Thread by @MikeOtsuka

Why I think a boycott 👇 of Trinity College by Cambridge academics is justified even though they’ve behaved less dishonourably than many of the colleges of whom the boycotters are Fellows. 1/
docs.google.com/document/d/1EH…

In this linked post from Feb 2018, in which I “broke” the story of Oxbridge’s attempt to undermine USS, I quoted the following from Cambridge University’s submission to that consultation 👇. 2/
medium.com/@mikeotsuka/ox…

I then asked: “if Oxford and Cambridge so dislike the ‘we’re all in this together’ last-man-standing mutuality of the scheme, why don’t they just leave the USS?” My answer 👇. 3/

Unlike Corpus Christi, Fitzwilliam, Girton, Gonville and Caius, Hughes Hall,
Jesus, King's, Lucy Cavendish, Pembroke, St Catharine's & Sidney Sussex, Trinity did not join the “less risk” Oxbridge movement to undermine DB. 4/

Rather, after considering the matter, they decided not to submit any response to the consultation. 5/

Trinity deserves some credit for their willingness to buy out their liabilities & leave the scheme, rather than trying to shift the entire scheme over to DC, because they were too cheap to buy out their own liabilities. 6/

They also had no reason to think their departure from the scheme would have such a potentially destabilising effect, since PWC’s lacks justification for their claim that, if one more comparable employer leaves the scheme, the strength of the covenant should be downgraded. 7/

For all its wealth, Trinity’s overall share of the assets of all employers is very small. 8/

It's hard to understand how withdrawal of such a small share of total assets of sponsors, which would be called upon in only the most improbable scenario, should make such a significant difference to covenant strength. 9/

Nevertheless, PWC’s assessment renders it the case that, if Trinity leaves the scheme, that would have a harmful effect on all who remain, either because it will bring the scheme within one more employer withdrawal of a downgrading of the covenant… 10/

…or because it will force sponsoring employers to accept a rule which makes it impossible for them to leave the scheme if this would lead to a downgrading of the covenant. 11/

So Trinity should reverse their decision to leave the scheme, now that they’re aware of its adverse effects on those who remain, and given how remote the risk to them is of remaining in the scheme. 12/

If, in spite of this knowledge, they persist in their decision to leave the scheme, academics would be justified in boycotting them, in order to render it too costly for them to follow through. 13/13

Tagging @CambridgeUCU @UniCambridge @TrinCollCam @VarsityUK @noellachye