Six weeks of campaigning to save the LGPS!

The next six weeks are going to be absolutely crucial to the future of the LGPS. The LGA and the Employers are pushing for a worse scheme for higher contributions despite saving money already by removing the 85 Rule and introducing the 25% lump sum commutation. And neither they or the Government have yet agreed to more protection so…every single UNISON member covered by the scheme is being asked to campaign for its life over the next six weeks, until the draft Regulations outlining the proposed LGPS for the future are published. Read on to find out what you must do.

LGPS Mass Lobby of Parliament: 22 November 2006

As a culmination of the next phase of our campaign, UNISON has decided to hold a rally and mass LGPS lobby of Parliament on 22 November. This date has been chosen because it hopefully falls before the draft Regulations on the new scheme appear, and even if we have them by then, will provide the opportunity to let MP’s know what we want in terms of protection and the new scheme from 2008. We want every branch to send representatives, covering as many LGPS employers as possible.

Political action is the key

Political action is going to be key to winning this dispute. MPs and the Government have to be made to realise that we will not accept an increase in employee contribution for reduced pension benefits and that our fight for full protection goes on. Local elections and the national one in Wales in May 2007 provide an important focus for our political campaign. UNISON members hold the balance in many marginal constituencies, so let’s make our numbers felt!

Further details of the lobby will be issued next week. UNISON will be producing a lobby pack which will include a briefing for you to use when lobbying your MP. In the meantime please make a note of the date – 22 November 2006.

LGA/LGE Response to the DCLG Consultation Paper

The Local Government Association (LGA) and Local Government Employers (LGE) Pensions Committee response to the DCLG consultation was published on 12 October 2006. It suggests support among a minority of councils and employers for an increase in employee contributions and reduced ill health benefits, without some of the key improvements we are looking for from the savings already made on your pension. This ‘more for less’ approach is completely unacceptable and we need to make that clear.

It should be noted that the response is based on only 64 returns from local authorities and 23 other participating employers. So far we do not know which employers/authorities responded to the LGE survey or how they break down according to size or type. The following are the responses under key headings. There is no mention of further protection for existing scheme members.

Scheme Structure

84% of respondents supported a final salary scheme
66% supported retaining the existing scheme structure of 1/80th pension, plus 3/80th lump sum accrual rate
Only 18% supported moving to an improved 1/60th accrual rate

Employee Contributions

72% felt that the average employee contribution should increase to 7% of pay
79% did not support variable employee contributions
81% supported some form of cost sharing - effectively capping employer contributions and triggering an increase in employee contributions or a benefit cut, if exceeded

Employer Contributions

65% supported the LGA position that the employer contribution for future service should be no more than 13% of pay
57% said that the basis for cost sharing should be that any increase in employer future service contribution caused by further improvements in longevity exceeding 13% should be passed on to the employee by way of a benefit cut or increased employee contributions

Ill Health Retirement

71% supported the view that there should be two tier provision
54% agreed there should not be any service enhancement for those in the lower tier ( e.g. those permanently unable to do their own job, but capable of other work)

Pensions for unmarried partners

85% support the introduction of partners’ pensions but…
76% only want it introduced from the date a forthcoming Law Commission report legally defines a ‘cohabitee’

What does your employer think?

We need to be able to demonstrate to DCLG that the LGA\LGE response is not supported by every employer. The Branch will be contacting the local authority to find out if they responded to the consultation. If they did, we will ask them for a copy of their submission and send it to the LGPS Campaign Unit. We will also ask the local authority to write to the Secretary of State, Ruth Kelly at the DCLG, supporting increased protection and opposing an increase in employee contributions for reduced pension benefits.

How you can help

You can help by writing to the Secretary of State, Ruth Kelly at the DCLG (address below) supporting increased protection and opposing an increase in employee contributions for reduced pension benefits. Please send all copies of correspondence you get to the LGPS campaign Unit LGPS@unison.co.uk postal address: LGPS Campaign Unit, UNISON, 1 Mabledon Place, London WC1H 9AJ

Rt. Hon. Ruth Kelly MP
Secretary of State
DCLG
Eland House
Bressenden Place
London SW1 5DU

You can also keep an eye out for details about the lobby of Parliament on 22nd November and consider taking part in it. Put the date in your diary!

Lobby your MP and Council Leader at local level and make it clear that we will not sit by and watch LGPS members get even more unequal pension treatment! If you can’t get to see them, write. Model letters will be on the UNISON web site www.unison.org.uk

During this phase of political campaigning we will also continue organising for possible further industrial action. So, speak to all non-union members in your workplace and ask them to join UNISON in advance of the ballot.