets? How do you decide what split to recommend for a client?
A: It depends on the client’s situation. But it’s also important to know that, just moving around asset classes doesn’t necessarily reduce risk. You want to make sure that you reduce the risk at the source. Buying quality is the first step.

That is if you’re going to buy into the equity market you should be buying quality, profitable businesses that pay dividends. That will reduce your risk on the equity side. On the debt side, you want to make sure that you are buying quality debt obligations of borrowers who can pay you back. You also want to make sure that the duration is reasonable.

The next step would be to determine what asset mix is appropriate. I think in very few instances would it be appropriate to have 100% of your money in ownership of businesses, just because most people can’t handle the volatility. They wouldn’t stick with program, and they’d bail.

For most people, depending on age and stage and their experience, we would add more or less fixed income to a portfolio. There’s no exact formula. It’s determined through the financial plan, interviews and getting a sense of their ability to handle volatility.

 Q. When you are developing a financial plan or a retirement plan for a client do you consider the equity in the family home as a potential source of retirement income?
A: No. I generally wouldn’t.  In a financial plan sometimes we run the plan out beyond age 80 and there could be a short fall. Then it’s conceivable someone would sell their home and move into a rental, or a long term care facility.

But, your home is your home. Borrowing or taking equity out of the home makes no sense. The other argument is “We’ll downsize when the kids are gone.” However, in this market, condos cost almost as much as stand-alone homes or more. There’s no real way to get equity out, in my opinion.

Q. There’s an ongoing debate in the media and the financial industry about actively managed portfolios versus passive index products. What are your views on the subject?
A: I think it’s funny, because the stats show that only 20% or 25% percent of actively managed portfolios beat the index. But zero percent of passive investments beat the index!

The only index or benchmark that a person needs to  care about is the number that is in their financial plan. If you need five percent return on your investments over your lifetime to give you all of the things that you dreamed about for yourself, your family, and your community then, it’s irrelevant what the markets do as long as you get it.

Q. So, you are not an advocate necessarily of just an index or passive approach?
A: If you take an index or passive approach the problem is, which index? You’re making a market call. It’s incredibly risky. People who do so have made a huge call based on zero or little if not knowledge.

Q. Congratulations. I see you’ve been named one of Canada’s Top 50 Advisers in 2014. Tell me how this process took place and how you were ultimately named to the list?
A: Wealth Professional Magazine does an annual survey. We took part in 2014 and 2015. They base their decision on the number of clients, growth of client assets under management and other factors. And we were fortunate for two years in a row that we made the list.

It’s an honour to be on the list. But it’s certainly not how we measure our success. We measure the success of this business by the success or our clients. What we focus on is their results which we monitor and measure.

Q. The Saskatchewan Pension Plan’s Balance Fund in which non-retired members are invested earned 9.1% in 2014 and an average of 8.16% over the plan’s 29 year history. Do you think that participating in SPP can form a valuable part of an individual’s overall investment strategy?
A: Yes. Those are reasonable returns. I think that the hardest thing is accumulating the money in the first place. If you’re not doing anything else, the Saskatchewan Pension Plan makes it very easy to accumulate money at a reasonable price. Putting money into that pension plan on regular basis is a great starting spot. If you have more significant assets or a more sophisticated situation, or you are a more sophisticated investor, there may be other places to look. But, for a vast majority of people it is a place to start because SPP does some of the heavy lifting to help you save money.

Q. Thank you Chet. I really appreciate talking to you . It was a pleasure to speak to you today.
A:  My pleasure.

—-
This is an edited version of a podcast interview recorded on April 15, 2015.

By Sheryl Smolkin

This month’s interview is with author and financial journalist Jonathan Chevreau. Jon was the Financial Post’s personal finance columnists for nineteen years, and subsequently the Editor in Chief of MoneySense Magazine for two years until he declared his personal “financial independence day” on May 20th, 2014.

He has relinquished the leadership role at MoneySense, but as editor-at-large, his work is still frequently featured. He also writes for many other online venues and in November of last year he launched his ambitious North American portal, The Financial Independence Hub.

I last interviewed Jon for savewithspp.com in the summer of 2012 about his financial novel Findependence Day. Today I’d like to explore what he describes as “the profound difference between the traditional concept of retirement and the paradigm shift he calls financial independence.”

Q. To start off Jon, what is the difference between financial independence or “findependence” and retirement?
A: Well Sheryl, I always say that when you’re findependent you’re working because you want to not because you have to, financially speaking. But of course the lines blur. For the media and the financial service industry, it’s retirement, retirement, retirement. They don’t really distinguish between the two concepts.

For super frugal people, financial independence can often occur decades before traditional retirement. When you talk about the “early retirement extreme” movement, what these people are really talking about is being financially independent.

Q: So in fact you have coined the term findependence to apply to people at various ages, not just older workers?
A: Yes. The Financial Independence Hub is relevant for people at all stages of life.

Q: You’ve left the corporate world. But you seem to be busier than ever, with all of your freelance writing, your blog, and spin-offs from your book Findependence Day. How would you describe your current status?
A: Busier than I want to be, really. I think you can relate to that one as well. On the Hub I reviewed books like Encore and I talk about this new phase of life. If you believe in extended longevity and a lot of people leave corporations, either voluntarily or involuntarily, in their late fifties, early sixties, I say there’s a fifteen to twenty year sweet spot.

You’re no longer an employee, but I don’t think you are ready to take year-long cruises and do nothing but watch TV, play golf, read and play internet bridge. I think that fifteen year period, is the new “encore stage.” You could also call it part-time or phased retirement.

Q: How many hours a week do you estimate you’re currently working for compensation and on your own projects?
A: I got into this in December (2014). I read a bunch of internet books. I was keen on “Multiple Streams of Internet Income” by Robert Allen, and a book by Tim Ferriss called “The Four-hour Work Week.” I decided by having more passive income and less renting my time out, I could go to a four-hour week. Unfortunately, it hasn’t really worked out.

It turns out that the path to a four-hour workweek for me is a nine-hour day. I would say that I probably still spend 40% of my time on the MoneySense blogging contract. Another 40% is spent on the Hub which is not billable time. About 20% of my time is taken up with other things like one-off speeches, book sales, blogs and articles.

Q: What are the pros and cons in your view of your current working arrangement, as compared to working as a full-time salaried journalist?
A: As a freelance contractor there are no employee benefits, sick days or paid vacations. I had a “man cold” last week and I had to barrel through it. Luckily, of course, I don’t have to commute.

It’s hard to match my previous gross income but it can be a little bit better on an after- tax basis depending on the legitimate employment expenses I can write off. When I balance it with the lack of commuting, I think it’s a better life-work balance. But like anything else, there are trade-offs.

Q: Do you think that Canadians across the board are working longer and contemplating encore careers, or is this really restricted to knowledge workers and entrepreneurs?
A: Well I think that’s an apt observation. When you’re a knowledge worker there’s a real blurry line between working and playing, because I think we actually find it quite fun to absorb lots of information on subjects that fascinate us. Whereas, as you point out if you are a labourer, the body is not as apt to keep on going past sixty-four or sixty-six.

Q: Youth unemployment is running around 14 %. Are older workers, who continue working, clogging up the pipeline for young people and mid-career workers who are trying to get a leg up on the employment ladder?
A: Well that is one perception I’m not sure is true. I suppose if we’re talking about a big corporation with your traditional pyramid, where basically there are only a couple of people at the top, then yes, older workers might be clogging up that traditional pipeline.

But I think when you’re talking about all the people leaving companies and then contracting back their services, at that point they just become a valuable asset. Younger people can still move up the ladder, and they can still access the expertise and skills of the older codgers, like me if they are retained as freelance suppliers to the company.

Q: Some people opt to work longer for their current employers or continue on a contractual basis. Then there are others who want more flexibility or to try something new. How can older workers go about finding an encore career?
A: They can go to findependencehub.com and check out the book reviews. Encore, the Big Shift, there are tons of these books out there. For some it might be going back to school, getting an MBA. A lot of people make complete changes. For example, Eleanor Clitheroe left Ontario Hydro and went to divinity school.

I have a friend who is actually downsizing and moving to the country, so that he can go from being a set designer to doing true art. Every second journalist I know wants to write the great Canadian or American novel. I compromised by writing Findependence Day which is a financial novel.

Q: Money won’t buy happiness but it helps. What are some of the factors that you think contribute to a happy retirement, other than having enough money?
A: There are obvious things.  Health, happiness, relationships, family, networks. There’s a book by Wes Moss called “You can retire sooner than you think.” One of the things he talks about is a retiree should have at least three or four passionate interests. This is why I decided to put internet bridge back on my list. Reading, volunteering and exercising would be others.

I think the biggest single thing is of course your partner. I’ve talked to people in the financial service industry, who’ve been divorced. They say the biggest mistake they ever made financially-speaking was to get a divorce, because their net worth was cut in two right off the bat. But obviously you don’t stay together for financial reasons if you don’t have a harmonious relationship. 

Q: Well the relationship issue is interesting and I think one of the things that I think about all the time, is you don’t know how much time you’re going to have. You’re worried about financing thirty years of retirement but who knows if you’ll have it. So if you put it off and you put it off you just might miss those golden years.

A: Various people have joked that financial planning would be the easiest thing to do on Earth if you just knew when you were going to die. Unfortunately, most people don’t.

Q: How long do you think you will continue to work?  Do you see full retirement any time in your future?
A: I have a vision, that eventually I will have a website that brings in lots of passive streams of income. My idea of a nice retirement or findependence is every three years, to leisurely write a book working four six-hour days a week. Then I would go on tour to promote it and bring in another stream of income. Instead of grinding out words for multiple clients I’d like to be financially independent enough to work on one big project.

Q: Thanks very much for talking to me, Jon. It’s always fascinating to talk to you.
A: Well thank you for allowing me to share some of my thoughts, Sheryl. I think you’re doing a great job, too, on Retirement Redux.

—-

This is an edited transcript of a podcast interview of Jonathan Chevreau conducted by telephone in March 2015.

By Sheryl Smolkin

As part of the ongoing series of podcast interviews on savewithspp.com, today I’m talking to lawyer Ari Kaplan, a partner in the Pension and Benefits Group of the Toronto law firm Koskie, Minsky, L.L.P.

Ari is the author of Canada’s leading textbook on pension law, and he has acted as counsel in some of Canada’s most widely known pension cases before the Supreme Court of Canada. In addition, he teaches pension law as an adjunct professor of law at both the University of Toronto and Osgoode Hall Law School.

In his spare time, Ari heads up licensing and publishing at Paper Bag Records, a leading, independent record label and artist management company also based in Toronto.

Today, we are going to talk about the Canada Pension Plan. In the ongoing national debate regarding how Canadians can be encouraged to save more for retirement, Ari is a staunch advocate for an expansion to the Canadian Pension Plan.

Welcome, Ari, and thanks for talking to me today.

My pleasure, Sheryl. Thanks for having me.

Q: How many Canadians currently have workplace pension plans?
A: Well, that’s a good question to put everything in perspective. Over 60% of working Canadians actually have no workplace pension plan, and they must rely solely on CPP and their own personal savings for their retirement income. 

Q: Why do you think that an enhanced Canada Pension Plan is the best way to give Canadians a more robust retirement income?
A: Very simple. It’s currently the only universal and mandatory savings scheme in the country. It’s portable from job to job. If you’re a student, you can work for the summer in British Columbia and then come back to a full-time job in Ontario, and your CPP credits will go with you. Also, it doesn’t just cover employees. It applies to self-employment, which most workplace pension plans don’t.

Q: As early as 2008, industry guru Keith Ambachtsheer wrote a C.D. Howe Institute commentary about the benefits of enhancing the Canada Pension Plan. Yet, in December 2013, the conservative government in several Canadian provinces voted against this proposal. Why do you think this occurred?
A: Every respected economist in the country supports a CPP expansion. The reason why the current government did not support it is political, not principled.

There was political pressure from business lobby groups who did not want to be forced to contribute employer revenue toward their employees’ retirement. There was political pressure from the financial services lobby, because they do not benefit at all when the retirement savings of Canadians is held in the CPP Trust Fund.

And finally, there’s fear among Canadian voters, who’ve been led to believe that anything opposed by business must be bad for them, too. Some of them also don’t want to be forced to save for retirement.

Q: Instead of expanding the CPP, the late finance minister, Jim Flaherty and the provinces endorsed pooled registered pension plan legislation as the way to encourage Canadians to save more for retirement. What are the key features of PRPPs?
A: Good question. PRPPs are basically like voluntary employer-sponsored group RRSPs. The funds are locked in, so it resembles a registered defined contribution plan. Your funds can also be ported to another plan and there are survivor benefits. So, it’s basically like an “RRSP-plus.”

Q: Why do you think that PRPP’s are not the answer?
A: Well, I think PRPPs are just a prime example of what I said earlier ­­­– political lobbying by business and the financial industry.

1. The employer is not required to contribute a dime even if the company voluntarily sponsors a PRPP.
2. An employee can opt out, or voluntarily set their contribution rate to zero, which gives zero benefit to the employee.
3. There’s very little benefit security. Like I said, it’s like a DC plan, so you get to choose member-directed investment funds. If you don’t invest your money well, then you won’t get a good pension.
4. The cost structure is really not that much different than a 500-member group RRSP. The management expense ratio (MER) will be much higher under a PRPP than under a large workplace pension plan or, for that matter, under CPP, where the efficiencies of scale are such that the costs are very, very, very low.
5. It will create a huge windfall to insurance companies and other financial institutions who manage these funds, because there’s very few cost controls. There are lots of problems in group RRSPs with so-called “hidden fees” and there’s no indication that that will change with PRPPs.

I can go on, but I think you get the idea.

Q: Groups such as the Canadian Federation of Independent Business say that required employer contributions to an expanded CPP would amount to a significant payroll tax that could slow down economic growth. How would you respond to this statement?
A: To be quite blunt, this is a false and misleading statement. Anyone who tells you it’s a tax is not telling you the truth. This is employee money. It goes into a pension fund. It then goes back to the employee.

Q: Ontario Premier, Kathleen Wynne’s government is currently holding consultations on the design of an Ontario Retirement Pension Plan. What are some of the key features of that plan?
A: At the end of December of last year, the Ontario government introduced the first reading of the bill for the Ontario Retirement Pension Plan intended to commence at the beginning of 2017. The reason for the delay period is because there’s hope that the next federal government may agree enhance CPP, which could make the ORPP redundant.

But the key features are that it’s a mandatory plan. It’s like an adjunct to CPP. So, it would be mandatory in all Ontario workplaces, except where the employer already has a workplace pension plan for its workforce, and it would be integrated with the CPP.

Q: Several other provinces, like PEI, may jump on the same bandwagon, so why do we still need a national CPP enhancement?
A: Well, it would better if the federal government came on board to make it nationwide. I mean if we just have it province by province, then it’ll be more of a patchwork. This could influence inter-provincial mobility. We don’t want to discourage full inter-provincial mobility by Canadians.

Q: Well – and, of course, the other issue is – just like pension legislation across the country, which is similar, but actually very different when it comes to the details – we run the risk of getting ten or 11 completely different plans.
A: And that would result in over-regulation and an increase in transaction costs although the whole point of this is to minimize and optimize the costs of running the fund — which is why CPP is good model.

CPP is viewed as one of the best universal, mandatory state-sponsored pension plans in the world. It would be a shame for us to have to rely on province-by-province, patchwork participation in such a scheme.

Also, you know, at the end of the day, this is really something that benefits all Canadians, regardless of what age or generation they are in. One way or the other, taxpayers will be taking care of older Canadians who are poor. It’s better that Canadians have their own resources to take care of themselves; and that’s an optimal use of taxpayer resources.

So, I just really think it’s a good idea, and I really think that this is the ballot question for the upcoming federal election this year. We saw this 50 years ago when CPP was introduced. I believe this year there will be a renaissance of that issue.

Q: Thanks, Ari. It was great to talk to you.
A: My pleasure, Sheryl. Be well.

—–
This is an edited version of the podcast posted above which was recorded on February 3, 2014.

By Sheryl Smolkin

 

Hi. Today I’m talking to Saskatchewan retired professor, author and playwright Gail Bowen. I’m an avid reader, so when I read her most recent Joanne Kilbourn mystery, “The Gifted,” which was published in 2013, and realized that she wrote 18 earlier books I decided to go back to the beginning and read as many of them as possible.

And while I usually interview financial experts and authors in this space, when Gail brought to my attention that 2015 is the 25th anniversary of the publication of the first Joanne Kilbourn book, I thought savewithspp.com readers would enjoy learning more about this homegrown celebrity.

In addition to writing the award-winning Joanne Kilbourn series, Gail has had several plays produced, and she wrote a radio play, “The World According to Charlie D,” based on a character in her books. Many of the Joanne Kilbourn stories have also adapted as television movies by Shaftesbury Films.

Welcome, Gail.

Well, thank you, Sheryl. It’s lovely to be here.

Q: Gail, you were an associate professor of English at First Nations University of Canada. How did you get started writing mysteries?
A: Well, I was asked to write something by a friend, and it was a book called “An Easterner’s Guide to Western Canada/A Westerner’s Guide to Eastern Canada.”

And my friend called me on Sunday afternoon. The deadline for the book to be published was Wednesday, and he asked me if I would do this.

At that point, we had three, small kids at home. I was teaching at the university. I was very involved in politics, and I said, “No, I’m sorry. Thanks for thinking of me.” And when I hung up, my husband said, “You know, when a friend asks you to do something, maybe you should give it a shot.”

So, I called him back, and that changed my life. After that project I was asked by the publisher if I would be interested in writing a mystery. So my writing career started when I was around 45.

Q: How did you find the time to write? How long does it take you to actually write a book from beginning to end?
A: Well, I always say each book takes two years. I have learned “to write in the cracks.” I really am very disciplined, and if I have five minutes, I’ll write for five minutes. It’s the only way I could ever get things done.

Q: Joanne Kilbourn is a widowed mother, political analyst and university professor who gets involved in frequent criminal investigations. Is she or any other characters in the book based on people you’ve actually lived and worked with in Saskatchewan?
A: No, they’re not. I mean of course there are small things. There are gestures, there are situations I use. But that tends to be almost the genesis of a creative idea.

I guess the thing I’m asked most frequently is whether Joanne is me, because her take on life is like mine. And I think of her very much as a very Canadian protagonist. When I started, that I was determined that she would be middle-aged and that she would age in the book, and that she would be very much a Canadian woman.

Most American female protagonists in mysteries are sort of lone wolves, but I think Canadians tend to be more community-minded, and Joanne is firmly rooted in her community. She has friends. Her family is so important to her. And she tends to also have very good working relationships with the police, which is often not the case in American mysteries.

Joanne also is really someone who, when she sees injustice or inequity, rolls up her sleeves and tries to do what she can to right what she perceives as wrong. And, again, I see that as a very Canadian attitude.

Q: Well, that was one of the reasons I was so excited to discover the series, because I love reading Canadian books about Canadians. So, 25 years is a long time, though, to write about one family of characters. How do you keep it fresh? And how do you keep coming up with new and evolving plot lines?
A: Well, I think, in part, it has to do with  my decision to have Joanne age. This has allowed her children to grow and to bring new people into their lives, and for Joanne to change. I’m also a very different woman now at age 72 than when I started writing this series.

I think the other thing, too, is that as the series goes on, Joanne is more aware of the fact that nothing is forever. And so she really cherishes the moments that she has, but she also can kind of plow through the times that are not good.

Q: Well, realistically, nobody ever has that many murders in their life.
A: Oh, God, no. You’re quite right, of course. Anyone who’s witnessed that many murders would be looking down the business end of a rifle by now. But Henry James has that great line “you have to give the writer her givens,” and so it’s a willing suspension of disbelief. You know, she just kind of perks along despite the dismal, existential facts.

Q: I’ve been to Regina a few times, but I learned a great deal more about the city from your stories, particularly about some of the tension that exists between aboriginal and white residents. Did you draw on your experience teaching at First Nations University in the development of these characters?
A: Oh, absolutely. I live in a very affluent, white area of Regina; and we have a very blessed life. Ten minutes from my house, I could be in North Central Regina, where kids as young as maybe nine or ten are on the streets and prostituting themselves. I feel so strongly that something has to be done. I loved teaching at First Nations, and we were an integrated university, so I taught as many non-aboriginal kids as aboriginal kids. But I I did see the reality of that life, and it’s just insupportable to me. And I think that’s one of the things that also drives Joanne.

Q: Shaftesbury Films, the company that currently produces the “Murdoch Mysteries,” made several of your stories into television movies. Did you write the script? And what was it like to participate in the creative process and then see the finished product?
A: Well, I didn’t write the script. I would now, you know. I think I’m more confident.

Christina Jennings still is head of Shaftesbury and that was their first foray into television. She has had tremendous success with the company and we remain good friends.

They are good movies, and I like them. I think Christina did a really good job. But the movies are so different from the books. For one thing, there are no aboriginal people in them. And the Eastern European names common in Saskatchewan that I used were Anglicized.

Q: So, what have the sales of your books been like? Can a Canadian mystery writer make a living?
A: I could make a very poor living. But movies pay a lot. Yet as far as mystery writers, are concerned my income from my books is probably in the top five percent.

Q: So, if someone has always wanted to write fiction, but doesn’t know where to start, what would you advise them to do?
A: Well, I would advise them to start. Don’t wait. You know, you can’t move one domino in your life without moving all the other ones. There are times when I kind of wished I’d started earlier; and, yet, I wanted to be with my kids. I wanted to work at the university.

But there is no substitute for just sitting down and treating it like an office job. Nothing beats just putting your bum on the chair and doing it. The thing to do is just trust yourself and write the kind of book you want to read. That’s always kind of been what I’ve done, and it’s worked well for me.

I still believe a good book will find its way. And I think that’s what you have to believe if you want to write. I mean you have to believe yours is a book that will work.

Q: With the evolution of technology, many people are self-publishing books. In your view, what are the pros and cons of self-publishing versus the more traditional route of submitting a book for publication by a publisher, like McClelland & Stewart, as you did?
A: Yeah. Well, I’ve done a 180 on that. I’ll tell you I used to be so opposed to self-publishing. I think it was because I kind of grew into this with the old memories of vanity press – you know, where if no publisher would take your book, then you published it yourself. But, in fact, I am now a proponent of it.

I’ve been writer-in-residence at three libraries so my own evolution as far as self-publishing has grown. I’ve actually had students of mine in Regina who I’ve watched go through the process of getting something self-published, and I really recommend it highly. But if you self-publish one of the major problems you will have to contend with is how to distribute your book.

Q: I understand you’ve almost completed another book at age 72, when many people have packed it in. What keeps you writing? And do you have plans to retire the Joanne Kilbourn series at any point in the foreseeable future?
A: Well, I don’t. I mean obviously I’m going to have to at some point. Right now, before I talked to you, I was going through the edits from my editor on the new book, which is called “The Singing Grass.” And it’s very different from the book that’s coming out in March, which is “12 Rose Street.”

I’m having fun. That’s why I keep on writing at 72. So, I think as long as I’m feeling excited about what I’m doing, I will continue to do it. But the one thing I’ve promised myself from the beginning is that I don’t want to write a series that goes on too long, where the margins get bigger and the plots get thinner.

Q: Thank you so much for talking to me today, Gail.
A: Oh, it was my pleasure, lots of fun. The whole creative process just fascinates me, so it was my pleasure, Sheryl. Thank you.

—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gail Bowen’s newest book 12 Rose Street was released March 3, 2015. Back copies of her earlier books are also available for purchase and from public libraries in Saskatchewan and across the country.

This is an edited transcript of a podcast recorded on December 14, 2014.

By Sheryl Smolkin

 

Hi, today I’m very pleased to be talking to Katherine Strutt, General Manager of the Saskatchewan Pension Plan. Since I first spoke to Katherine for savewithspp.com in December 2010, she has been featured numerous times in print, on radio, and on TV.

But when I realized it’s been four years since I formally interviewed her, I decided it was time to ask Katherine to bring savewithspp.com readers up to date on some more recent SPP developments.

Welcome, Katherine.

Thanks a lot, Sheryl.

 Q: Katherine, how many people are SPP members, and how much money is in the plan?
A: Well, we’ve had a real growth spurt over the last few years. We now have just over 23,000 contributing members and approximately 10,000 retirees. So our total plan membership is 33,332. And these members collectively have $403.8 million in assets. So we’ve had a real growth spurt.

Q: I see from your 2013 annual report that 1,415 new people joined SPP and 801 people transferred funds from existing retirement savings to their SPP account. I was one of them. Has the plan continued to grow at the same rate in 2014?
A: We want to reach a target of 1,500 new members in 2014. As of mid-December we had 1,228 people joining so far this year so we may not quite get to the 1,500 mark, but we’re going to be very close. And in terms of people transferring money in, 981 members have transferred in, so we’re past the limit that we had last year and still growing. We anticipate that that will continue to the end of the year.

Members had until December 31 to transfer money in for 2014 because it’s on a calendar year basis. But in terms of contributions, they can make their 2014 tax year contributions up until March 2, 2015. 

Q: Now I know there have been more middle-aged or older plan members. Are you starting to see the younger people waking up and realizing that they should start saving earlier?
A: Well, the average age last year was around 42 years old, and now it’s down to 40. So that two year drop may not seem like it’s a lot, but it is because that means that we are getting the younger members in.

It’s always a struggle to attract younger members because I don’t think eighteen-year-olds ever think they’re going to be sixty-five and they have other financial priorities. But I believe we’ve made some inroads by advocating they “start small and start now.” You know, you don’t have to wait until you’ve got a lot of money to invest. A little bit consistently saved is the answer.

Q: Because the annual maximum SPP contribution is $2,500, most people have additional RRSP contribution room. Why should they belong to both the SPP and a personal RRSP instead of concentrating all their savings in their own or their company RRSP?
A: That’s a really great question, Sheryl, and we get members who ask that as well. We tell them that the SPP gives members access to top money managers they may not be able to access on their own. SPP also gives members a strong investment product at a very low price. The costs of running our plan are around one percent or less, and this compares to fees in a retail mutual fund that can be anywhere between two and three percent.

So many members tell us that they wish they could put more money into their account because they see value in the product. However, if they have more than the $2,500 contribution room, a lot of them typically contribute both to SPP and to a personal RRSP in order to get the maximum value from their SPP investment.

Q: Employers can offer SPP as a retirement savings option to their employees. Tell me how that works.
A: Employers can set up an SPP pension plan and allow their employees to contribute via payroll deductions. We work with both the employer and the employees to establish the plan at the workplace, and then we handle all the paperwork and communication. SPP makes it so simple for both the employer and the employee to be part of it because we have a dedicated team at our office to help employers. Gail Genest, our Manager of Business Development, works with many companies to help set up SPP in workplaces. So anyone, employer or employee, who would like a presentation about SPP should contact our office.

Q: How many Saskatchewan companies are taking advantage of this easy way to help their employees save for retirement?
A: We saw about a 7% growth in 2014, so I think that’s a testament to Gail getting out there and talking to businesses and creating some awareness. We currently have 303 employers with just over 1,500 employees who are taking advantage of SPP through their workplace. It’s also available on the payroll platform.

Q: You did some interesting research in April 2014 around how important a pension plan is for attracting and retaining employees. Why did you conduct this study and what did you learn from the results?
A: We really wanted to know what employers and employees thought about saving for retirement partly as a way of helping us frame our message to these groups. And we learned that the expectations of the two groups are quite different.

For example, 57% of employees surveyed said a pension plan is very important in deciding a new career opportunity. They also ranked pension plans as more important than cash bonuses. But because employers assumed the opposite there was a disconnect between what employers thought their employees wanted and what employees really wanted.

We also found (not really surprisingly) that only 12.5% of employers surveyed offered a pension plan. Those that offer plans do so because they feel it’s the right thing to do and as a way of attracting potential employees. Most companies that don’t offer a pension plan cited the cost as the main reason.

Q: How would you respond to small employers who say they can’t afford to set up a pension plan because it’s too expensive and too time consuming to administer?
A: Well, it certainly doesn’t have to be that way. Using SPP as an example, it’s very easy to set up. We handle all the paperwork, and the employer simply establishes the payroll deduction and the payment schedule. We handle the employee signup, the questions, the distribution of the tax receipts and statements. I think we take the complexity out of the equation and allow employers, no matter how small, to set up a pension plan. Furthermore, in discussions with employers, we found that offering a pension plan is a very important tool in retaining and attracting staff, especially for the small employer. I think a lot of people don’t expect a small employer to be able to offer a pension plan so it’s a way of helping them distinguish themselves from their competitors.

Q: Do you have sort of a ballpark number of your employers who put some money into the plan to employee contributions? 
A: That’s truly anecdotal because we don’t track that, but I would say half or more.

Q: What happens if someone joins SPP planning to contribute, let’s say, $200 a month but can’t afford to continue contributing for a few months because his car broke down or he loses his job.
A: Life interferes, right? And again, I would have to say that SPP is very flexible in that regard. So contributions can be changed, stopped or started by a member at any time. We know the best approach is to keep contributing, but sometimes it’s just not part of the game plan, and SPP can accommodate those circumstances very easily.

Q: Who determines how members’ contributions are invested, and how can members be sure their money is safe?
A: The plan is governed by a board of trustees, and they are responsible for setting the investment policy and hiring the investment managers. They work with an external consultant to review the investment policy on at least an annual basis, sometimes more often. The board also reviews the managers’ performance on at least a quarterly basis.

Furthermore, we have administrative staff who are monitoring investment performance, and the board reviews it as well. Within the investment policy, the Board has implemented both quality and quantity guidelines. This is a way of reaching the goal of strong returns while controlling risk. Finally, the investment managers invest in companies of the highest quality.

Q: Are there any plan changes or enhancements on the drawing board you can talk about?
A: Well, we’re always looking at our web services and seeing what enhancements we can make in that area. For instance, we often get members looking for their tax receipts or statements online, and we’re certainly looking at how we can enhance that online experience, but only as we can afford it.

We are very mindful that we are dealing with member funds and we must keep expenses as low as possible so that more can be returned to member accounts.

Q: If readers want to find out more about the plan and fund performance, what sources of information are available to them?
A: We have a number of sources: obviously our website, saskpension.com, our blog, savewithSPP.com and our toll-free line 1-800-667-7153, which is available all across Canada. We also encourage members to sign up for our monthly newsletter which is another source of ongoing information.

Q: Thank you very much for talking to me today, Katherine.
A: My pleasure, Sheryl.

—
This is an edited transcript of a podcast recorded on December 14, 2014.

 

By Sheryl Smolkin

 

Hi, today I’m kicking off the 2015 SavewithSPP.com expert podcast interview series. I’m delighted that Gail Vaz-Oxlade has made time in her busy schedule to talk us.

Gayle is truly Canada’s money maven. She has worked in the financial services arena for 25 years as a writer, reality-television host, public speaker and corporate spokesperson. Over the last several decades she has published 15 personal finance books, four of which were on the best-seller list at the same time in January 2012.

She has also filmed almost 200 episodes of her television programs, Til Debt Do Us Part, Princess and Money Moron. In addition, she regularly blogs and answers questions from readers on gailvazoxlade.com.

But, what I’d like to talk to her about today is mymoneymychoices.com, an online financial literacy program she founded just over a year ago.

Welcome Gayle.

Hi, thanks for having me.

Q: So Gayle, how do you define financial literacy? How big an issue is lack of financial literacy in this country? 
A: The issue itself is huge because most people already know most of what they need to know but aren’t doing it.

Q: You describe mymoneymychoices.com as Canada’s first comprehensive financial literacy program designed to raise the money IQ of Canadians by drawing on community support, a solid financial roadmap and gamification for reinforcement. How did you come up with the concept?
A: I was actually between television shows. I had a big whack of time off and I read about an organization in the U.S. that that used positive peer pressure in order to change behavior. So I laid out this roadmap of everything you need to do in the order I think you need to do it in, to build a rock solid financial foundation.

Q: What are your goals for the program?
A: Really what I want people to do is stop saying “I don’t know where to start.” If you go to mymoneymychoices.com and register – it’s absolutely free – and you just take the steps as they are given to you in the program, then you will work your way to being financially healthy. I want people to come together in communities and support each other, teach each other and work together in order to increase their community’s financial literacy. 

Q: You say the first level is the hardest. Why?
A: In the first level, which I say has all the heavy lifting; you have to do your six-month spending analysis. You also create a debt repayment plan to get your consumer debt paid off in 3 years or less. You have to build a budget and you do your first net worth statement.  And very often I find that people don’t understand why the pieces are necessary. I say to people all the time, if you do the net worth statement today and it looks really bleak, it’s irrelevant, because it’s not where you are today. It’s how different it will be when you do it in six months for the second time.

Q: Do you have any sponsors or partners? Or, are you solely responsible for the development and maintenance costs of the site?
A: I would love sponsors to support us, but the thing is that, whenever you affiliate with anyone, typically what happens is they then have some say in what you do. And so I bore the costs of the development of the site myself and I set up the My Money My Choices Foundation, where I’m taking donations. In late 2014 I ran an Indiegogo campaign and raised $3,785.

Q: Is My Money My Choices, aimed at any particular age or demographic?
A: No it’s not. The reality is it doesn’t matter if you are 23 or 43. If you’re not aware of where your money is going then that’s the first place you have to start. If you’ve done all those things already you can just pick through those on the program until you get to the level where you are implementing something new for yourself. For example, it might be the level in which you investigate disability insurance and life insurance

Q: Give me briefly how the program works. I see there is a leader board and different prizes and levels.
A: The prizes are really icons. They are what you can use to show the world where you are and how you are progressing through the steps.

Q: What is the community element? From what I read on the website, you can’t do this on your own. You’ve got to be part of a tribe or a team.
A: You can do it on your own because anyone can use the roadmap. However if you are working within a tribe then what happens is you benefit from the support that comes along with that. When you have a whole community cheering you on, or kicking your butt depending on what you need that day, you’re much more likely to get back on the horse if you get bucked off.  That’s part of the purpose of the community.

The other part is that some people within a community are very good at some things and other people are very good at something else. And, when you bring it all together you create cohesion, together with process, together with management skills. When you bring all those things together you make it much stronger than each individual trying to do all the pieces alone.

Q: What role does the watcher play?
A: The watcher is the first guy to do the teaching. Typically the watcher is someone who has some money expertise whether it is official or not. And that person’s job is to help the first few people go through level one, and then guide those same people through the various other levels and encourage them to bring more people into the tribe so that they can become teachers and mentors to their own protégés. Ultimately, the watcher will manage the whole process and say “okay, this is how we’re doing as a community.”

Q: If a group of people want to get together and participate in your game on your website, do they have to have a watcher or does someone become a watcher because they are the first one who gets through the levels?
A: I’ll give you an example. I was invited to speak to a church community in Thornhill a few weeks ago, and I agreed as long as they set up a My Money My Choices tribe as part of the process. A gentleman named Emilio who is well along the way because he’s been following me for years became the watcher for that church community. He set up a Facebook page so people could communicate with each other. He made sure that there were books in the library so that the resources were available if people needed help making a budget or doing a spending analysis. He did all the administrative and support stuff to make sure that as people started coming into the program they didn’t get sidelined by small issues.

Q: That’s really cool. So it’s 23 levels. Can you give me some examples of what participants learn as they progress through the various levels?
A: Sure. The very first level, as I said is the hard one because what’s it’s laying the ground work for everything else. Once you’ve done level one you move on up to the point where you are putting process in place. You’re using a spending journal. You’re posting to your budget every single month. You know where your money is going. As you move up you also start allocating money to savings. You get your debt paid off. Ultimately, the reason there are 23 steps is because I don’t expect people to go from 0 to 100 in 12.2 seconds. It takes time.

Q: So you say you’ve had 8,000 people register on the website. How many of them have progressed through all the levels?
A: Nobody yet.  Because at the last level you are maximizing your RRSP, you have paid off your mortgage, you are maximizing your tax-free savings account, and you’ve got all your consumer debt paid off. This is a process. You are incrementally improving your financial position all the way along in very, very small steps.

Q: There are ways to earn extra points. What do you do with those points? What do they do for you? 
A: This is a very interesting phenomenon. One of the pieces of research shows that the points in and of themselves are what people want. They don’t care what the points translate into. It’s human nature. We like to gather things. We like to accumulate things. We measure our success in points. We like the point system.

Q: What kinds of things do people do to earn extra points?
A: It’s the idea that every time you post to your spending journal or push your spending journal to your cash flow budget you acquire more points. The reward system is based on action. If you are actively participating, you keep accruing points.

Q: Do you have any plans to changing or enhancing the program,?
A: I’m not going to touch the My Money My Choices program as it currently exists. I worked on it for about two years before I actually put it up. I think it covers all the bases. If people send me good resources to supplement it, I will add those resources over time once I have vetted them. But really, I don’t have to reinvent stuff if it’s okay and it’s working. What I want to do is use some of the Indiegogo money to create more of a presence on the internet that helps people find the program.

Q: You always seem to have dozens of projects on the go. Is there anything new and exciting still in the developmental stage you can tell us about?
A: I have a new book coming out in January 2016 called “Money Talks, When to Say Yes and How to Say No.” And that will deal with all the relationship side of money. How do you have those really difficult conversations that people just seem to be avoiding? Whether it is the conversation you have before you get married or the conversation you have with your parents because they keep hitting you up for money and you are dead sure they don’t have a retirement plan. So it’s all about having these difficult conversations and how best to position them.

Q: Thank you so much for taking the time to talk with me today Gayle.
A: Oh, my pleasure.

—

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can find out more about mymoneymychoices.com and how to play the game here. All of Gayle’s books are listed here and can be ordered from Indigo or Amazon.