Skip to main content

To: The USS trustee board

USS: Revisit your decisions on Jane Hutton's dismissal

Make public the full report into Jane Hutton's dismissal from the USS board and the legal costs of the prior investigation

Why is this important?

In October 2019, the Universities Superannuation Scheme announced that they had dismissed the UCU-nominated trustee-director and whistleblower Jane Hutton following an investigation into her conduct by an external legal firm. The 250-page report on which the decision was based was kept highly confidential, to the extent that not even Jane herself was allowed a copy. The costs of the investigation have not been declared but a sharp increase in legal fees in the past year shows it could be in the region of £1,500,000. Many suspect her dismissal to be unfounded.

In the year to October 2020, there have been significant changes to the board of directors at USS, including a change of the chair, two new UCU trustee-directors and one new UUK trustee-director. It is time for the board to revisit the decision-making that surrounded Jane's dismissal.

As a first step I will launch on behalf of the signatories of this petition a complaint with USS using their internal dispute resolution procedure as follows:


I, along with those signatories of the petition "USS: Revisit your decisions on Jane Hutton's dismissal", do not believe the decisions taken by the USS trustee board to keep confidential

a) the report into the dismissal of Jane Hutton, and
b) the legal costs associated with the prior investigation

to be consistent with the fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the scheme and its members. A satisfactory resolution to this complaint would include both:

1. The full publication of the Slaughter and May report into Jane Hutton's dismissal;
2. A full breakdown of legal costs incurred by the scheme in i) the investigation into Jane Hutton's conduct, and ii) subsequent work contracted by external legal advisers related to her dismissal.

I ask that the board revisit these decisions as a matter of urgency due to the serious effect they have had on the levels of trust in the administration of the scheme.


How it will be delivered

By using the internal dispute resolution procedure at USS in the first instance, followed by escalation to the Pensions Ombudsman and/or the Work and Pensions Select Committee, as necessary.



2022-05-19 15:45:37 +0100

Very sad news from Jane's employment tribunal this morning: she has decided to withdraw after 2 days in the witness stand.

It does, however, mean that USS should now respond to the IDR1 complaint I sent, since they said they would "consider the conclusions of the current proceedings in the Employment Tribunal, and the implications of your complaint, when the proceedings in the Employment Tribunal have concluded".

I have written to them to remind them of this fact:

"Dear xxxxxxxxxx,

Regarding the IDR1 complaint I lodged in 2020, your response indicates that you would revisit the decision at the point that Jane Hutton's employment tribunal concluded. As it appears this condition is now satisfied, I look forward to hearing your revised response.

I attach your first response to me for reference.

All the best,


See the initial response here:

2020-12-18 14:30:40 +0000

USS responds! Not good news, I'm afraid. They will neither release the report into Jane's dismissal or the legal costs, nor will they progress the complaint through their Internal Dispute Resolution procedure, citing an employment tribunal launched by Jane into her dismissal as a blockage. In other words, "no can do".

Full text of the response:

I will launch proceedings with the Pensions Ombudsman in the new year.

2020-10-07 10:09:25 +0100

500 signatures reached

2020-10-04 03:56:13 +0100

100 signatures reached

2020-10-03 16:50:13 +0100

50 signatures reached

2020-10-03 16:25:19 +0100

25 signatures reached

2020-10-03 15:52:44 +0100

10 signatures reached