This sounds likely a way of parking a lorry in a car park.
It’s the wrong vehicle in the wrong place at the wrong time. Pension schemes may not be convenient for American parents but they are very important to the pensioners and those who will be pensioners in years to come.
So long as we get American sponsors thinking that fiduciary management teams (dressed as trustees ) can park the UK pension lorry in a car park, we will continue to advertise our pension schemes as a nuisance.
Instead, we should be returning the pensions to the people who drive the cars – the ordinary people. 
We need the people making decisions about the parking of the big trucks that are our occupational pensions, getting the pensions to deliver the goods.
Pensions need to be managed for the people who are beneficiaries, not as a management problem to be minimised by business people.
It would help if more took personal responsibility for their future and started to save, no matter how modestly. Instead we have a society where not in education or work is accepted to have no personal consequences for the personal choice.
We are aware that pension provision are more than one market yet the range of solutions is from very fuzzy support to penalising success.
Rarely is the outcome defined surely this should be begin with the end in mind, and aiming to provide a living wage. Maybe even a minimum wage where there is a lack of productivity per capita.
Mapped: Minimum Wages Across Europe https://share.google/d9s313WeBjdQVv9Wg
I presume those minimum
wage “monthly” figures assume a 40-hour week or similar.
I’m not sure everyone on a minimum
wage (and in the UK they still vary by age, under 18, 18-21, over 21) can count on 40 hours paid every week, John.
It will be interesting to see the examples to being given by the IGC.
Will it for example compare the composition of Trustee Boards of pension schemes who gave away a third of the scheme’s assets to insurance company profits by buying bulk purchase annuities during the negative real gilt yield period against Trustee Boards with minority or no “professional” trustee representation?
That did not prove to be in either the Members or the sponsoring employer’s Interests.