Consultation responses reveal strong majority support for UCU’s preferred approach

USS has just released their report on the responses to the statutory consultation on UUK’s proposed changes to pensions. It reveals strong majority member support of UCU’s preferred approach involving the payment of higher contributions to retain current benefits. As USS’s covering note to the report says:

some individuals responded to say they would rather pay more and retain the current benefits, and this view was strongly supported by the answers to question 5 (see section 3.7) where the most popular of the four named approaches to dealing with increased scheme costs was to pay higher contributions…. [my bold emphasis added]

Here is question 5:

UCU’s proposals call for option D involving contribution increases to preserve current benefits in preference to any of UUK’s proposed cuts, which constitute options A, B, and C. In this document, USS provides a Condorcet ranking — about which see more here and here—of options A, B, C, and D. Here is the ranking:

1st: Contribution increases to retain current benefits (D) — ranks above all other options in pairwise comparisons

2nd: Reduction in the DB/DC salary threshold from £60k to £40k (A) — net dispreferred to D by -1175; ranks above all other options

3rd: Reduction in the accrual rate from 1/75 to 1/85 (B) — net dispreferred to D by -1575, net dispreferred to A by -1322; ranks above remaining option

4th: A 2.5% CPI cap in revaluation of pensions for inflation (C)— net dispreferred to D by -1518, net dispreferred to A by -1378, net dispreferred to B by -824 (therefore ranks below all other options in pairwise comparisons)

The above results strengthen the case I make in this blog post that UUK is acting contrary to their duties arising from the consultation in their dismissal of UCU’s proposals:

These results also strengthen the case I make in this blog post that UUK’s proposal of an almost indiscernible mitigation of their CPI cap on inflation is a wholly inadequate response to the consultation:

Rather than UUK’s risible tweak of their proposed cuts, the case for paying modestly higher contributions to retain current benefits until April 2023 is overwhelming:

--

--

--

Professor of Philosophy, LSE & Rutgers. On UCU national negotiating team for USS pensions.

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Recommended from Medium

When your Uber driver was a khat runner

Property industry reaction to election result

New coronavirus strain: cases from Britain to India rise to 20, as New Delhi extends flight ban…

Is Brexit Killing Democracy?

Market pullback will be worse than Crimea if Russia invades: Goldman Sachs

Photo byCNBC

India, China agree to stop sending troops to Ladakh frontline after corps commander-level talks

ICON in Numbers #33 (week 15/16–2021)

The IFT Is Mostly Closed

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Michael Otsuka

Michael Otsuka

Professor of Philosophy, LSE & Rutgers. On UCU national negotiating team for USS pensions.

More from Medium

We Can’t Litigate Ourselves To Equity: The Limitations Of Pay Equity Lawsuits

There is something potentially seismic and painfully, almost hopeful happening in Ukraine.

Mendel Letters 64 — Colombia

They Made It a Toon: The Spooktacular New Adventures of Casper