Achmea: Result of member consultation
January 18 2022
The votes have been counted. The good news is that almost 60% of the voting members actually voted. Experience shows that such a response is high. This gives us a more than representative result.
The result of the vote is as follows:
- 46,5% voted in favor of the final offer.
- 49,8% voted against the final offer.
- 3,7% abstained from voting.
The conclusion is that there are currently no majority is among our members who agree with Achmea's final offer.
Members of FNV and CNV have (with narrow majorities) agreed. This makes the collective labor agreement a fact. Because of the special result, Achmea has indicated that it is prepared to jointly analyze the result of the vote and the comments made during this month. It will be discussed what this means and to what extent this can be taken into account, for example in the further elaboration of the various agreements.
De Unie will naturally accept this invitation.
What will our approach be?
For De Unie this result is no surprise. It was clear in advance that the results of the employee survey in 2021 and Achmea's final offer are not 'in balance' with each other. This mainly concerns the wage agreement in the second year, the 4×9 and the austerity (lower accrual) of the pensions.
Many members are particularly critical of the wage agreement in the second year of the collective labor agreement. The structural increase of 1%, in combination with a one-off increase of EUR 750 gross, is considered insufficient. And in the face of rising inflation, such a reaction is predictable and understandable. That is why we would like to ask Achmea to convert the one-off increase of EUR 750 gross into a percentage and structural increase. This would not cost very much extra for the term of the new collective labor agreement, but in the longer term it would be a substantial improvement for employees (in terms of income and pension).
- 4 × 9
There is a critical response to the earlier decision not to be able to work 4×9 anymore. We would therefore like to ask Achmea to reconsider this. We think that the arguments of the time should be reassessed. This is partly because there is much more – and will be working from home in the future. The shortage in the labor market also plays a part in this.
The cost limitation of the pension scheme to a premium level of 40% (and the resulting lower pension accrual of approximately 1,6%) can also count on a lot of criticism. In the run-up to the New Pension Contract, the fiscal maximums (including allowances and transition costs) will be limited to a maximum of 38% in the near future. The 'first step' now being taken in reducing costs is almost the complete step. Many members/employees find this step too big. That is why we ask Achmea to reconsider with us whether we can still improve the pension accrual slightly, for example by:- a higher maximum premium;
– date for 'locking in' the interest rate cannot be changed to the end of September 2021
– once again jointly request the board of the Stichting Pensioenfonds Achmea to (temporarily) agree to a (slightly) lower premium coverage ratio than 100%. With regard to the latter, we have already discussed the latter with the board of SPA. Although the fund is 'healthy' in a financial sense, the regulator (DNB) also allows such a solution and the board of SPA recognizes that premium coverage ratios below 100% also occur at other funds, the position has always been taken in this regard. feel little in favor of the framework of a 'balanced representation of interests'. Bonden and Achmea do not share this view. That is why we have always regretted the decision. However, we hope that now that employees (and therefore the active participants) have spoken out, this may lead to new insights for the board of SPA.
Does your opinion really count?
The conclusion is that there is now a formal collective labor agreement and that Achmea still offers room for 'a discussion'. And although a conversation does not guarantee that the final offer will be adjusted, we still hope that this conversation will yield something. After all, Achmea has always taken the position that the input and opinion of employees is important. It is not for nothing that at the start of the collective labor agreement process it was decided to JOINTLY give the employees input in the survey and to ask questions about what they consider important. Their reaction at the end of the trajectory is also clear. There is not much support for Achmea's final offer – and with it the new collective labor agreement. Whether the members have just - or just haven't agreed.
As far as we're concerned, anyone who says 'A' should also say 'B'. That is why we count on a constructive conversation. And who knows, the outcome of the conversation will lead to more support among our members, so that there is also a signature under this collective labor agreement De Unie can stand. That is ultimately our aim. For your sake!
We will of course keep you informed of the sequel.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us by email email@example.com.