back
Trustee
Responsibilities
by
Dr. Ros Altmann
(All
material on this page is subject to copyright and must not be reproduced
without the author's permission.)
BRAVE
NEW WORLD FOR TRUSTEES
There
have been significant recent changes which will have profound implications
for pension fund trustees. Since the changes have happened so quickly,
it may be that many have not yet realised how much their world has
changed. There is an urgent need for all trustees to carefully assess
how they are operating and ensure that they are not laying themselves
open to possible legal action from members.
There
are several key areas to consider. In terms of scheme governance,
whether defined benefit or defined contribution, the trustee Board’s
focus should be to ensure members achieve good pensions. The Myners
Review and measures in the current Pensions Bill entail a major
move towards ‘professionalisation’ of the trustee’s
role. There is also an increased emphasis on the rights and needs
of members, which applies to trustees of both defined benefit and
defined contribution schemes. The requirements will differ, depending
on which type of scheme is involved.
For defined
benefit schemes, the trustees’ prime aim should be to ensure
they can pay the promised pensions. Their role is not to maximise
investment returns with minimum risk, nor to ensure that managers
outperform a particular market or peer group benchmark, nor to try
and minimise the employer’s contribution, but it is to match
or outperform the scheme’s liabilities. The Pensions Bill
has strengthened members’ rights significantly and the trustees’
role has become much harder, requiring closer focus on scheme funding
levels. Perhaps the level of underfunding (on a buyout basis, as
well as other measures) needs to be monitored on an annual basis
– not triennially, aiming to achieve closer matching over
time. In the past, trustees were concerned about ‘who owns
the surplus’, but it is now important to understand ‘who
owns the deficit’. Employers could wind up the scheme and
leave much of the deficit with the members. Since June 11th 2003,
this is no longer easily done and trustees need to negotiate funding
levels more firmly with the employer to better match the liabilities.
Trustees will need to document details of meetings with the employer
and take written professional advice, in order to be able to prove
that the funding levels were appropriately negotiated. Trustees
also need to consider the strength of the employer covenant and
any corporate changes. All credit to WH Smith trustees, who have
shone a light down the path for other trustees to follow. .
For defined
contribution schemes, the aim is still to deliver good pensions,
but of course, individuals are bearing all the investment, inflation
and longevity risk. Perhaps trustees need to facilitate help for
members to deal with these risk, for example by providing access
to good quality information and possibly advice, to help members
understand and plan for their pensions. In addition, I would argue
that trustees have not yet focussed sufficiently on providing really
good investment options and default options for defined contribution
schemes. For members who wish to choose, a good range of investment
funds should be available, covering all asset classes. For those
who do not want to choose, better-designed default options are required,
not just balanced funds or lifestyling. For example, most members’
idea of risk is ‘not losing money’. A capital protected
product would come closer to providing this type of ‘low risk’
option than either with-profits or even bond funds.
Apart
from investment returns (net of fees) there are two other vital
elements to providing good defined contribution pensions. Firstly,
the level of contributions. Trustees could consider helping members
understand financial planning to decide appropriate contribution
levels. Secondly, the annuity purchase is critical. Trustees may
not have devoted sufficient attention to this. Many members may
be eligible for enhanced rates and impaired life products and, if
trustees do not offer this option, I believe they may be open to
action from members who receive the wrong annuity, but can never
change it.
As regards
best practice, it is vital that any conflicts of interest on the
Trustee board are recognised and dealt with and trustees should
perhaps assess their Board’s skill levels and arrange to fill
in any gaps with appropriate training or recruitment. Sound decision-making
processes and structures are important – for administration,
communication and investment – with the aim of achieving well-managed
implementation of those decisions. Monitoring and documentation
of reasons for and results of these decisions would help to assess
trustees’ own performance. Of course, the performance of their
advisers also needs to be assessed – against pre-set criteria
for each scheme. One area would be to insist that recommendations
from investment or actuarial advisers are made in plain English–
with clarity of assumptions and recommendations that ordinary mortals
can understand!
In
summary, the trustees’ world has changed and their job has
become much more difficult. Tougher and braver negotiations with
employers and improved member communication may be essential to
avoid possible litigation. Trustees need to bear in mind always
that their role is to help members receive good pensions and minimise
any conflicts of interest, or lack of skills, which will interfere
with this goal.
back
|