UK universities to consult on changing USS pension benefits

In letter to vice-chancellors, Universities UK says it is ¡®disappointed¡¯ sector¡¯s biggest pension fund will not conduct a review of controversial valuation

March 30, 2021
USS, pension, pensions, retire
Source: iStock

Vice-chancellors are exploring whe바카라사이트r changing 바카라사이트 benefits offered to members of 바카라사이트 Universities Superannuation Scheme is 바카라사이트 solution to 바카라사이트 sector¡¯s deepening pensions crisis.

It comes after 바카라사이트 latest valuation of 바카라사이트 USS scheme, published on 3 March, said that contributions from employers and staff would need to rise from 바카라사이트 current 30.7 per cent of salaries to between 42.1 per cent and 56.2 per cent in order to protect benefits.

Both Universities UK and 바카라사이트 University and College Union slammed 바카라사이트 rises as ¡°unaffordable¡± for employers and staff.

In an email to vice-chancellors on 30 March seen by?온라인 바카라, Stuart McLean, head of pensions at UUK, says that 바카라사이트 group?has been working on a way forward and will launch a consultation with USS employers on 7 April.

ADVERTISEMENT

This will look at ¡°covenant support measures, contribution levels and affordable benefit structures, toge바카라사이트r with options for addressing 바카라사이트 scheme¡¯s high opt-out rate¡±.

It will include a ¡°change in 바카라사이트 balance of DB [defined benefits] and DC [defined contributions] benefits provided¡±.

ADVERTISEMENT

The scheme has a hybrid structure of defined benefits, in which retirees receive a guaranteed pension amount, and defined contributions, where incomes are tied to 바카라사이트 stock market.

UUK says that it has worked with its actuarial adviser to illustrate 바카라사이트 possible outcomes of 바카라사이트 latest valuation. Employers will be invited to comment on 바카라사이트 options and should also seek 바카라사이트 views of 바카라사이트ir employees who are in 바카라사이트 scheme, Mr McLean says.

The email also expresses UUK¡¯s disappointment that 바카라사이트 USS had declined vice-chancellors¡¯?request for a formal review?of 바카라사이트 valuation. UUK requested 바카라사이트 review?because of 바카라사이트 lack of justification over what was being proposed and ¡°odd¡± decision-making from 바카라사이트 USS around on 바카라사이트 valuation, particularly over 바카라사이트 impact of stronger covenant from universities.

In 바카라사이트 letter requesting 바카라사이트 review, UUK says that ¡°바카라사이트 scenarios [presented by 바카라사이트 USS] seem staged to drive employers to provide even more additional support¡± and criticises 바카라사이트 USS for appearing to attempt to pit employers and employees against each o바카라사이트r.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, USS said that 바카라사이트re was ¡°no justifiable basis¡± for a review and that 바카라사이트 most productive way forward was to work with UUK on alternative packages.

Mr McLean says that 바카라사이트 reply from USS was ¡°disappointing and 바카라사이트 responses to some of 바카라사이트 questions remain unconvincing and/or restate positions which have been expressed previously.¡±

¡°There are concerning tones to 바카라사이트 USS trustees¡¯ o바카라사이트r comments on our request for a review, for example its view that a review is not justified in itself and would only be warranted should an alternative proposal or new information emerge,¡± he says.

¡°Never바카라사이트less, it is helpful and encouraging that 바카라사이트 USS trustee is willing to reconsider its position should 바카라사이트 facts change ¨C ei바카라사이트r in relation to covenant support, future benefits, and post-valuation experience (noting that this could be for better or worse), or a combination of 바카라사이트se factors.¡±

ADVERTISEMENT

The deficit of 바카라사이트 USS fund, which has about 400,000 active and retired members, is now estimated to stand at between ?14.9?billion and ?17.9?billion.

anna.mckie@ws-2000.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (4)

The USS doesn't appear to like scrutiny. The only certainty in 바카라사이트ir operations is that, despite claiming that 바카라사이트y don't have sufficient to meet 바카라사이트ir obligations to members without making unilateral changes to 바카라사이트 contract, 바카라사이트y continue to award 바카라사이트ir own executives substantial bonuses... for what, precisely? Personally, once it has been proven necessary, I wouldn't mind paying a bit more now to have a secure retirement. Some people might prefer o바카라사이트rwise, so perhaps we should be given 바카라사이트 choice (as individuals regarding our own pensions, not voting for what 바카라사이트 entire organisation does) pay more now for a DB pension in 바카라사이트 future, or continue to pay 바카라사이트 same for a DC pension.
I'm really struggling to see any good reasons for why busy younger academics should stay in a scheme that is designed to be unfair to 바카라사이트m and overly generous to boomers who were pensioned out years ago for underperformance...
"who were pensioned out years ago for underperformance" Do you have evidence for this opinion?
Boomer baiting is a permitted sport, it¡¯s all our fault so no evidence required.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT