“Staff will no longer meekly accept pension cuts”, warned Brendan Barber, TUC General Secretary, at the National Association of Pension Funds conference today.

“Once pensions were seen as dull by unions – suitable only for those with an excessive interest in rainwear and the need to get a life.

Now pensions have shot up our agenda. This is not because they have suddenly become of interest to activists and union leaders, but because they are a top concern for people at work.

They feel let down, betrayed and angry at the retreat from good pensions provision by too many employers.

The three-way partnership that should exist between individual, employer and state to provide security in retirement is on the retreat. Both the major parties want to reduce the state’s role, cutting the proportion of retirement income paid by government from one half to one third.

This government has done much to help the poorest pensioners, but no party will give a clear commitment to upgrade the state pension each year in line with earnings so that everyone can use it as a foundation to build further provision. I do not knock the pension credits, but many are not claiming what is theirs by right despite real efforts to reach them.

Employers have retreated from their part of the bargain. Though let me say straight away that I know that there are those – and many will be represented here – who have not followed the fashion and still understand the importance of a pensions promise to staff. Yet these are the exception.

The NAPF’s own research found that 1 in 4 final salary schemes closed in 2003 alone. We estimate that amongst the UK’s biggest employers probably half of those with salary related schemes have closed them to new entrants. Amongst smaller firms the rate of closure is even higher.

Equally clear is the inadequate level of contributions going into the money purchase plans that are appearing. According to the Government Actuary’s Department the average combined employer and employee contribution to such a scheme is less than 8% – half of what most would argue is necessary to fund a decent retirement income.

The damage to their reputations that firms risk is huge. How many times do we hear companies repeat the words ‘people are our greatest asset’, yet often the very same companies are stripping away retirement security for their employees. What kind of message does that send out to both current and future employees about the attitude of the company to its staff?

I think we can find an answer. Some firms now make their pension scheme a big part of job adverts. So firms offering money purchase schemes with poor contribution levels may end up having to increase salaries to aid recruitment. What was saved in pension expenditure simply moves to another part of the payroll, with all the extra costs of being seen as a bad employer.

I suspect many companies were sold the idea that the short sharp shock of switching to a DC scheme with low contributions was a ‘magic bullet’ solution to their pension problems, and would please the city short-termists into the bargain.

Yet those employers that retain a commitment to decent pension provision, and are open and honest in their dealings with staff will find it easier to attract the right people, and to keep them. They will surely be the more successful businesses in the long run.

But I warn today that staff will no longer meekly accept a cut in their pension rights. They understand that the pension is part of their pay packet. Of course unions will always be willing to negotiate to save a pension scheme. We understand there can be difficulties, and throughout the country staff have agreed to make sacrifices to save a good pension scheme with genuine problems.

But when there is no will by the employer to save a scheme then unions are prepared to take action. We have already seen industrial action. More is currently threatened. And if more attempts to cut pensions are made, then the inevitable result will be further industrial action.

And this will be intensified if boardroom double standards continue. Too often these days we see companies piling huge amounts into the pensions of directors whilst claiming that pensions for staff are too expensive. And we have seen some frankly despicable examples of companies shutting salary related schemes for staff but keeping them in the board room, and cases of supposedly closed schemes admitting new directors.

This irresponsible action by a small number of firms is doing great damage to the public perception of British business. Given the NAPF’s role in corporate governance in addition to pension provision I hope this is an area where you can join us in urging companies to end this hypocrisy.

And it is not just that many employers have closed good schemes, and replaced them with lower quality schemes. Many of the large well established employers have reduced their workforce. They have outsourced service functions. Gone are the days when the cleaner and the canteen staff should share in the pension where they worked, as they are more likely to work for a service company or through an agency today. Low paid women workers have been the main losers from this.

Newer companies are less likely to have established quality pensions. The result is that growing sections of the workforce do not have anything like the pension savings they will need for even a modestly decent retirement. The burden is falling on the individual to make their own arrangements.

Start young we tell them. But how can young people burdened with student debt, the astronomic cost of property and wanting to start a family really put aside the 15 per cent of their income the experts advise?

This is why we talk of a growing pensions crisis. The workers who have lost their pensions when their employer has gone bust are only the most visible. Compensation for staff from ASW, UEF, Mayflower, Dexion and Kalamazoo is in the political balance even as we speak, and I know that many here today will join with me in calling on the government to give them compensation.

Just because it has crept up on us, and gradually gets worse day by day does not stop it being a crisis. This is why the TUC has called a national march and rally on June 19th.

We want it to be a national wake up call – a message to the politicians that radical action is needed, and that tinkering will not do.

I would like to invite NAPF members to join us there. It may not be quite your style, but we have a common interest in securing a new pensions settlement in this country. It would be a real symbol of the partnership that we believe must lie at the heart of pensions policy

At their best occupational pensions schemes have been an example of partnership in practice. They are a shared responsibility, with both employer and employee playing their part.

Let me conclude by saying we want pensions if not to be boring again, certainly to be a lot less interesting. But that is not going to happen unless we all face up to the hard questions we need to answer and the difficult decisions that we must all make.

The Pensions Commission is clearly taking its task seriously, although I worry that its timescale will delay everything until after an election. But we are not sitting back and waiting for its report. Nor should you.

The battle must be on for a new pensions partnership that can give everyone a chance of a secure retirement. Let’s get to it.”