Many working American are frustrated by the details of their retirement plans, which vary widely from company to company, often bristling at the federal laws that govern them.

Throw in serious investment losses from a severe bear market and you've got a real recipe for rage.

Millions of investors have come to depend on employer 401(k) and similar 403(b) retirement plans as the mainstays of their retirement savings.

Fed-up in Syracuse, New York, Joe wrote in to say that administrative management fees passed on to participants in the plan mostly eat up his employer's matching contributions.

He's also quite unhappy that there are very few equity fund options offered in the plan -- and that they've been losing money in the past few years.

Joe's spent a lot of time studying technical analysis and believes he can use hedging strategies to do better than buying and holding stocks and stock funds.

"My balance has continued to spiral in spite of my and my employer's contributions since almost all money managers today subscribe to a buy-and-hold strategy," he wrote.

Joe is incensed that he cannot roll his 401(k) contributions into a self-directed IRA unless he leaves his job.

"So my hands are tied!!!!! ... I cannot get control of my portfolio," Joe said. "Why can't fund managers implement hedging strategies and why can't I roll over my money into an IRA? They have my money locked up and are making money from my money while I lose."

Joe is hardly alone in being frustrated. Because 401(k) plans are typically invested heavily in equity funds, most 401(k) balances have fallen in the last few years in the bear market. To expect otherwise would be to expect miracles.

However, I don't think his situation is quite as grave as he thinks.

It's too bad that his employer's matching contributions are mostly eaten up by administrative expenses. And it's true that most employers pay the administrative expenses themselves, but they are not required to do so. Nor is any employer required to make matching contributions.

If the matching contributions are larger than the plan expenses, then Joe is receiving a net benefit that's greater than he has any right to expect. This still may not feel right to Joe. But this net benefit is something he could choose to be thankful for rather than angry about, especially during a serious recession.

Joe has studied technical analysis and believes he can manage his money more effectively than the fund managers in his retirement plan.

So why can't he roll his 401(k) money over to an IRA and at least give that a try? For the same reason his employer can't take Joe's contributions and use them to pay the company's bills: It's against the law.

Under federal law, 401(k) money can't be paid out or rolled over except in very specific circumstances (NOT including frustration with investment choices).

Some 401(k) plans let participants roll their contributions over to IRAs when an employee reaches age 59.5. If Joe is 59 or older, he should ask his employer if his plan has such a provision.

Joe's contributions may be "locked up," but he can unlock them if he really wants to. He can quit his job and find an employer with policies and plan options that he likes better.

Assuming he doesn't want to quit his job, Joe has more options. He can stop making voluntary contributions to his 401(k) plan. Instead, he can contribute $3,000 a year to an IRA and make further investments in taxable accounts.

If Joe wants to use hedging strategies, the best place to do so is within an IRA, where he can buy and sell without immediate tax consequences.

Further, with the money remaining in the 401(k) plan, Joe can invest exclusively in a money-market fund or whatever similar options the plan offers. He won't make much that way and he may not reach his objectives. But with his money in cash, he won't be paying what he believes are unreasonable fees for performance that leaves him feeling abused.

Since I don't know what funds are in Joe's plan, I can't agree or disagree with his assertion that their managers are making big profits at his expense. But I think his attitude could stand a bit of a reality check.

It's true that money management fees are charged even when the market goes down.

The fund business normally works like this: Fund expenses are calculated as a percentage of assets under management. When a bear market takes some of those assets away, it also takes away some of the funds' income. The fund managers and their staff must be paid, and the bear market is not their fault.

Joe's bear market losses are real, but they don't affect his lifestyle now. The funds' loss of income, on the other hand, is felt right now. This may manifest itself in numerous ways, including layoffs, salary freezes, reduced or cancelled bonuses, diminished capacity for new investment in infrastructure... and of course in lower profits for the owners of the fund companies.

Joe may see himself as a victim of the system, but nobody is forcing him to make the choices he has made. Whether he chooses to remain at his job or find a new one, he will do himself more good by focusing his energy on making good asset allocation decisions than by being upset about things that are outside his control.