A former employee of Britain’s biggest union has been sacked as a ‘trustee director’ of its pension scheme after alleging discrimination against 350 retired members of its staff who are in their 80s. Dave Marsh says he was informed he had been ‘removed’ from the role by Alex Ryan, the pension secretary of Unite the Union’s pension scheme (UPS) in a telephone conversation.
The union has confirmed Mr Marsh 'was removed from his unpaid position after evidently sharing confidential trustee information'. Mr Marsh has served as a trustee director of the scheme since 2015 and says that since then he has been re-elected every three years by more than 2,300 pensioners - the “largest constituency in the scheme”, he said.
As reported by the LDRS last week, 73–year-old Mr Marsh accused Unite of ‘vindictive and spiteful’ discrimination against the 350 pensioners over the refusal by the UPS to up their payouts. Mr Marsh, from Salford, was a union official based in Manchester from 1977 until he took voluntary redundancy in 2005. But he continued as a trustee director and is also one of the people affected.
READ MORE: The bizarre case of a 'forgotten' Greater Manchester graveyard and Pope Francis
Mr Marsh told the LDRS: “On Friday March 17 at around 3.30pm, I was advised by pension secretary to the UPS, Alex Ryan, that a decision had been made to remove me as a trustee director with immediate effect. This was relayed to me by telephone. “I believe this is because I have exposed systemic discrimination from the heart of Unite the Union - the general secretary and executive council - that they refused to increase 350 80-year-old pensioners a £3 a week increase at no cost to them.”
He said he believes the Unite bosses think ‘if they get rid of me, the problem will go away’, but he added: “This has actually created more resolve than before among the affected 350 pensioners.” Meanwhile, a petition has also been raised on behalf of the affected former employees of Unite, who have an average of 80, two-thirds of whom are women and include many bereaved widows.
The post on the Change.org website by Sheila Furmedge says: “Help stop Unite the Union discriminating against 350 pensioners average age 80 and bereaved widows. Yes, this is unbelievably true.” It appealed for people to sign the petition so it could be sent to the general secretary of the TUC, Paul Nowak, to investigate and ‘put an end to this deliberate act against people who have worked for the union most of their lives’.
“These pensioners rely on a pension increase directly approved by the general secretary [of Unite] and executive council, but shamefully they have refused such an increase, even though the pension scheme has a £60m surplus,” it continued. “Any increase would cost the union not a penny because it would come from the pension funds.
“In February, the general secretary refused a £3 per week increase of which two-thirds of the 350 are female. It's shameful and heartbreaking, so please sign the petition and send it to all your contacts. Who would have thought the biggest union in the UK can act in such a vindictive and spiteful manner against former trade unionists?"
Documents compiled by the actuary running the pension scheme and seen by the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) appear to confirm the pension fund would be unaffected by an increase.
Hilary Salt, of the Salford company First Actuarial, wrote: “The latest actuarial funding update at September 30 2021 and the more recent funding tracker show that the scheme is now in surplus…this surplus is greater than the actuarial cost. I would advise that if the trustee decided it would pay a discretionary increase at this level, that [the scheme] would not need to seek additional contributions from the union.”
The union is an amalgamation of several different unions which came together under one umbrella in 2013 as Unite along with their respective pension schemes. Mr Marsh has said that the way the pension scheme is constituted, increases for former members of the former electricians and engineering unions pre-1997 are at the discretion of the general secretary of Unite and the executive council.
The elderly 350 pensioners have received rises of 2.5 per cent in 2018 and 2019, but a request for a further rise now in the midst of the cost of living crisis, has been turned down by Unite. Other documents seen by the LDRS show that Unite members who are part of the scheme post-1997 have received regular annual increases, amounting in one case to 193pc since 2001. Over the same time span, the affected 350 have received just 5pc.
Mr Marsh also says that there are 'other related issues' of which the government's Pensions Regulator should be advised. He says that under the recent government proposal 'Guarantee Minimum Payment Rectification' needed to be introduced, meaning all pensioners needed to be advised of their correct pension.
"No problem," said Mr Marsh. "Except a number of the UPS trustees actively campaigned that this is members' money and any outstanding payments should be secured. This money would then go onto members who are on strike. This resulted in not one, but a number of members receiving demands in excess of £12,000 when they receive just over £400 per month pension.
"This made one 80-year-old pensioner very ill and they needed medical treatment. Eventually, after 16 months, the attempt to reclaim the money was abandoned. Another example for the Pensions Regulator to look at is that when I queried why the union was not increasing the pension for the 350, I was told it was because of the Ukrainian War."
Responding, a Unite spokesperson said: "Unite stands by its previous statement on this matter and will not comment on specific allegations that have been made about confidential discussions between trustee directors of the UPS. There is no discrimination from the union and all pension scheme members are being paid the benefits they are entitled to under the scheme rules. The union and the trustee directors of the UPS take into account the interests of all members when making decisions.
“The individual was removed from his unpaid position after evidently sharing confidential trustee information. Confidence has been breached so all the other trustee directors felt they could no longer conduct business as usual and unanimously decided to remove the individual in the interests of all scheme members. This is within their legal power.
“The UPS is a separate legal entity to Unite the union and is governed by specific legislation with operations overseen by the Pensions Regulator. The scheme prides itself on good governance. Unite emphasises that the issue of discretionary pension increases for some scheme members to which there is no legal entitlement has already been to the Pension Ombudsman.
"The Pension Ombudsman, who is in possession of all the facts, determined that the complaint would not be upheld against the union or the trustees. The UPS is made up of a number of legacy union pension schemes in which different benefits are both built up and paid. These differences include the treatment of increases to pensions-in-payment, the age that an individual can retire or the level at which benefits are accrued over the time of being of scheme member. This has the effect of members of the UPS not receiving identical benefits.
“Active members have recently been asked to pay increased contributions to receive the benefits as outlined in the current trust deed and rules.Unite and the trustee directors of the scheme review the situation of those affected members referred to on a regular basis and, after following due process, have decided not to pay a discretionary increase at the current time. The union and the trustees will continue to review this situation on an ongoing basis.”
READ NEXT:
Andy Burnham gets millions in budget... but local councils are in limbo
Why Andy Burnham was in the US on one of the biggest days for Greater Manchester
London learns from Manchester as Parliament restoration team visits town hall
New Lidl by 'dangerous' junction knocked back but three other controversial plans approved
The groundbreaking deal that will change Greater Manchester forever
