NTEU Advice on UniSuper Issues
Please find below NTEU's advice on the issues surrounding UniSuper that have been covered in the media this week.
Other
(193 KB) - PDF
(193 KB) - PDF
•
Related Blogs:
ACT Division, NSW Division, NT Division, Vic Division, WA Division, SA Division, Qld Division, Tas Division, Australian Catholic University, University of Adelaide, Australian Defence Force Academy, Australian National University, University of Ballarat, Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education, Bond University, University of Canberra, Charles Darwin University, Central Queensland University, Charles Sturt University, Curtin University of Technology, Deakin University, Edith Cowan University, Flinders University, Griffith University, James Cook University, La Trobe University, Macquarie University, University of Melbourne, Monash University, Murdoch University, University of Notre Dame Australia, University of Newcastle, University of New South Wales, Queensland University of Technology, RMIT University, Southern Cross University, Swinburne University of Technology, University of Sydney, University of New England, University of Queensland, University of South Australia, University of the Sunshine Coast, University of Southern Queensland, University of Technology Sydney, University of Western Australia, University of Western Sydney, Victoria University, University of Wollongong
Post a comment
Branch Contacts
Branch Office
Black Rose Bdg Armidale Campus
University of New England
Phone: 02 6773 3175
Fax: 02 6773 3973
une@nteu.org.au
http://www.nteu.org.au/une
Tim Battin
Branch President
tbattin@une.edu.au
Helen McLennan
Branch Organiser
une@nteu.org.au
Comments
[ 0 ] My thoughts go to the voting process. How can you remove a clause without negotiating for a better alternative? Everything seems to be conviently orchestrated towards the employers with regards this event. Nothing was to the advantage of the members. I could understand if the vote was a one of lump some payment from all universities into the dbf in return for the removal of there onus. But nothing. We can ponder all we like the proof will be when we slide into 2013. I am practising eating bake beans as a main meal. I can guarantee that I am getting the same return from my investment.
Like • Dislike • Report Abuse[ 0 ] What can I say Jamez, I agree with you!
Like • Dislike • Report AbuseI believe that when I joined the scheme, the necessary guarantees were in place to ensure that the fund would be underwritten by employers.
It seems that employer organizations had been maneuvering to weaken those guarantees for several years prior to 2006 so that, when they moved to change the relevant clause, they could claim that their guarantee of the fund was unworkable.
NTEU seems to have dropped the ball on all this. They seem not to have realized what was happening. They should have seen this maneuvering for what it was: a way to cut the fund adrift.
However, good as hindsight might be, I have no idea what (if anything) can now be done to rectify things. I guess we can only hope that NTEU proves more effective in safeguarding our entitlements into the future than it has proved itself to be in the past.
[ 0 ] Bill Geddes, it is obvious that the Superannuation fund did not clearly articulate the information in a manner the rank and file understood. We are talking about well educated individuals. I can not believe for one moment that apathy was the cause of this situation. Unfortunately, apathy is now what is driving this bus now. We now rely on the fund and the union and possibly the government to help. That's if there is anyone that is negotiating on our behalf. Have we forgot Pyramid. I don't mean to be alarmist but I am too old to head back into the work force . Superannuation was a conduit to a retirement of choice and dignity.
Like • Dislike • Report Abuse[ 0 ] Bill Geddes, it is obvious that the Superannuation fund did not clearly articulate the information in a manner the rank and file understood. We are talking about well educated individuals. I can not believe for one moment that apathy was the cause of this situation. Unfortunately, apathy is now what is driving this bus now. We now rely on the fund and the union and possibly the government to help. That's if there is anyone that is negotiating on our behalf. Have we forgot Pyramid. I don't mean to be alarmist but I am too old to head back into the work force . Superannuation was a conduit to a retirement of choice and dignity.
Like • Dislike • Report Abuse[ 0 ] Jamez, unfortunately, having now obtained a copy of the Superannuation Scheme for Australian Universities Trust Deed (1986), Clause 48(1) amendment of that Deed states that:
Like • Dislike • Report Abuse'The Trustee may with the consent of the Consultative Committee at any time and from time to time by Deed alter, add to or repeal all or any of the provisions contained in this Deed… '
Since the changes introduced in 2006 required the consent of the Consultative Committee, the question to be asked is whether there is a case for arguing a lack of due diligence or negligence on the part of employee and retiree representatives on that committee in agreeing to the removal of the relevant protective clause(s). (This, however, will not change the 2006 outcome!)
It was good to see Grahame McCulloch assure us, on Wednesday 28 Dec. last year, that ’Retired university staff can rely upon NTEU to represent their interests in future negotiations with the Unisuper Board and the two organisations representing the universities as employers’. The questions which need to be answered, however, are:
Why wasn’t that representation effective in 2006?
And, what has been done to ensure that future representation will be more effective?
[ +1 ] After serious irregularities with trio Superannuation fund. Its is apparent that regulators APRA are unable to keep an appropriate finger on the pulse. There also seems a lack of accountability. Again individuals are left to feel the pain of inappropriate practises. This is why proactive action is required to insure that Unisuper appropriately meet members obligations. This can only be achieved by investigating how binding the 2005 decision to remove employers obligation to fund the fund when in financial trouble. This is essential to be done now not later when we are up to our necks in issues.
Like • Dislike • Report Abuse[ 0 ] After serious irregularities with trio Superannuation fund. Its is apparent that regulators APRA are unable to keep an appropriate finger on the pulse. There also seems a lack of accountability. Again individuals are left to feel the pain of inappropriate practises. This is why proactive action is required to insure that Unisuper appropriately meet members obligations. This can only be achieved by investigating how binding the 2005 decision to remove employers obligation to fund the fund when in financial trouble. This is essential to be done now not later when we are up to our necks in issues.
Like • Dislike • Report Abuse[ +1 ] sorry misquoted the date I ment 2005 not 1995. I agree also with Bill Geddes. What is required before the we find ourselves in trouble is a legal investigation in the validity of what took place in 2005. How the clause was removed that protected existing members. Before next year.
Like • Dislike • Report Abuse[ 0 ] I not quite sure, but why isn't anyone in authority test the validity of 1995 decision to removed the onus of universities to not meet there obligation in the event the dbf is in shortfall. There is a number of glaring fundamental issues related to this action. One it was totally in the interest of the university. Usually when you remove a clause some of equal value or better is replaced. There wasn't even a financial benefit provide to the dbf members. Interestingly, this amendment was back dated to all dbf members. I could understand that in the advent of new members this may apply but removing it from existing members how is this possible when we agreed to be dbf members because of this protection. This action should of been voted on wholly by individuals in the dbf Not representative who will not be affect by the out comes.
Like • Dislike • Report Abuse[ 0 ] As a retiree, I find myself outside the Union's information loop and so have received no information on what transpired at the February 9 meeting with Unisuper. It would be good to have a summary of conclusions posted here for those who have retired.
Like • Dislike • Report AbuseOn Wednesday 11 Jan, 2012, in a posting to this blog, Peter C explained "I have asked UniSuper for a copy of the Trust Deed applicable at the time I joined".
Since it appears that this was not forthcoming, it would be good if the Union could ensure that UniSuper makes this available to UniSuper members and alerts members to the Web address where it might be viewed.