Nevertheless, one-third of the companies in the survey said the reduction or elimination of the matching contribution feature would make it less likely they would pass the federal nondiscrimination test.

In research it released earlier this year, Fidelity Investments found that, on average, when a company offers a match of at least 50 percent on every dollar of participants' contributions, it increases worker participation in plans by as much as 9 percent. Adding immediate vesting, which provides employees full entitlement to all plan contributions with no waiting period, was found to increase worker participation by another 2 percent.

When companies eliminate the match, almost half see a decrease in participation and deferral rates, said Scott B. David, Fidelity's president of workplace investing when the survey was released.

The younger the worker, the more likely the elimination of a match will affect participation rates, Fidelity found. It said that workers in their 30s had an average participation rate of 52 percent in plans where no company match was provided, versus 61 percent in plans with a match. Workers in their 40s showed similar rate increases, with participation at 61 percent in plans without a match versus 70 percent for plans with it.

David said the very existence of any company match, even a small one, is s huge lure for employees. The more generous the match, the more employees participate in their workplace plans.

I understand that companies have to trim their costs. But in their quests to generate short-term cost savings, they are hurting the long-term participation rates of employees who can least afford to stop saving. Given the research, why not just reduce, rather than eliminate, the company match?

It's not in anyone's best interest -- a company or its employees -- to take actions that mess with people's savings habits. Once they stop saving, I've found it's hard for them to start up again. The 401(k) match has become a vital benefit that helps companies attract the best workers. The more people save, the less likely they will have to depend on government aid, and that's a savings to us all.

So I certainly hope that as the economy recovers, companies quickly put this perk back in place.