So three quarters of the deficit being used to justify slashing academics' pensions by up to 40% has already disappeared on its own, in under 2 yrs. Yet our employers still insist a valuation done in the middle of a pandemic triggered market panic makes sense. We aren't fools.
And because they know we aren't fools, the pension fund whose fees we are all paying from our pension contribution, tried to stop publishing the updates showing the deficit was evaporating like mist on a summer morning:
Meanwhile to maintain the fiction that liabilities will rise dangerously, our "sensible and prudent" employers are currently assuming that capitalism will fail for the next 40 years, with zero growth of invested assets.
Our pension fund has grown more, in 18 mths, than the extremely well paid, very "sensible" people at USS and UUK claimed it would grow between 2020 and 2068, when justifying claims about "unsustainable" liabilities. Absent Skynet becoming conscious, this is an absurd projection.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
An increase in scheme value which USS said would take 40 years to achieve happened in 18 months, but apparently no conclusions about the direction of travel can be drawn from this
So I guess we are all supposed to continue believing projections which show zero return on assets for decades - an unprecedented failure of entire economic system - as sensible and credible. USS management really providing great value for my money here
USS, after pandemic driven market crash: "This definitely shows we must cut benefits sharply right now"
USS, after (predictable and predicted) post-pandemic market recovery: "We can't draw any conclusions about anything from this"
So I'm on strike today and tomorrow, and probably some of next week too. I do not like this. But I think action is needed given how the job academics do is being steadily eroded. Lower pay, no security at the start of your career, no security after retirement.
If my younger self were finishing their UG degree right now, I am not sure I could recommend becoming an academic to them. Years of low paid PG study, years of insecure post-PhD employment, if you win the fight for a permanent job, its poorly paid for years after.
Long hours meeting impossible demands from a management class who demand everything - world class research, world class teaching, constant paperwork - and offer nothing in return. Real terms pay cuts for a decade, a constant slow burn war against secure pensions
Your regular reminder that academic journal publishing is a truly remarkable exercise in turning academics’ desire for prestige and status (and the career benefits they bring) into huge profits for shareholders.
It is honestly a truly remarkable phenomenon which shows us how powerful the drive for prestige is, and how co-ordination problems can enable an obviously undesirable status quo to persist for literally decades even as everyone involved knows the system makes no sense
One of the first people to figure out there was a massive rent extraction opportunity here? Robert Maxwell en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_…
Another Galaxy Brain move this - once again undermines Johnson's claims (less than a day ago) to have listened and learned and needlessly antagonises restive MPs. Even if this line holds (unlikely), do they really think penalties won't leak, either from the Met or the office?
And cabinet colleagues are now obliged to humiliate themselves yet again on media rounds, offering whatever flimsy defence Team Johnson comes up with for this daft idea.
Johnson's Downing Street considering an aggressive move to protect their short term interests without considering how it plays out even one step down the line? Stop me if you've heard this one before...
This wizard scheme comes to you courtesy of the same people who managed to engineer an entirely avoidable by-election last autmn by trying and failing to abolish the standards committee in order to protect an MP who then resigned
This magic ruse comes via the ten dimensional chess players who tried and failed to unseat the mildly critical chair of the 1922 committee, thus making an enemy of the man charged with the process of confidence votes in the PM
Labour holding a substantial lead as best party on immigration is a very unusual situation - Cons reputation as party of immigration control has given them solid leads on this issue going back to the late 1960s
The current Labour lead likely reflects confluence of two trends: 1. Cons lost their big advantage on imm control during coalition (failed "tens of thousands" pledge), never really regained it. 2. Steady and substantial growith in pro-imm electorate, who want *less* control
Conservative right's preference is to target (1) by going after refugees crossing the channel. Problem with this is twofold. First, it may fail to deliver as a policy, further hurting govt with strongly pro-control voters (as net migration pledge did duing coalition).