THE DISPUTE
The dispute centres on a disagreement between Grangemouth staff and management over changes to the company's pension scheme for both new and existing workers.
Refinery operator Ineos is proposing to retain an invested final-salary scheme for all existing members, paying 1/60th salary for every year worked.
But workers will be forced for the first time to contribute 6% of their salary to the scheme, which was non-contributory for many, and the retirement age will rise to 65. The plan would be phased in over six years.
New starters would be offered a defined contribution pension plan - generally regarded as inferior. The key difference between this and final-salary is that all investment risks and rewards are assumed by each worker and not the employer, making it more difficult for individuals to assess the level of income they will receive from their pension.
Final-salary schemes are seen by many as the holy grail of pension schemes, giving retired workers a set percentage of their final salary as a pension depending on their length of service and usually for an unvarying contribution of a set percentage of income.
Ineos says it is only part-way through a broad consultation on the pension reform, which started in September 2007 and is due to end on June 30.
The company has said no major changes will be implemented for existing employees until 2009 and these will be phased in over time. It says this goes well beyond the statutory 60 days' consultation required by law.
Ineos says the current scheme costs it one-quarter of the salary bill at Grangemouth compared with the industry norm of 16%.
But the union Unite claims the company is not under financial pressure to reduce pension costs, because the scheme has a surplus of £24m.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article