Some of the MND election results are now on the Trust's website Notice Board.  The turnout was disappointing. Despite encouragement and reminders from candidates, AMIPP, and the Trust, less than 1 in 5 of those who could vote did so. (And the deferreds had no vote).  This is less than in the 2005 election.  There is no certainty about why so few voted, but factors likely to have had an effect are:

- the poor design of the election, which alphabetically merged the candidates in the two elections, and required voters to rank across candidates who were not in competition with one another.

- the Trust's ultra-secrecy about what the Trust Board actually does in practice, leading voters to doubt the potential effectiveness of MNDs.

Argentine page translated.  13 January 2008.  Our links now include the IBM Argentina Retirees site.  Go there for the Spanish.  This Google translation indicates the theme.

Newsletter 36  12 January 2008

Payments to Trustee-directors    5 January 2008

The Valuation Report for 2006  explained.   5 January 2008

This website is about occupational pensions, and especially about IBM UK pensions practice.   Occupational pensions tend to have a long period when the employee is buying the pension with work and contributions, followed by a long period of pension in payment after retirement.  Over such a long period there will be changes in the behaviour of the company.   In some cases this is cause for outrage, when the members of a pension scheme (the consumers) feel they have been wronged by the employer (the provider).  A question of consumer protection arises - whether a company can do and say whatever it likes when it wants to recruit, retain or retire employees and then do something different subsequently.

IBM UK is an extreme case.  For decades it obtained a talented, loyal, ununionised workforce by a practice of being competitive with leading companies in all of its benefits.  In answering a question about pensions in payment (PIP), ie how the value of pensions is affected by inflation, IBM confirmed and documented that for PIP, like all the other benefits, it aimed to be competitive with leading companies.  This was only an "aim" because IBM's economic circumstances might have prevented it.  Another document explains the constraint of affordability.  

IBM's PIP practice has been the worst of all comparable companies.  It turns out that this is not due to affordability, but to a mechanical rule for degrading the value of pensions, irrespective of economic conditions or what other companies did.   This transition from "One of the Best", in practice and predicted, to actually "One of the Worst" took place after many people had retired.   In the midst of this, an  extreme action of totally changing the nature of the pension plans was made, perhaps illegally, without as much as advising the scheme members about how it would be funded. The manner in which these changes were put through the Pension Trust board, with U.S. headquarters monitoring that U.K. board and appointing U.S. executives to it, so that the changes reflected U.S. requirements rather than English notions of "fair play", was exceptional.

As consumers of occupational pensions, with no power to bargain after retirement, is there anything the retirees can do? Is there any legal constraint, on what happened or on how the pensions trust was used to make it happen?

If you are concerned, you are not alone.  More than 2000 people receive our electronic newsletter.  Some have been looking into the affair for years, as our situation report explains.  Dozens wrote to their MP, dozens wrote the authorities and agreed that a small set of complaints, taken together, would cover their concerns.  This website records a thousand messages offering information, advice, and comment about what should be done.  A media campaign? Change the law? Hire a lawyer? Petition the elected trustees? Enlist the help of pensioners' associations nationwide? Join a union? The pros and cons are discussed.

If you are an active member of a pension plan you may also be concerned - your bargaining power, to take your skills to a different company, represents a last resort.  If you have a deferred pension, it may be large enough to matter to you.  Even if your interest is only a general one, we suggest you bookmark this website - our notes explain how to find what is new on each visit.  We suggest you register for the newsletter which usually comes out at six week intervals.  If you are new to this site, you can read about our general situation now.   This home page cannot describe everything that is on the website, but the links on the top left will help you find things, and submit your opinions, and read others. 

This site is maintained by the Association of Members of IBM UK Pension Plans.

You are welcome to provide material for this site (for example, any correspondence, reference material, background, legal items etc.). Please send any input to the Webmaster

There are some notes about the site, with the usual disclaimers, and navigation advice.

Eat and drink pleasantly for what you did beforehand in the days gone by. [Qur'an 69.24]