The Grangemouth oil refinery strike is now national news, and no longer a purely Scottish affair. Despite calls for people to not panic, it’s been hard to miss the queues at petrol stations, and many of them - here in Glasgow - seem to be struggling to keep up with demand. The public don’t seem to be listening, and don’t seem to believe assurances about supply. There is a whiff of panic in the air.
As Frances and I don’t really need the car at all, we’re not that bothered. Other than a trip to Edinburgh this weekend I need to make by car (the trains are appalling on Sunday), I work largely from home (or use public transport), and Frances gets the train to work. We can, and do, walk to the local shop. Living in London for all those years means a 10 minute walk to the shops isn’t the terrifying prospect for us that it seems to be for so many others who probably should know better. From comments when Frances started her new job about “will you be driving to work”, it seems it’s the default presumption up here, and speaks volumes of the distance we need to go up here to get people out of their cars.
But I digress. I was travelling over in Edinburgh yesterday, and saw the oil refinery from the train. It’s one of many impressive sites on the railway between Edinburgh and Glasgow, as the track is, I think, on a ridge, so there are some stunning views (natural and man-made) to the north towards Sterling and Perth, and across the Forth estuary. Presuming it’s not raining heavily of course.
This dispute strikes me as very unnecessary too. From what I gather (see here) it’s essentially regarding two points: The final salary pension scheme is to be closed to new employees, and there’s some change in how contributions are to be made, including employee contributions.
It’s the first point that puzzles me most, and talking to Frances last night, we both wondered who - in this day and age - is attracted by a final salary pension scheme? Most people really don’t stay in the same job for many years, so a final salary scheme is really not that attractive as it’s far less portable, and doesn’t necessarily grow in an attractive way. Frances had such a scheme when she was at Strathclyde university, and it it’s proved a mistake to have got involved in for such a short time. It also seemed to be dependent on people joining the scheme to support it, so the advice she received wasn’t very balanced.
Money purchase pension schemes, preferably ones that the recipient controls (ie. chosing where funds are invested), are often portrayed as undesirable by unions, but I suspect this is more to do with a lack of financial knowledge than anything else. Understanding financial products - equities, varying risk, fixed income, derivative products - may sound complicated, but the essence isn’t that difficult. There are risk guidelines, and simplified products of all sorts if it does prove difficult, and couldn’t/shouldn’t unions be helping their members with such financial matters? Having a pension statement that says “you have this much” is, to me, far preferable than some vague assurance from an employer I will get a pension based on my salary in 30 years time(!!). It’s also much more portable for the shifting job patterns we are all experiencing.
Maybe I’m just a naive office worker with a long list of companies I’ve worked for (even before I was freelancing). An oil refinery worker doesn’t necessarily have the same flexibility and job options that I, and others in similar professions, do. But I’m not really so convinced that is the case for people leaving school or joining the industry now, so is the union just playing this issue up? The contribution issue is more difficult, but there’s so little information available about what’s being asked (I find it hard to believe that everybody has to contribute if they’ve had a pension in place to date). Contributing is not a bad thing anyway - it’s your future after all: We don’t save enough as a nation anyway. The pension fund valuation issue seems to have been dropped, but wonder if that might be something to do with it. The costs of the strike seem to outweigh the valuation figure being disputed.
The issues of the strike aside, the affects are proving quite considerable. I can’t help but wonder if the union and the refinery company have boxed themselves into a corner they didn’t expect to find themselves in. The union had thought the threat of closure would be enough, but expected the employer to blink. It hasn’t, and thought the union would back down.
Either way, the scare mongering in the press, and the rush on petrol (despite assurances of plenty of supply) are leading to queues and shortages, which further reinforces the sense of panic. The result is that those of us living in Scotland are being held to ransom over a strangely outdated dispute regarding final salary pensions by a few thousand employees.
I’m certainly glad I don’t need to use a car very much. Whilst I certainly don’t have much sympathy with the strikers, goodness knows how people who need their car must feel…
