With this newsletter we would like to tell you a little more about the state of affairs with regard to the negotiations with KLM about the new pension scheme. We would also like to reflect on the discussion that has arisen about the IPB scheme.
Pension
As indicated earlier, we have been in talks with KLM about a new pension scheme for a long time. An important employment condition. The reason for these discussions is the legal changes in the context of the Future Pensions Act (WTP).
We have now reached an agreement with KLM. All agreements are laid down in a so-called ‘transition plan’. This mainly concerns the characteristics of the scheme, the survivor’s pension, the amount of the premium, compensation agreements and the ‘entry’ of rights that have already been accrued.
In the coming weeks you will receive more information about this and you will be given the opportunity to give your opinion on the transition plan.Are you interested in this topic and want to know more? Then also take a look at the website https://www.pensioenduidelijkheid.nl/. Here you will find general information about the WTP. This website is an initiative of trade unions, employers’ organisations, pension administrators and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment.
IPB
Recently, there has been – not for the first time – discussion about the IPB scheme. The reason for this is the petition that was started – without any mutual coordination between trade unions. In the meantime, this subject has also made it to the press. The Union’s position is as follows. We have been drawing attention to this subject for some time now. This was also the case with the last collective labor agreement negotiations. Our proposal was as follows:
IPB 84% of our members who participated in the survey indicate that they sometimes or often (almost 1 in 3) make use of the IPB scheme. Only 1 in 4 of the members is satisfied with the IPB scheme. That is a painfully clear, but not unexpected outcome. Most striking is the strong criticism of the difference in allocation (also between the various blood groups), availability, execution and prices. Most of our members therefore indicate that the IPB scheme should be ‘fairer and more attractive’ and should also be included in the collective labor agreement. Especially in a difficult labor market, IPB could and should be an attractive and distinctive employment condition. Not only for existing employees (retention), but also for new employees (recruitment). It is not without reason that our members have named IPB as an important theme in the survey. We therefore propose to thoroughly review (and improve) the current IPB regulation and to include it in the collective labor agreement (is now formally not the case, but in other areas HAS been discussed in connection with the collective labor agreement consultation)
At the end of the negotiations, we unfortunately had to conclude the following:
“We really think it is a ‘missed opportunity’ that KLM does not dare to take up the challenge of really changing the IPB scheme (although not a collective labor agreement subject).”
It is therefore no surprise that many of our members (employees) are not satisfied with the current IPB scheme and has been known for a long time. KLM knows this and we really don’t need a petition for that. It would have been better if KLM and all the unions had really supported our proposal (just a few months ago) during the last negotiations. Also the union that has now started the petition. Then the whole ‘circus’ that has now arisen would not have been necessary. As was to be expected, this subject has now also reached the press. And with that, KLM and its employees are – not for the first time – in the news again. As far as we are concerned, that would not have been necessary.
We therefore also believe that the IPB regulation should be thoroughly revised. There can be no misunderstanding about that. Whether this is during or after the collective labor agreement negotiations, we don’t care. We know it’s a tricky subject, but that’s no reason not to at least give it a try.
KLM has now announced that the only solution is to completely redesign the scheme. We think this is a good plan. That is why we will urge KLM and fellow trade unions to ‘pick up this gauntlet’. We are certainly prepared to do so. Sincerely,Huug Brinkers and Wicher van de Hoef
Advocates
