[Closed] Uni staff striking over pensions

You are correct. Not enough in for what will need to come out. Try explaining that to Mr and Mrs tripple pension lock and you will find out they deserve it but everyone else younger is work shy and it's their own fault.

>but their scheme is in deficit

Only because the Universities choose not to fund it properly.....

Pension is just deferred salary, they accepted a job based on certain financial terms, now the Universities are trying to retrospectively renegotiate a pay cut....

Yep had a long lecture from my mother as to how she had earned her final salary pension from all the tax she had paid but objected to paying for anything else.... Current pension arrangements only work if people start dropping dead sooner.

Except the Fund isn't in deficit, the deficit is a projection based on what UCU's independent assessors are calling flawed analysis. Other independent projections give a very different outcome, but of course, the USS and Universities UK are doing the 'No we're right' and we won't budge/talk stance.

Will (unintentionally) be the trigger for much needed and fundamental review of tertiary education in the UK eso the funding and competition.

I am not sure the academic community have thought this through yet - but they should do. Not impressed by the pressure put on students to support people who remain remarkably unresponsive to the changing needs of students.

Poor show IMO but if it triggers reform then there is a silver lining.

Already happened in some parts of civil service with pensionable ages changed from 65 to the national retirement age....which is 68 plus increases in contributions.

Not impressed by the pressure put on students to support people who remain remarkably unresponsive to the changing needs of students.

I thiught that it was it was a shame in some ways that that Indian student didn’t win his case against oxford, despite them admitting there were inadequacies in the programme and support. That would have really put the cat amongst the pigeons

I am not sure the academic community have thought this through yet – but they should do. Not impressed by the pressure put on students to support people who remain remarkably unresponsive to the changing needs of students.

To put this frankly I don't think you have the slightest idea what you're talking about. The Majority of UK Universities are going through their biggest period of internal reforms ever.

"Pension is just deferred salary, they accepted a job based on certain financial terms, now the Universities are trying to retrospectively renegotiate a pay cut…."

Changing contracts midway through is not unusual, Universities are now in the "market" and charge for their services. Cant have it both ways.

the pressure put on students to support people who remain remarkably unresponsive to the changing needs of students.

what are the changing needs of students ? Compared to students of the 80's, for example.

Later starting hours? Free wifi throughout the campus ?

Good. It’s been a long time coming.

At least some students are getting some much needed extensions on essays - silver linings!!

The student population is much greater and with more diverse needs. Courses need to be much more flexible and offer better VFM for a start.

In the context of higher education what does this mean?

Courses need to be much more flexible and offer better VFM for a start.

>Changing contracts midway through is not unusual, Universities are now in the “market” and charge for their services. Cant have it both ways.

But the change shouldn't be retrospective, which is what changing pension rights does.

>I thought that it was it was a shame in some ways that that Indian student didn’t win his case against oxford, despite them admitting there were inadequacies in the programme and support.

A totally ridiculous case, which was rightly thrown out. You are buying an education course not a guaranteed qualification.

> In the context of higher education what does this mean?

That they're now charging three times as much for the same course?

>Courses need to be much more flexible and offer better VFM for a start.

Undergrads need to think twice before doing a degree. If you're just going to end up being a Barista in Costa, what is the point in taking on a £50k debt before you start, it's effectively a very expensive gap year(s).

That they’re now charging three times as much for the same course?

How do you know they're the same course? Course titles can sometimes remain static, content and technologies don't.

That they’re now charging three times as much for the same course?

The course costs the same it always did, it is just that the government stopped funding it themselves and said that the Universities would have to recoup the money from the students at a capped rate (less than the government paid overall).

So we now have the current situation where Universities have to do more with less while being blamed for raking it in and being at the mercy of student's who now feel that they are paying for a degree rather than an opportunity to learn.

Tuition fees, etc are not extra money that the Universities now receive!

Do you know how aggressively universities market in foreign countries and how little they focus on practicalities? It would make the average cryptocurrency scammer blush. For local students degrees are at worst a low cost loan which will eventually be written off. A lot of foreign students' parents are mortgaging their houses, or going all in on their life savings to give their kids an education. It's time they were more responsible with their promises.

Universities at a minimum should be made to publicise stats like class sizes, degree completion rates, degree classifications obtained, and how many students work in a related field within a year of completing their degrees. Maybe an average salary for a degree holder vs a non-degree holder in a related field would be good too.

I remember a professor at Kingston University saying he teaches students for jobs at McDonnel Douglas, not McDonalds. Meanwhile, they don't tell you that in reality applications for grad placements are oversubscribed at 22:1, or even some guidance through the job application process. McD got bought out over 20 years ago.

For the fees they charge students now they should offer a much better service.

I'm on strike today. The whole situation is ridiculous. No one wants to strike, and everybody knows that pensions need reform (hence I didn't strike when they shut my final salary pension scheme down), but this is way beyond that. It is purely to shift risk from institutions (many of whom are in debt as they seek to expand and attract more students since the caps on numbers have been lifted, and are terrified as Brexit and associated political shifts are likely to cripple our ability to attract foreign students) to individuals.

The valuation is crazy and does not reflect the sector and the shared risk within it (if BHS, for example, goes bust their fund has to cover the pensions of those in the scheme. If my university goes bust the scheme is supported by other universities that still survive. The modelling is based on the fund having to support the pensions should every university in USS go bust simultaneously. Hardly likely).

I'm not going to go into anymore detail, but I trained for 8 years on no money to take a low paid job. The bonus was a decent pension, and the opportunity to do a job that I really liked. The job has changed a great deal with changes in tuition fees/the sector in general, and I no longer have a decent pension. If I worked in a 'new' university rather than a russell group institution, my pension would be at least 3 times higher as they're in the teachers pension scheme.

This guy has some really interesting articles on the current dispute if anyone is interested.

https://medium.com/@mikeotsuka

>For the fees they charge students now they should offer a much better service.

Cuts both ways (<span class="st">Caveat emptor</span>), if students are completely undiscerning and do no research, then should they really be surprised that they don't all end up on six figure salaries after graduating?

I agree with lots of the points above re: value of a degree to students given the cost, and also agree that the attempts of Unis to attracting foreign students often prioritise cash flow over student experience. But Shackleton is right - we're being asked to deliver considerably more with the same or less resources.

But I can assure you that for the rank and file members of teaching and admin staff (who are the ones striking, not the people making these higher level decisions) NOTHING has got better in higher education since the introduction of tuition fees. Increased student numbers, understandably higher demands and expectations from undergrads, job insecurity for early career researchers, and increased pressure on research funding all make life increasingly miserable. I've never seen morale so low, and this pensions kick in the teeth is the last straw for many of us.

Universities at a minimum should be made to publicise stats like class sizes, degree completion rates, degree classifications obtained, and how many students work in a related field within a year of completing their degrees. Maybe an average salary for a degree holder vs a non-degree holder in a related field would be good too.

They do, this information and more is all in the public domain, collated annually and published in various free to access forms.

Meanwhile, they don’t tell you that in reality applications for grad placements are oversubscribed at 22:1, or even some guidance through the job application process.

Again, this is all available. They can have all the information shown to them but they have to give enough of a toss to read it, pay attention or look into things in advance. They are adults, generally at the higher end of the national intellect measures, why not treat them as such?

But I can assure you that for the rank and file members of teaching and admin staff (who are the ones striking, not the people making these higher level decisions) NOTHING has got better in higher education since the introduction of tuition fees. Increased student numbers, understandably higher demands and expectations from undergrads, job insecurity for early career researchers, and increased pressure on research funding all make life increasingly miserable. I’ve never seen morale so low, and this pensions kick in the teeth is the last straw for many of us.

As someone in the same boat I can wholeheartedly agree.

Sure, if they're posing as someone selling a miracle weight loss cure, then that's fine.

But these are professors shilling their universities. People used to respect teachers at these institutions. It's hard to hold a 19 year old student responsible. The number of first year undergrads I know who pick a degree having deeply researched their chosen institution, intended career and the correlation to earning potential are very few and far between.

Maybe you can blame it on their parents. But a lot of times these are people sending the first person from their family to university. They've not got the education, the capability or a reason to suspect they're being sold a pup. In my opinion it's not far off mis-selling a financial product.

But the change shouldn’t be retrospective, which is what changing pension rights does.

Quite. This is a pay cut, and in response, lecturers are exercising their right to withdraw their labour.

I have little time for the reasons of striking and those who strike, it solves nothing and agrivates everyone.

It is about time universities sorted out the products they sell, and the quality thereof, and deliver high expectations to those paying for the service. I have no doubt there are plenty of skilled, intelligent and caring lecturers who do far more than asked, similarly there are those who teach by rote and add nothing.

But this is about Pensions and the ridiculous situation the Funds and University manage such, which is endemic within Fund Management. Promise too much, deliver less than promised.

It is a situation that will not be fixed by striking, that’s a given.

It is about time universities sorted out the products they sell, and the quality thereof, and deliver high expectations to those paying for the service.

Did you read the posts upthread? There are no new resources for lecturers to deliver the improved service you'd like to see.

It is a situation that will not be fixed by striking, that’s a given.

I have been on strike over pensions, the result was that the employer came back to the negotiating table, and a compromise was agreed.

It’s hard to hold a 19 year old student responsible.

Why? They can marry, breed, vote, drive, drink or serve as front line soldiers, all activities that can impact others, as well as themselves, to a much greater degree (hah!) than choice of University course.

The number of first year undergrads I know who pick a degree having deeply researched their chosen institution, intended career and the correlation to earning potential are very few and far between.

I didn't pick mine (Botany) on the basis of earning potential, I chose it on the basis of what I was interested in as I thought that is what would lead to me remaining engaged for 3 years. So far I've remained engaged for 19 years.....

A first University degree isn't a direct route (with some exceptions) to a profession. In reality, for the majority, it teaches you a number of transferrable skills, using the degree topic as a framework, that should allow you to perform in a variety of jobs that are not necessarily related to the topic of your degree.

I know plenty of MEng grads who are accountants, BSc (biology) patent lawyers, BSc (history) journalists, etc.

A University degree is an opportunity to learn, not be taught, and shouldn't be seen as a direct route to a profession. University degrees (again with some exceptions) are not vocational training.

Well done ransos, but I disagree.

Strikes prove nothing.

As for the Services Universities supply, yes it’s tough but they are having to go through what every other business has been doing for millennia.

Provide quality products to those willing to pay for them.

Universities are learning that the old funding model is not fit for purpose, and having to adapt to a new funding model. As is they also have to provide Pensions based on an old provision model that too is no longer fit for purpose. So call in those that decided to provide and non sustainable funding model to explain why it was given, and what the options are to plug the gaps.

Stiking won’t provide that, you need the originators who cut the deals to get together to sort it out. You striking means the services you provide.. aren’t being provided. So, a refund for lack of service or perhaps a discount on next term to those students who are paying for a service .. not .. provided.

Having my Final Salary, Defined Benefit, retire at 60 pension frozen in 2008  and followed on with a Career Average, Defined Benefit, retire at the State Pension Age was an unfortunate and annoying change in employment terms.

I saw why the unions were striking but decided it was nowhere near as bad as it could have been and reasonably sensible...

What's happening to the univeristies pension which appears to be going from a scheme similar to the NHS Scotland 1995 scheme to a defined contribution one with no safeguarding and is basically an epic gamble is ridiculous and well beyond acceptable change in terms.

>I have little time for the reasons of striking and those who strike, it solves nothing and agrivates everyone.

Just because you're happy for someone else to be given a retrospective pay cut, doesn't mean they have to be. They are exercising their right to withdraw labour as a result of a one sided and downward change to employment terms.

Personally, I fully support their action.

You striking means the services you provide.. aren’t being provided. So, a refund for lack of service or perhaps a discount on next term to those students who are paying for a service .. not .. provided.

The service is ultimately still being provided, just with a narrowed content - you do realize that students won't be examined on any content they were't actually taught? If the lectures etc. can't be rescheduled (unlikely given the time constraints) the exams can't contain any of the "missing" coursework, which adds up more points spread across less content. If the Universities suddenly decided to increase the course content by 20% with the same points spread across more content there would be an outcry from student bodies. This makes it a bit easier. Students should be using their heads & telling the student bodies to push the point that there's no time to reschedule for the "lost" content & use the time off to study the bollocks out of the "reduced" content. More for less, innit.

You're welcome 😉

Thanks, I am welcome.

The service has been taken away, correct ?

You are just adjusting to common business practice, and you don’t like it. Fine.

Striking and removing the service to paying customers achieves nothing.

Supporting those that strike means you align yourselves to thier cause, fine that’s your prerogative.. But if by supporting them you do nothing more than say you are supporting them, then that achieves nothing. I don’t know your situation work wise, but if by supporting them you are not at work, then fine. If you are supporting them with mere words then that too achieves nothing.

The Pensions Fund Managers should be brought into this equation, not just Universities back office admin, so too the Boards who agreed the deals and the representatives thereof. Until the underlying reasons and achievable outcomes can be thrashed out striking achieves nothing other than remove a service from a paying customer.

You will really have to get your heads around that concept, because it isn’t going to go away.

Paying customers expect a service, if they don’t receive that they go elsewhere. Surely there are some Economists teaching this in lecture halls all over the U.K.

This strike has nothing to do with universities needing to be more customer-friendly or responsive. They are already overwhelmed with customers desperate to throw money at them and could easily raise prices if the govt allowed it.

Well done ransos, but I disagree.

Strikes prove nothing.

Disagree about what? My direct personal experience?

striking achieves nothing other than remove a service from a paying customer.

Then why do you think people do it?

Seems strange that the people tasked with educating the plebs , should fail to understand basic maths, if you havent enough cash in the tin under the desk you have to cut back and look for savings, some savings may be harder to achieve than others but savings must be made.

University of hard knocks in life

But there is enough cash in the tin, it is just the obscure and odd way that it is currently assessed that artificially puts  it in the underfunded category. See earlier comments and independant actuarial assessments.....

The main reason why "they" want the scheme to change is political (big, well funded scheme with good pay out and returns vs most other pension schemes out there), but they have to dress it up in artfully constructed finance and claim it is unsuccessful.

Firstly, the scheme is not "£6bn in deficit". This is an accounting dodge cooked up by USS to cover their tracks, and is based on protecting against an "apocalyptic" scenario in which all universities signed up to USS essentially default. This is completely unrealistic, and goes way beyond "prudent forecasting".

Under realistic assumptions, and indeed under the USS's previous modeling, the scheme is actually £3bn in surplus. 3 years ago, my employing university wrote to USS saying that they believed the assumptions underlying the deficit modeling to be incorrect. They have now (this time around) changed their tune - and this is believed to be due to issues relating to the bond market. Essentially, even having this very slim possibility of all the universities going bankrupt increases the cost of raising funds. To slightly lower the cost of capital, academics are being shafted.

And it is a pretty thorough shafting. I used the model to calculate the change in my own pension after the new rules. The retirement income I get for work between now and retirement drops to 43% - I repeat 43% - of the value it would have been with the current model. (The new number is really not enough to survive/retire on, despite me being a Professor on what many would consider a pretty good salary). This is really not about defined contribution vs defined benefit - I don't care to be honest - it is about the fact that they are using the switch to massively reduce the pension payed to individual academics. Academic salaries in this country are already much lower here than in competing countries such as Australia - I know several people who have just left as a result.

People who think this is a simple matter of "the scheme is in deficit, there need to be some savings" are being quite naive. The deficit is dependent on the model, which will tell you what you want it to, if you do the modelling.

"They are already overwhelmed with customers"

Well they have certainly lowered standards in order to get paying customers in. My undergraduate son received several unconditional offers before receiving his grades.

The mere threat of strike/industrial action has bought my employer back to the negotiating table on more than one occasion.  Pay, T&C’s etc.   So striking does work.

The pensions fund issue has its roots back in the 80’s with politicians burying their heads in the sand about future problems, Gordon Brown raiding pension funds a bit later on and then ruling that they couldn’t have a surplus (because boom and bust was gone).  My pension fund was in surplus so we had a holiday from payments for a good few years.  Now it’s running slightly in deficit so there have been some alterations.  I said at the time that we should still be contributing in case of financial disaster but as a small cog wasn’t listened too.

The mere threat of strike/industrial action has bought my employer back to the negotiating table on more than one occasion. Pay, T&C’s etc. So striking does work.

Yep, we secured union recognition, followed by improved pay and working conditions and some really valuable concessions during redundancy negotiations.

A lot of the staff were sceptical but really changed their minds when they saw what the union could do for them. I suspect a lot of anti-union types think about it in terms of politics when the collective bargaining is the key thing. If they really think about it at all.

Lot of talk of what universities should or should not be doing, but that is irrelevant to this issue, which is that lecturers crap pay was compensated somewhat by a less crap pension (still crap at 1/80 of final salary per service year IIRC) and now this is being taken away. They're right to strike, for themselves and for future students who will not benefit if good people are driven away from the profession by the need to feed a family.