But for most, those resources weren’t adequate in the first place.

61-year-old Bob Scherry figured he had a pretty good retirement program when he was a sheet metal worker, in the 1980s. His company provided a pension plan that squirreled away money for employees in their golden years.

You didn’t have to think about it, it went in automatically.

With a pension the employer takes all the risk and responsibility of investments and guarantees a set monthly stipend to retirees for the rest of their lives. But pensions have gone out of favor with employers.

Today fewer than one in five private sector workers have them.

Most employers have switched to so-called 401(k) programs. Named after a subsection of U.S. tax code, they guarantee a defined contribution from the employer but make no guarantee on outcomes.

The employer’s contribution along with the employee’s is invested in a select group of mutual funds, real estate trusts and fixed income options. It’s up to the employee to decide where exactly to put the money within the range of choices offered.

Bob Scherry’s current employer has a 401(k) retirement plan. He says that’s been a challenge, because he’s no investment whiz.

“I don’t have the smarts,” Scherry says. “401(k)s you have to think about, or trust somebody to administer the plan for you.”

Scherry is not alone, according to J.B. Silvers, a finance expert at Case Western Reserve University.

A typical employer might offer 50 different funds for people to choose from, under the theory they’re able to choose, and have the knowledge to do that. And overwhelmingly, they don’t do a very good job.

Westlake-based retirement plan consultant Dave Kocsis blames widespread financial illiteracy.

“People need to start learning in grade school and high school how to be financially self-reliant, and not just how to balance a checkbook, because that’s really not even relevant anymore,” says Kocsis.

One of the most common missteps people make is not saving enough for retirement. Studies show only 1 % of people with 401(k) plans contribute the maximum allowed; 20% of workers eligible don’t participate in a plan at all.

And there’s this from a Boston College think-tank: The Center for Retirement Research calculates that the typical household with two workers in the 55 to 64 age range has about $120,000 in retirement savings.

That would provide a measly $7,000 a year.

The typical household needs at least four times that much, plus Social Security to maintain their standard of living.

Not only do we put too little in, we take it out too early. New data show a record number of workers raided their retirement funds during the recent recession to make ends meet.

“Taking care of their families, just putting food on the table, putting kids through college — whatever the case may be,” Dave Kocsis says.

Now, they’re trying to shovel in as much money as they possibly can into their retirement accounts.

J.B. Silvers of Case Western says the shovel isn’t big enough and that’s going to cause huge problems over the next twenty years, especially for those now hitting retirement age.

“They probably won’t have enough time until retirement to make that up, and they may not even understand how much they have to save to be able to have a chance at retirement, either.”

Some financial experts say it’s time to overhaul or even scrap the 401(k) system; replace it with something that presents less risk for the average investor, mandates employee contributions and totally prohibits access till retirement age.

Otherwise, critics say, many more people may be standing on the edge of poverty in their old age.

Click the play button above for a full report from Ohio Public Radio’s Bill Cohen.

Sixty-six-year-old Ludwig has spent the last 30 years working for Ohio’s prison system, the last 20 at the Grafton Correctional Institution where he worked as both a correctional officer and food services manager.

Ludwig did not want to stop working — he said he can keep up with men half his age. But the Grafton prison is one of several prisons set to be sold to private companies. And Ludwig feared salary and benefit cuts.

“It was easier for me to go out on retirement and get my retirement money from OPERS and deferred [compensation] and my Social Security than stay there,” he said.

Ludwig is among a growing group of public employees at least seriously considering retirement because of looming changes.

The Ohio Public Employees Retirement System has seen a 34 percent increase in retirement applications so far this year compared to the last. And the number of people inquiring about retirement in April was up a staggering 182 percent over last April.

School Employees Retirement System — or SERS — has seen a 24 percent increase in its retirements over last year. And the number of people running their retirement numbers is up by almost a third. “We’re booked for about the next three months on personal counseling sessions and we’ve had to implement group counseling sessions to meet the need,” said Lisa Morris, SERS’ executive director.

Morris attributes some of the increases to retiring Baby Boomers.

“But I think it’s very fair to say that there is a lot of concern and just general anxiety around the legislative climate. What’s going to happen in pension reform; will the legislature do pension reform? Will there be layoffs? Will there be downsizing in the school systems? So I think it’s almost a perfect storm of issues,” she said.

Gov. John Kasich signed into law the contentious Senate Bill 5 which limits bargaining rights for union workers. Opponents are trying to get a repeal vote on November’s ballot.

Imminent pension reform is prompting the retirement surge. Lawmakers are considering changing the cost of living adjustment retirees receive. Right now retirees get a flat three percent increase every year. But officials want the increase to float with the inflation rate — which lately has been less than three percent. Morris said this has many school employees — like union bus drivers and cafeteria workers — are worried. They already make some of the lowest public employee wages. And Morris says many of them feel as though they’ve been vilified in recent months — causing some to consider retirement.

“Public employees used to be described as public servants. Now they’re portrayed as feeding at the trough. And that’s the way our members feel, that they somehow are getting something that they don’t deserve. And the cause for economic distress in the state,” Morris said.

Seventy-year-old Betty Knief worked as head cook at Triad Elementary School in Champaign County for 39 years. She finalized her retirement yesterday. Knief said her decision was directly related to Senate Bill 5 — even though it may be repealed.

“Forced out to do what you’re not ready to do, but it’s the best thing for you,” Knief said.

Carol Bowshier is chief of staff for the Ohio Civil Service Employees Association. Bowshier agreed there are a number of factors contributing to the increases in public worker retirements, but the union official said it has more to do with the proposed state budget and SB 5.

“If I’m a corrections officer and I know, for example, that people are going to come after the wage and benefit package I have under Senate Bill 5? Do I want to continue to risk my life everyday and work in the conditions I work in? Or is it time for me to look at my retirement options and take something that’s a little less taxing,” Bowshier said.

Bowshier’s colleague, Sally Meckling, agreed.

“It’s going to mean massive job loss. And so I think there are employees, you know, they’re thinking to themselves, you know I need to get out while the getting’s good,” Meckling said.

OPERS and SERS are not the only retirement systems to experience increases. The state teacher retirement system has seen a 14 percent increase.

The states police and fire pension and state troopers pension have not seen a significant increase in retirements.

The five state public pension systems will present new plans to the Ohio Retirement Study Council next week. The changes come as each system has endured significant losses in assets. The recession is partly to blame.

Laura Ecklar speaks for the State Teachers Retirement System or STRS. She said while the economy played a large role in losses – STRS’ assets declined 24 percent from 2007 to 2008 – Ecklar said retirees are living longer, and that means more benefits have to be paid. The proposed changes STRS hopes to make will save almost $9 billion for future benefit payments.

“We foresee a shortfall. That at some point in this system’s future we would not have the assets to pay member benefits,” she said.

Some of the proposed changes include increasing member and employer contribution each by two-and-a-half percent. STRS members currently contribute ten percent of their salaries to the pension fund. Employers currently pay 14 percent. Other proposed changes are to retirement eligibility, the benefit formula and cost-of-living adjustments.

STRS has more than 440,0000 members, including about 126,000 retirees. Ecklar said there’s no one major proposed change. She said the changes affect all STRS members.

“They realized that it was going to take a combination of changes. There really was no one thing that they could do that would be practical,” Ecklar said.

The proposed changes ultimately require approval by the General Assembly and Governor Ted Strickland.

Still, officials of the pension funds are not rushing to divest, even though they’ve promised state legislators they would try.

A star witness at Thursday’s first hearing was a woman with links to the 9-11 terrorist attacks. Statehouse correspondent Bill Cohen reports.