I can’t comment directly because I was not in this meeting but it fascinates me that a senior lawyer, a representative of an employer and a union man are chaired by a Proprietor of a CDC scheme. The quotes and photo are all from a Professional Pension article written by Alex Levy

I don’t blame employers , feeling wary, they ought to be at this early stage of development.

While I can understand nervousness, the message from actuarial consultant’s modelling seems to be getting through.

I find it easy to understand that

In a snap poll conducted during the session with 80 respondents, 76% said better outcomes for members was the main attraction of CDC.

I find it harder to understand this

“The most important thing is that trustees, your employer, and your proprietor are aligned that there are trade-offs.”

If value for money to the member is a “better outcome“, what do we mean by value for money in pensions?

If value for money to the member is the pot and the freedom of tying up your money, then I would side with DC but all the evidence is that ordinary people when asked about pensions start with the state pension and consider their workplace pension in the same breath.

If there is time to do a consultation isn’t that time now? If you are one of the 76% employers who accept that outcomes are better with CDC , then shouldn’t be the question to staff be whether they are prepared to take a worse outcome to get freedom from pensions?

I am aware that the Pensions Regulator doesn’t want pension managers telling staff that collective pensions are better or worse,  then can they say that after consultation the staff told them one was best?

I’m not surprised that there’s a feeling that collective pension’s are anything but simple. Royal Mail’s structure is that of a CARE DB scheme and suits people with a lifetime with that employer.

This is not likely to copied by a multi-employer where careers are spread between work for a number of employers. They will better suit a system of pension purchase at prices which are adjusted every month or week or even every day. This is the way to avoid one generation of workers subsidising another.

As I once said at an NAPF Conference  (or so I’m told )

To suppose that we are saving to be wealthy is probably a bit far-fetched for most people. Getting a fair and well-administered pension is enough for most of us (the Pensions Regulator can look after VFM)

As for administrators, I noticed that Aptia were sponsoring a session on the first day of the conference. They seem bullish to be an administrator of CDC.

My favorite phrase from the Professional Pensions article was  from Torsten Bell who apparently found a

 suspiciously keen” group of “CDC enthusiasts” in the market.

Judging by the polls I’ve seen from both the Aptia and this CDC session, there are a large number of us!