What is the University Pension Plan (UPP)?

• The UPP is a pension plan for faculty and staff at the University of Toronto, Queen’s University, the University of Guelph, and Trent University as well as employees of the Association of Professors of the University of Ottawa (APUO) and the Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations. It was created as a multi-employer, jointly sponsored pension plan involving pooled assets among the participating institutions and a 50-50 partnership between the participating employers and employees when it comes to both funding and governance.
• The plan was officially launched in 2021 but originated in discussions about a multi-employer pension plan in Ontario’s higher education sector dating back more than a decade.
• Membership in the plan stands to grow in the next few years. A number of Ontario universities and their respective faculty associations are in active discussions about whether to join the UPP. As the plan expands in membership (and therefore in the financial contributions made to it), questions of ethical and sustainable investment will become even more important. 

Why are UTFA members calling on the UPP to divest?

• We understand the rights and obligations UTFA has as a permanent member of the Joint Sponsor Committee; we are one of the only employee sponsors with that right. 
• A primary feature of the UPP is that it is overseen by both employer- and employee-sponsored representatives. This means that UTFA members, through our appointed representative on the Joint Sponsor Committee and our appointed representative on the Board of Trustees, have an important right to help determine where our pension dollars are invested. 
• With those rights come important obligations to ensure that the UPP is consistent in how it defines and implements its Responsible Investment Policy and its Investment Exclusion Policy. As the motion itself notes, the UPP has stated its commitment “to promote the health of capital markets and the financial, social, and environmental systems on which capital markets rely”; we are calling on the UPP to be consistent in applying that commitment.
• UPP voluntarily excluded all direct and indirect investments in entities domiciled in Russia within three weeks of that country’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, stating that “breaches of international law have no place in UPP’s portfolio”; we are calling on the UPP to be consistent in applying this commitment.

Shouldn’t our pension investment decisions be divorced from politics?

• Our pension funds are invested on our behalf. We have a responsibility and an opportunity to ensure they are invested ethically, which is actually consistent with existing UPP governance policies. For example, UPP’s Responsible Investment Policy affirms “UPP’s commitments … to incorporating environmental, social, and corporate governance (“ESG”) considerations in investment management and stewardship activities”. And UPP’s Investment Exclusion Policy “outlines how UPP seeks to mitigate financial and reputational risks related to environmental, social and governance (‘ESG’) issues, such as UPP’s investments contributing to or being directly linked to severe adverse social or environmental impacts.” 
• UPP’s Investment Exclusion Policy also affirms UPP’s “duty as stewards of members’ capital to consider and manage material ESG risks and opportunities, to be active asset owners, and to take into account stakeholder interests and investment impacts when conducting our investment management activities.” 
• UTFA is a major stakeholder. It holds a permanent seat on the UPP Employee Sponsor Committee which gives us a particular opportunity and obligation to ensure UPP funds are ethically invested.

Would passing the divestment motion compromise the performance of the pension plan?

• No. As UPP’s Responsible Investment Policy notes, research and evidence show that responsible investing (“RI”), namely investing “incorporating environmental, social, and corporate governance (“ESG”) considerations in investment management and stewardship activities supports risk management and value creation and helps UPP provide stable retirement benefits at a reasonable cost for members, now and in the future.” Therefore, it is possible to maintain a well-performing pension plan that takes seriously the plan’s own commitment to responsible investing.  
• Our motion (and similar motions passed by other UPP employee groups) expresses the wishes of our members. It sends a signal to the other plan members, and to the UPP Sponsor Committee, that this is an issue that requires attention and deliberation, including as informed by input from the independent UPP Board of Trustees. 
• To be clear, as UTFA members, we can only recommend divestment. Any decision on whether, when, and how to divest can only be made by the UPP Joint Sponsor Committee, who would be required to ensure that such decisions do not compromise the plan’s performance. 

Why does the motion call for a general membership meeting?

• Section 10.2 of UTFA’s Constitution stipulates that:  “The President shall call other general meetings of the Association (i) as directed by the Annual General Meeting, (ii) as directed by the Council, (iii) as directed by the Executive Committee or (iv) at the written request to the President of fifty regular members of the Association, the request to be accompanied by the proposed agenda of the meeting.”
• The motion invokes Section 10.2 and is signed by 50 regular members of the Association. As per this section, the letter sent to President Zorić proposed an agenda, including presentation of the motion and opportunity to discuss it and an in-person vote on it. The letter proposed a specific date, possible locations on the St. George campus, as well as a request for child care and ASL-English interpretation for those UTFA members who may need such accommodations.
• Typically, there is only one meeting per year open to all UTFA members, the Annual General Meeting (AGMs); this year’s AGM is currently scheduled for April 10. The agendas for AGMs are understandably very full. Consequently, UTFA members involved in this campaign decided an additional general membership meeting would allow enough time for open, democratic discussion about this important motion and invoked Section 10.2 of UTFA’s Constitution to ensure the meeting take place.

What happens after UTFA members pass a UPP divestment motion?

• Our motion is a first step. While it doesn’t bind the UPP, it sends a signal to the other plan members, to the UPP Sponsor Committee, and the independent UPP Board of Trustees that this is an issue that requires attention and deliberation. Ultimately, it will be up to the relevant UPP organs to decide whether, when, and how to divest.

Does the UTFA members’ motion for UPP divestment single out Israel?

• No. The motion makes explicit reference to other international conflicts, as well as other examples of divestment efforts related to other questions of ethics and sustainability. The motion calls on the UPP to be consistent in the framing and application of its existing Responsible Investment Policy and Investment Exclusion Policy.
• The motion includes important details about orders and opinions of the International Court of Justice, as well as resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly so as to demonstrate a call for divestment should also apply to the manufacturing and distribution of weapons that might be used by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and/or entities involved in Israel’s illegal occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The motion is premised on extending existing UPP policy, not singling out any particular actor. 

Why do we need a divestment motion now that there is a ceasefire?

• Israel’s occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory is ongoing, irrespective of the status of the current war/genocide in Gaza. As such, the rationale behind the motion is still relevant. 

Why don’t the pledges have names attached to them? Why is everyone anonymous?

• Recent history at the University of Toronto and other universities has shown that there is sometimes a penalty for taking a public anti-war, anti-apartheid or anti-occupation position. Doxxing is also a risk. These penalties are unequally distributed, falling mostly on Indigenous colleagues, colleagues of colour, junior and precarious colleagues. Given the uneven risks to our community members, the UPP Divest campaign has decided that all people who pledge to support the UTFA motion will remain anonymous, in solidarity with our most vulnerable members. However, showing the titles and constituencies conveys the broad base of support we have across the university.