糖心Vlog

UK university staff vote to strike over USS pension reforms

Fourteen days of strike action set to begin on 22 February if talks fail, affecting 61 universities

Published on
January 22, 2018
Last updated
January 24, 2018
Strike placards

Union members have voted overwhelmingly in favour of strike action over changes to UK higher education鈥檚 biggest pension scheme.

Eighty-eight per cent of University and College Union members who took part in the ballot voted to walk out after Universities UK proposed scrapping the element of Universities Superannuation Scheme that guarantees a certain level of pension income in retirement.

UCU said that, if a deal cannot be reached, 14 days of strike action would be held at the 61 universities where ballots met the 50 per cent turnout threshold required for any strike action,聽starting with a two-day walkout on 22 and 23 February.

This would escalate to three-day, four-day and five-day strikes in subsequent weeks.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Of the 58 per cent of members who voted, 93 per cent backed action short of a strike, which is set to include refusing to cover classes or reschedule classes lost to strike days, as well as refusing to undertake any voluntary duties.

About 190,000 staff in mainly pre-92 institutions are members of USS.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Sally Hunt, the UCU鈥檚 general secretary, said that members had 鈥渕ade it quite clear they are prepared to take action to defend their pensions and the universities need to work with us to avoid widespread disruption鈥.

Universities will be hit with levels of strike action not seen before on UK campuses if a deal cannot be done over the future of USS pensions," she said. "Even at this late stage we urge universities to work with us to reach an agreement that protects the defined benefit element of USS pensions."

Talks involving UUK and UCU are currently scheduled to finish on 23 January.

At present, the USS operates a hybrid scheme in which defined benefit pensions can be accumulated on salaries up to 拢55,550, with earnings above this threshold directed towards a defined contribution scheme, under which retirement incomes depend solely on returns from money invested in the stock market.

UUK鈥檚 proposal would move the entirety of members鈥 earnings on to a defined contribution model, in a bid to close a deficit that USS estimates to be 拢7.5 billion.

A spokeswoman for UUK described the ballot result as 鈥渄isappointing鈥.

鈥淎 solution to the significant funding challenges facing USS needs to be found,鈥 she said. 鈥淯UK鈥檚 priority is to put USS on a secure and sustainable footing while offering attractive, market-leading pensions 鈥 the very best that can be afforded by both employers and employees.聽聽

鈥淲e should be under no illusion, this is not a problem that will go away if ignored.聽To retain the status quo would only serve interests in the short term.聽Without reform now, universities will likely be forced to divert funding allocated from research and teaching to fill a pensions funding gap. The option of no reform is a dangerous gamble. It is a risk that employers cannot take.鈥

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

The result comes after 960 professors warned that UUK鈥檚 proposal would lead to a recruitment 鈥渄isaster鈥 for universities.

The letter, published in 糖心Vlog, says that, in a sector where 鈥渕any would earn more in the private sector and which has a well-deserved reputation as 鈥榳orld class鈥, the USS pension has provided compensation for relatively modest salaries and has acted as a powerful magnet to talented staff from around the globe鈥.

Last week, the vice-chancellors of the University of Warwick and Loughborough University broke ranks to criticise UUK for failing to offer guaranteed retirement incomes for USS members.

Writing to Alistair Jarvis, UUK鈥檚 chief executive, Warwick鈥檚 vice-chancellor Stuart Croft urges the organisation, which represents the university, to look at 鈥渓ess stark solutions鈥.

鈥淚 strongly believe that there is scope to look again at the technical provisions, to look at other benefit options 鈥 such as full defined contribution options for those above the national pay scale (perhaps by opt-in) and the flexibility to offer defined contribution to others who would prefer a more flexible scheme 鈥 and the deficit recovery period,鈥 Professor Croft writes.

鈥淎 combination of these could sustain a meaningful defined benefit offering for those below the current salary threshold.鈥

A spokesman for the Universities and Colleges Employers Association highlighted that the number of UCU members voting in favour of strike action "represents an estimate of just 16 per cent of academic staff in those HE institutions and 12 per cent of active USS members聽in聽HE".

"The vast majority of聽HE聽employees聽who are USS members聽appear to聽understand the reality of the current聽funding聽environment and the challenges facing the USS," the spokesman said. "Many have shown they do not support action that could harm both their institutions and their students.聽

"It is for each individual, autonomous institution聽to decide how best to deal with this industrial action and each will of course wish to protect their students鈥 interests.鈥

sophie.inge@timeshighereducation.com


Institutions set to be affected by strike action

The 50 per cent turnout threshold required for any strike action was not met at the following institutions: University of Bradford; University of Birmingham; London School of Economics; Ruskin College; St George's, University of London; University of Suffolk; Swansea University.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

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 (3)

Diverting funding from research and teaching will indeed happen, and it will happen as a direct result of the hugely expensive de-risking, which could have been avoided had UUK opted for the least restrictive parameters for Test 1 that were on offer in February. Instead, they pushed for increased de-risking, possibly without realising that this was going to cost them dearly. See Reason 4 on my "Ten reasons why USS is a scandal waiting to bite back": https://hemarketisation.wordpress.com/2018/01/18/guest-post-ten-reasons-why-uss-is-a-scandal-waiting-to-bite-back/
It really is a great scheme and is ideal for academics who stay with the same employer for long periods of time and don't sit up all night worrying about and/or fantasising about the stock market. UCU need to make a significantly generous offer of increased employee contributions so that their members are paying in at least the same amount as their counterparts in post-92 unis. And UUK need to postpone some of the shiny buildings until they've sorted out their members' pensions.
I think you have hit the nail on the head. New buildings without great people do nothing to increase the true quality of an institution. When I was a PhD student in the 1980s, excellent work was done in an old building which later led to the reputation needed for a new building.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT