Uproar as employers block referendum on universities' pension fund changes
23 July 2010
Members of the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) will be denied the opportunity to vote on changes to their pension scheme after the employers' representatives rejected calls for a ballot of all affected members at a board of trustees meeting last night.
The University and College Union (UCU) said the decision to block the ballot was 'anti-democratic' and warned that if it was not reversed it would weaken the credibility the scheme has with its members.
The three trustees representing employees on the USS board proposed a referendum of all USS members on the changes proposed by the employers. The union is concerned that the changes would see new starters lose more than £100,000 in pension payments, compared to the current scheme, and would leave long-serving staff made redundant forced to accept inferior benefits.
The board voted against a ballot and in favour of a much more limited consultation on the grounds that a full ballot was not a requirement of the fund's rules. The vote was nine against a referendum of all staff and three in favour. The board has decreed a limited consultation with some universities will go ahead in the autumn.
The union said it was pushing for a ballot to ensure the scheme retained some legitimacy following damaging revelations that taxpayers' money had been used by the employers to fund a PR campaign to propagate its proposals. Independent experts believe more moderate changes would be enough to maintain the scheme's financial health.
The union said that it would now take the campaign for a full referendum of fund members to each institution affected, demanding that universities make good their commitment to consult fully with staff by organising local referendums of USS members before committing to support the changes.
UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: "The decision to deny fund members a vote on fundamental changes to their pension scheme will come back to haunt the employers. It shows that they are unwilling to either argue the case in a referendum or be bound by its result.
"It is an anti-democratic disgrace that universities would seek to implement changes without the mandate of those affected. This issue will not go away. We will be pressing for a transparent referendum of all USS members in every institution before they respond to the sham consultation.
"If the scheme is to retain any credibility, university vice-chancellors need to join me in urging the USS board to reconsider its decision otherwise lasting damage will be done to the relationship between staff and the sector's leaders."
The three trustees representing employees on the USS board proposed a referendum of all USS members on the changes proposed by the employers. The union is concerned that the changes would see new starters lose more than £100,000 in pension payments, compared to the current scheme, and would leave long-serving staff made redundant forced to accept inferior benefits.
The board voted against a ballot and in favour of a much more limited consultation on the grounds that a full ballot was not a requirement of the fund's rules. The vote was nine against a referendum of all staff and three in favour. The board has decreed a limited consultation with some universities will go ahead in the autumn.
The union said it was pushing for a ballot to ensure the scheme retained some legitimacy following damaging revelations that taxpayers' money had been used by the employers to fund a PR campaign to propagate its proposals. Independent experts believe more moderate changes would be enough to maintain the scheme's financial health.
The union said that it would now take the campaign for a full referendum of fund members to each institution affected, demanding that universities make good their commitment to consult fully with staff by organising local referendums of USS members before committing to support the changes.
UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: "The decision to deny fund members a vote on fundamental changes to their pension scheme will come back to haunt the employers. It shows that they are unwilling to either argue the case in a referendum or be bound by its result.
"It is an anti-democratic disgrace that universities would seek to implement changes without the mandate of those affected. This issue will not go away. We will be pressing for a transparent referendum of all USS members in every institution before they respond to the sham consultation.
"If the scheme is to retain any credibility, university vice-chancellors need to join me in urging the USS board to reconsider its decision otherwise lasting damage will be done to the relationship between staff and the sector's leaders."
- PrintPrint this page
- Share
Comments