2 cents: Approaching retirement? Apply at Trader Joe’s

For two lovely years, Jane White, the founder and president of Retirement Solutions LLC, wrote an insightful and incisive column for EBN. I enjoyed and admired her passion for the “other” top tier benefit, which — even with a full-blaze retirement crisis before our eyes — still doesn’t get the first-string play that health care receives.

Whenever I start to miss Jane’s cut-to-the-chase commentary, I drop by her website. Without the limits of the printed page, Jane is even more in her element — sounding the alarm louder and longer about the importance of 401(k) reform to create strong and financially sound savings vehicles to ensure Americans a secure retirement.

Lately, she’s been a strong advocate of the Australian retirement system, under which employers are required to contribute 9% of pay to employees’ retirement savings account.

In a recent post on her site discussing in part the Australian system, Jane put the need for 401(k) reform in terms as only she can: “If you don’t work for Trader Joe’s, you probably can’t retire.”

Upscale grocer Trader Joe’s contributes 15.4% to employees’ retirement accounts. Take that, Aussies!

However, the TJ tidbit also raises the question of whether the company should be the rule rather than the exception. I’m certainly not in favor of more mandates, but still … Should employers be required to contribute to workers’ retirement savings? If so, how much is too much? If you had to pick one, would you rather be required to contribute to employees’ retirement accounts or provide health care coverage?