Agreements on new pension plan are known

The transition plan not only contains the agreements on the new pension plan, but also indicates how the accrued pensions will be dealt with and how the assets of the Pension Fund should be distributed in the opinion of the social partners. In the transition plan, the social partners also explain which calculations and considerations underlie the choices they make. The transition plan answers the following questions, among others: What will happen to the accrued pensions? How will the existing buffers be distributed? What are the effects of the transition for the retirement and survivors' pensions for the various participant groups? And why is the transition to the new pension scheme balanced?

Agreements have also been laid down on compensating certain groups of active members for the disadvantage they would suffer if they switched to the new pension scheme without compensation. This is due to the fact that the new pension scheme has a different premium system.

 

We now have to review the finalised transition plan to determine whether the choices made by the social partners can in fact be carried out. In addition to this, we also assess matters such as: can the ambition be achieved (are the contributions agreed between employers and unions enough to realise the ambition?), is it comprehensible (will members understand the pension plan?) and is it balanced (do the agreements work out ‘balanced’ for the participants of the Fund?)? 

On the issue of balance: by law, the Pension Fund’s decisions are required to be ‘balanced’. The law does not explain what that means precisely; however, it is clear that various decisions are possible, which could all be balanced. At the very least, though, we need to carefully map out the implications of each of our decisions for each of the separate groups of members and seperate age groups, and weigh the various pros and cons. This means that the Board will review the social partners’ decisions against the criterion of ‘balance’. In practice, we already shared a considerable amount of information with the social partners while the preparations were underway, to make sure that they knew when making their decisions how those decisions would affect our members. 

Do you want to know exactly how this decision-making process works? You can read more about it in this article.

A pension is an employment benefit. This means that designing the new pension plan is principally a task for the social partners. However, the decisions that those social partners make also affect the pension beneficiaries and non-contributory policyholders, for example what to do with the pensions that they have accrued and what type of contract is chosen. Although they do not have a say in the negotiations, their interests must be included in the arrangements between the social partners: the law dictates that the switch to the new pension plan must be ‘balanced’ for all our members. 

The law stipulates that the voice of the pension beneficiaries is included in the decision-making process of the social partners via the statutory ‘right to be heard’ of a pensioners’ association that represents a substantial part of the pensioners. The Federatie van Philips Verenigingen van Gepensioneerden (FPVG, the federation of associations of Philips retirees) meets this condition at the Philips company. The FPVG was involved in the decision-making process at Philips* and gave an opinion on behalf of the pension recipients on the agreements in the (draft) transition plan. This assessment has been included in the transition plan and the social partners provided feedback on what has been done with the input from the FPVG. This input has led to adjustments to the transition plan on a number of points.

* The employers Signify, Versuni and Philips Pensioenfonds have not had separate consultations with the FPVG in the context of the right to be heard. It is also questionable whether this was necessary, because it is far from certain that the FPVG is also a pensioners' association that meets the aforementioned statutory requirement for the employers Signify, Versuni and Philips Pensioenfonds and whether the FPVG therefore also has a statutory right to be heard for these employers. Whatever the case, the FPVG has not invoked the statutory right to be heard for these other employers. Furthermore, these other employers assume that the interests of the pension recipients of these employers have been indirectly taken into account via the FPVG's right to be heard with Philips. After all, they are all pension beneficiaries of Philips Pensioenfonds and the agreements in the transition plans of Signify, Versuni and Philips Pensioenfonds are identical to those in Philips' transition plan on all points relevant to pension recipients.

The solidarity-based contribution plan is a form of pension designed by the legislature to make pensions more personal, with every member having their personal pension capital, combined with a collective financial reserve to offer protection against financial setbacks: the solidarity reserve. Precisely what impact this has on your personal pension situation will be explained shortly before we make the switch to the new pension plan, in the autumn of 2026. Before then, we will of course share more information about how things will change financially in general terms under the new pension plan. 

This can be done, for example, by mapping out the consequences of the transition to the new pension pan for certain participant groups, based on a certain funding ratio of the Fund at the time of transition. We always include a disclaimer for the level of the funding ratio at the time of transition. An example of a publication in which we discuss the financial consequences of the transition to the new pension plan in general terms is the article ‘Did you know’ in our December 2024 edition of our magazine Generaties. 

You can always ask us your questions about the new pension scheme. Here you will find the contact details of our Service Desk.