Dear Helaine: I'm 54 and divorced. I've been with the same company since 2004, and I also receive a small military pension. After taxes, I earn $4,900 a month, including the pension. I contribute to my employer's 401(k) and meet the employer match. In addition, I also save between $900 and $1,000 a month, and now have $32,000 in savings. I have no other debt besides my mortgage.

My question? I calculate that at my present rate of saving, I would be able to pay off my mortgage by the end of 2020. That's 8 1/2 years into a 30-year fixed mortgage. It would wipe out my savings, albeit without touching my 401(k). And I do have an aversion to paying interest. I also don't want to be paying a mortgage in my 60s. Is it foolish to use my entire savings to clear my mortgage?

My job is fairly secure, and I hope to remain with the company till retirement in 10 years. Even so, there is an undeniable appeal in not having a mortgage in case I am overly optimistic about my employment security. -- A Mortgage-Free Future

Dear Mortgage-Free Future: I totally understand where you are coming from. I'm not going to say you are right or wrong; each one of us has a different comfort level for mortgage debt and the interest owed on it.

What I would suggest is that you put this goal on a longer time line than a two-year period. Why? Simple: I don't think it would be a good idea to clean out your savings so you can achieve your goal of metaphorically burning your mortgage papers.

If something goes wrong -- say, your job isn't as secure as you think, or you suffer a health crisis -- you might face a situation where you need to turn to your retirement savings. That could leave you paying penalties, along with doing significant damage to your post-work finances. That's the opposite of the security you are hoping to achieve.

Real estate is an illiquid investment, and there is no guarantee you can sell the property when you need to for the amount you would like, or that a bank will give you a home equity line. On the other hand, the amount you have set aside is a nice emergency fund. I don't think you need to add to it.

I'd suggest taking the extra $1,000 a month and dividing it between increasing your retirement savings and paying down your mortgage. If you get a raise, you can put that money toward the mortgage, too. And keep up the good savings work!

(To ask Helaine a question, email her at askhelaine@gmail.com.)

(EDITORS: For editorial questions, please contact Sue Roush at sroush@amuniversal.com)

Dear Helaine: My husband's job requires he attend a number of conferences and workshops in his field. It's usually two to four times a year. Not going to these meetings is not an option, as it would certainly affect his merit reviews and, potentially, his employment.

His employer will not provide credit cards to purchase airline tickets in advance. They expect my husband to pay for any expense and then will reimburse him after he returns. My husband submits his request for reimbursement the first working day after his return. However, his employer can take six to 10 weeks to process the reimbursement. Inquiries seem to extend the time between the request and actual reimbursement.

My husband is currently waiting on reimbursement for two trips taken at his boss's request between six and eight weeks ago that rang up $2,789 on our card. Obviously, we can't pay off these credit card charges every month, so we're paying interest on these expenses. His employer says they aren't responsible. What can we do to reduce the impact of business travel expenses on our personal finances? -- Unhappy Travels

Dear Unhappy Travels: This is a tough question. Even in the states where the law requires employees be reimbursed for expenses like the ones your husband is racking up, there is no language in the statutes about what a reasonable time frame for repayment actually is. That being said, it is generally customary for companies to pay employee expenses, once they are submitted, within the next pay cycle or 30 days.

So where does this leave your spouse? First, can your husband ask if his company could make the arrangements, so he doesn't accrue expenses for the big-ticket items like flights, conference registration, hotels and the like? If they won't do that, in the short run, I'd suggest your husband attempt to minimize his expenses: buy tickets as far in advance as possible to save money on flights, stay at a lower-cost hotel and so on.

But I've got a bigger piece of advice: I think your husband might also consider starting a search for a new job. At the very least, this behavior demonstrates a lack of consideration for employees, and if these sorts of delays are common, it might also speak to bigger corporate financial problems.

(To ask Helaine a question, email her at askhelaine@gmail.com.)

(EDITORS: For editorial questions, please contact Sue Roush at sroush@amuniversal.com)

Dear Helaine: I need some advice on where to save for my retirement. I am 47 years old, and my wife and I own our home and have no debt. Over the years, my various employers have been on a downward trend as far as matching contributions to a 401(k).

I am currently saving 10 percent of my income into the company-sponsored 401(k), with a 4 percent company match. We have received news that due to a pending merger, our new corporate overlords will no longer offer us any match at all. I was going to increase my own contributions by another 5 percent, but I am reluctant to rely on this company-sponsored 401(k) as an investment vehicle. Any advice on options I should explore outside of this 401(k)? -- Retirement Blues

Dear Blues: This is a question that sounds easy but is anything but. I'm going to ask you to weigh a couple of different factors. Then you need to make the decision, not me.

First, it is absolutely true that companies are not required to offer their employees a 401(k) at all, never mind a match on their contributions. No surprise, many will change reimbursement amounts. During the last recession, it was common to see major employers cut back or eliminate the match entirely. Many have since restored it, at least in part. Things change, in other words. Will you stay on top of this, or are you the sort to ignore the company plan once you are no longer part of it?

Second, the law permits you to put aside much more money in a 401(k) than an Individual Retirement Account. For 2018, a person under the age of 50 can set aside $18,500 in a 401(k) vs. $5,500 in an IRA. In the ideal world, of course, most of us would max both out, but few can afford to do that.

Finally, there are fees. Mutual funds are not free. Investment advice is not free, either. Ditto administering a corporate retirement plan. Those fees, of course, eat into your profits over time. As a general rule, large companies have the heft and expertise to make it more likely their employees are offered low-cost investment options in their 401(k)s. Small businesses -- not so much. Individuals? It depends how savvy you are.

There are extremely low-cost index fund offerings -- heck, sometimes even no-cost selections -- at brokerages like Fidelity and Vanguard. Are you the sort who will compare options between your 401(k) and a low-cost brokerage, and then follow through based on what you discover? Or will you fall prey to the financial adviser recommended by a friend or cousin, who might not have a legal duty to act in your best interests?

Again, only you can answer these questions. Good luck!

(To ask Helaine a question, email her at askhelaine@gmail.com.)

(EDITORS: For editorial questions, please contact Sue Roush at sroush@amuniversal.com)