Our branch delegate writes…
There was certainly a more reflective mood amongst Branch delegates at UCU’s HQ today compared to the meeting held just over two weeks ago. The latest proposal represents an advance on the first potential deal that was so contentiously mislabelled “an agreement”: It confirmed an independent panel of experts, with a broad remit to consider the valuation methodology and the benefit structure; it avoided the bogey in the (USS) room of relying on a non-independent “independent Chair”; and recognised members were determined to hang on to defined benefit pensions, at least as good as currently if not more in line with TPS. And it looked as if the UCU negotiating team were confident that we would be broadly in favour of accepting, as they handed out ballot papers as we registered for the session.
The speeches of Sally Hunt and lead negotiator Paul Bridges reminded us how far we had come from the threatened imposition of defined contributions. Sally Hunt was able to offer some clarifications before the debate, having just received an open letter from Alistair Jarvis of UUK and a copy of a confidential letter from the office of the UK Pension Regulator to the Chair of USS Trustees. The letter from Jarvis confirmed that the January DC proposal had disappeared and mentioned the need to rebuild trust (a dangerous word in RHUL circles) between, on the one hand, UUK and constituent employers and, on the other, UCU members and supportive students. However, this letter did refer to their preference to “work with UCU on risk sharing alternatives” – without indicating if that simply meant shifting more of it onto staff. The letter from the office of the Pensions Regulator (tPR) cannot be disclosed but we were read an excerpt which stated that tPR appreciated that the proposed joint panel of experts was a valuable opportunity to bring stakeholders together to work for the future of the scheme and that they will engage with the panel at the appropriate time. The General Secretary told us that this meant the trustees have no reason to stand in the way of the proposed jointly convened expert panel. This gave some reassurance to many delegates, but as the questions flowed it was clear that several areas of ambiguity remained, with the lack of trust in UUK a major stumbling block.
Branch delegates then raised questions and expressed the views of their Branches on the UUK proposal, as garnered by E-ballots, Emergency General Meetings (EGMs), and, occasionally in larger branches, both methods. Branches who had managed to hold EGMs explained that the more their members discussed the proposal, the more concerns arose but Branch reps had found themselves unable to answer any questions. Some expressed relief at the clarity provided by Sally at the start of the meeting, especially around the letter from UUK but were left wondering why it had only arrived an hour before this meeting. This reinforced the lack of trust in UUK’s apparent engagement, and was described by one representative as a deliberate “splitting tactic”.
The ballot of reps was taken off the table without comment as it seemed to be clear, from the 55 branch representatives who contributed, that more than half required additional work to be done on the proposal. This is not surprising given that the proposal was presented to UCU on Friday afternoon, so up to this point it has not been subject to formal negotiation by UCU. The meeting closed after almost three and a half hours, and we were hurriedly ushered out so that the Higher Education Committee could ruminate on what they had heard. They had the unenviable job of reviewing motions submitted by a handful of Branches, debating the views of the Branches which had attended, and identifying a process by which we move forward. We have now learned that they have recommended that this proposal, edited to reflect the clarifications we were given today, go out to a ballot of members. That’s democracy in action and reflects the overall position of RHUL members but it’s not the outcome that I or many other Branch reps expected.