Women in federal service still face retirement gaps

March is Women’s History Month, a time to reflect on the achievements of women who have shaped American institutions and to examine the challenges that persist today. One area where women’s contributions — and challenges — are especially visible is retirement security. For federal employees, retirement planning is built on a strong foundation through the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS). Yet, even with this structure, women face unique hurdles that make proactive planning essential.

In 1967, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed Executive Order 11375, which added sex to other prohibited forms of discrimination in the federal government. As a result, the Civil Service Commission established the Federal Women’s Program (FWP). The program was tasked with identifying barriers that hinder hiring women and women’s career advancement in the federal government.

In 1972 the Equal Employment Opportunity Act brought federal employees fully under the equal employment opportunity provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Equal Employment Opportunity Act required that federal agencies designate a Federal Women’s Program Manager to advise the director of equal employment opportunity on matters affecting women’s employment and advancement. It also required federal agencies to allocate sufficient resources to their Federal Women’s Programs. To help implement the portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act that affected its female employees, the National Archives and Records Service (NARS) created a Federal Women’s Program Committee.

I’ve had the opportunity to present retirement planning programs to a variety of groups of female federal employees. My presentations for groups of women were really no different from any other presentations I conducted. However, I noticed that there were more frequent questions about taking time out for caregiving, whether it was for young children, parents or spouses. Caregiving duties often result in changing work schedules from full time to part time.

In some cases, women have taken a break in their service history, leaving them with shorter careers resulting in smaller retirement benefits when they returned to federal service. In some cases, refunded retirement contributions needed to be paid back (with interest) to fully credit the past service.

Federal Employed Women, or FEW, is a private, nonprofit organization founded in 1968, the year after President Johnson’s executive order was signed. Today, FEW still works to end sex and gender discrimination, to encourage diversity for inclusion and equity in the workplace, and for the advancement and professional growth of women in federal service by:

• encouraging diversity and equity in the workplace

• enhancing career opportunities

• establishing relationships with organizations to advocate the fair application of laws, policies, procedures and practices

• maintaining relationships with organizations to advocate the fair application of laws, policies, procedures and practices

Groups like FEW exist to improve the quality of life for women by influencing legislative actions, committing to maintain a unified and diverse membership and providing opportunities for professional growth.

Women in Federal Law Enforcement, or WIFLE, is another such organization that stemmed from President Johnson’s efforts to remove barriers to women in government. WIFLE’s predecessor was ICWIFLE (I C WIFLE), which is the acronym for the Interagency Committee on Women in Federal Law Enforcement hosted by the departments of Justice and Treasury.

ICWIFLE was originally formed as a task force created by the Office of Personnel Management in 1978. It was charged with studying reasons for the low numbers of women entering federal law enforcement — fields that opened to women only after President Richard Nixon signed Executive Order 11478 (EO 11478) on Aug. 8, 1969.

President Nixon’s executive order provided equal opportunity to federal employment for all persons; prohibited discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap or age; and promoted equal employment opportunity through a continuing affirmative program in each executive department and agency.

Women were not authorized to carry firearms, execute search warrants and make arrests until 1969, when Executive Order 11478 was signed.

Joanne Pierce Misko, a former nun who grew up in Niagara Falls, N.Y., and Susan Roley Malone, a 25‑year‑old Marine, became the first female FBI agents in 1972, followed by the first Black female FBI agent, Johnnie Mae Gibson, serving from 1976 to 1999. I had the privilege of meeting Special Agent Gibson during the time I worked at FBI headquarters in the 1980s.

In 1971 and 1972, women special agents were also hired by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

How women save compared to men

Despite remarkable gains in labor force participation, women’s economic well‑being continues to lag in key outcomes like median earnings and retirement security. Research shows that women hold fewer retirement assets and are more likely to be impoverished at the end of their lives than men.

Census Bureau data consistently show that women approach retirement with fewer financial resources than men. According to U.S. Census Bureau research in 2018, about 50% of women ages 55–66 have no personal retirement savings, compared with 47% of men in the same age group. Women are also less likely to have substantial savings: only 22% of women report retirement savings of $100,000 or more, compared with 30% of men.

Multiple studies indicate that women are disadvantaged across all sources of retirement assets: they tend to receive lower Social Security benefits, have lower retirement account ownership rates and lower estimated retirement account balances, and own fewer assets than men.

A study by researchers from the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College found that the lifetime earnings of mothers with one child are 28% less than the earnings of childless women, all else equal, and each additional child lowers lifetime earnings by another 3%.

When examining Social Security benefits, the study found that the “motherhood penalty” is smaller than the earnings penalty. But mothers with one child still receive 16% less in benefits than women without children, and each additional child reduces benefits by another 2%.

Other studies reinforce this trend. Research summarized by Investopedia shows that women often have less than one‑third of the median retirement savings of men, a gap driven by lower lifetime earnings, caregiving responsibilities and career interruptions.

Surveys also indicate that women report lower confidence in their ability to meet retirement goals than men, even when participating in employer‑sponsored plans.

For federal employees, the Federal Employees Retirement System helps offset some of these challenges by guaranteeing a pension. Still, differences in TSP contribution levels, investment growth and years of service can widen gaps over time if not actively managed.

Why women face greater retirement challenges

Elderly women, who comprise a growing portion of the U.S. population, have historically been at greater risk of living in poverty than elderly men.

This prompted a study by the Government Accountability Office in 2012, which found that women, on average, earn less over their lifetimes and are more likely to take time away from work to care for children or aging relatives. These interruptions reduce years of creditable service under FERS and lower total TSP contributions.

In 2020, the comptroller general of the United States, Gene Dodaro, head of GAO, testified about the unique challenges women face saving for retirement. Among those challenges, he noted that women have longer life spans, lower lifetime earnings and that they are more likely to be primary caregivers, which can limit them from maintaining paid employment.

Studies cited by retirement researchers show that women are more likely to express concern about longevity risk and health care costs in retirement. These realities make strategic retirement planning especially critical for women in federal service.

How women federal employees can prepare for retirement

While challenges exist, federal employment offers tools that women can leverage so they can prepare for retirement.

Preparation begins with understanding how each component of FERS fits together. Maximizing TSP participation is one of the most impactful steps. The federal government automatically contributes 1% of salary and matches additional employee contributions up to certain limits, making consistent contributions especially valuable over time. Ensuring at least enough contributions to receive the full match is widely recognized as a foundational strategy.

Women should also pay close attention to years of creditable service and retirement eligibility milestones. FERS retirement options depend on combinations of age and service, such as reaching the minimum retirement age with 30 years of service or age 60 with 20 years. Understanding these thresholds helps employees make informed decisions about when to retire and how long to remain in federal service.

Finally, retirement preparation extends beyond income. Evaluating health insurance continuation, survivor benefits and long‑term care considerations is particularly important for women, who statistically spend more years in retirement.

Looking forward

While FERS provides a solid framework, women still face disparities in savings, confidence and retirement readiness. By understanding the data, using federal benefits strategically and learning from the women who shaped today’s retirement landscape, women in federal service can turn structural advantages into lasting financial security.

In doing so, they continue a long tradition of women strengthening not only their own futures but the retirement systems that support generations to come.

What has Congress done and what can they do in the future to help equalize the retirement benefits for women?

• Increase access to retirement plans (there are well over a dozen categories of federal workers who are excluded from FERS coverage, including temporary and term appointments and employees serving on an intermittent work schedule)

• Improve tax incentives to save for retirement (IRS Retirement Savings Contributions Credit is a tax credit established to help taxpayers save for retirement and lower their tax bill. Beginning in tax year 2027, the Saver’s Credit will be replaced by the Saver’s Match, created by the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 for individuals meeting income and other eligibility requirements. Several provisions of SECURE 2.0 affect how participants contribute and use the TSP as well)

• Expand Social Security benefits for caregivers

In 2025, Rep. Lauren Underwood, D‑Ill., and Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D‑Wis., introduced the Women’s Retirement Protection Act of 2025 (WRPA), legislation to help close the retirement gap and improve women’s financial security. There is a companion bill in the Senate, S.988, sponsored by Sen. Baldwin, D‑Wis., designed to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to provide greater spousal protection under defined contribution plans (the TSP already provides such protection by requiring spousal consent for withdrawals by FERS and uniformed services participants).