HEINEKEN and the employees’ representative organizations made a preliminary choice for the solidary contract as the preferred scheme for the new pension system. Together with the Heineken Pensioenfonds, social partners aim for a transition to the new system per 1 January 2025.
The participant survey carried out by the Heineken Pensioenfonds shows that the (former) employees of HEINEKEN (response rate: 14.2%) find it important to have a stable pension and to share the windfalls and setbacks amongst each other. A majority prefers to leave investment choices to professionals. The survey results are not only but also taken into consideration when further designing the future pension scheme.
The new pension system will facilitate premium pension plans with a flat contribution rate. Only two types of so-called defined contribution schemes are allowed, one being the solidary contribution scheme. The pension benefit itself is converted into a capital accrual and the return moves in line with the financial investment results of the pension fund. If things go well financially, the pension is increased with the achieved results. If the economy deteriorates and the return is negative, the pension will be lower.
Earlier, the Heineken Pensioenfonds has shared the survey results here, from which the following has been concluded: The Heineken Pensioenfonds participants’ survey revealed the desire to arrange a pension together. This is partly due to the preference to set money aside in a shared reserve pot (buffer) during good economic times. This buffer is limited, but can protect the pension to a certain extent during bad economic times. It is also widely regarded as desirable to provide everyone with the same income the same pension. Whether someone builds up a pension in good or bad economic times should not matter. Solidarity is considered to be more important than making own investment choices by a majority of the participants.
Making own choices about (investment) risks is also considered important; with notable differences in preferences amongst the younger participants and pensioners. However, the same group who responded favorably towards taking investment risks, considers the implementation of a collective (solidary) scheme more important. Considered a phenomenon often observed is that a majority of people opt for the default investment option even when choices are offered. All things considered, stability and mutual solidarity is considered more important than flexibility for own investment choices in the new system that is yet to be designed.
