With a going-concern assumption we assume the firm continues operating and that the employee stays at the firm, so we use a prediction of their final salary. This gets a more accurate picture of the future pension payouts.
So why do we use the employee’s current number of years at the firm. Why not predict how long they will stay?
The only reason I can think of is because each year, employees earn more pension benefit (service cost) and the firm pays something into the plan assets, so they are matched off in the same time period.
I don’t quite understand your question.
In what way do we use the employee’s current number of years at the firm?
x = final salary
n = total number of years worked at the firm
maybe each pension payment will be x * n / 12
We estimate what x will be at retirement, but we don’t estimate n at retirement, we use today’s n (so far).
i looked at the GM statement
http://www.gm.com/annualreport/downloads/2013_GM_Annual_Report.pdf
page 44 breaks down the next 5 yrs and yr5-10, i.e. just like leases
there is a discussion on benefits for workers with 30yrs service. since the plan is closed to new employees I would think they could estimate this liability and disclose it…
for plans which are closed I would say there could be more information added which could be useful for analysis.
thanks guys. yep, makes sense