These are the latest press reports.
Another press report
Quote from: Jane Tordoff on June 08, 2016, 10:08:03 AM
Another press report
Interesting that both Halcrow and PPF have instructed Wilberforce Chambers, something of a conflict of interest?
Quote from: Clive Williams on June 08, 2016, 12:48:07 PM
Interesting that both Halcrow and PPF have instructed Wilberforce Chambers, something of a conflict of interest?
source wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chambers_(law)
' In England and Wales, New Zealand, Australia, India and Hong Kong, chambers may refer to the rooms used by a barrister or to a group of barristers, especially in the Inns of Court.[3] Barristers cannot form partnerships or companies, and are therefore regarded as self-employed sole practitioners. To share costs and expenses, barristers typically operate fraternally with each other, as 'chambers'. Chambers are administered by barristers' clerks who receive cases from solicitors and agree on matters such as fees on behalf of their employers; they then provide case details to the barristers.[4]
Some chambers specialise in particular areas of law.....'
I think it reflects the fact that Wilberforce Chambers specialise in Pensions
Another (Inaccurate) report form the Daily Mail 2016-06-07
ENGINEERING PENSION CUTS
ENGINEERING firm Halcrow is making cuts to pensions for its thousands of savers in a bid to keep itself afloat.
It is slashing its 5pc pension fund annual increases under a new scheme, and will instead link them to the Consumer Prices Index – a key measure of the cost of living – which in April was 0.3pc.
The 3,300 pension savers will be given a one-off boost of 2.5pc to their savings to soften the blow, should they choose to join Halcrow's new scheme.
(Most of the pensions in payment are not linked to CPI, not do we know if the new scheme is in fact Halcrow's)
A brief mention of Halcrow in the attached press cutting from the Financial Times.
Latest press report
HPS reference in Financial Times report of 2 June
John Ralfe has another article in the Financial Times. Given that it's behind a wall and hence difficult to read, the original text is here (http://www.johnralfe.com/public/100_FTfm_Halcrow_June_20th_2016.pdf).
John Ralfe's article does not paint a rosy picture of the new scheme, suggesting that this action is simply "kicking the can down the street". If the new scheme is relying on investment performance outstripping the markets we might end up having our pension put on the favourite at the Doncaster races.
Quote: TPR (The Pensions Regulator) claimed they informed all "directly affected parties" of the granting of the RRA and of a 28-day time limit within which to appeal to the Upper Tribunal. However, they did not consider the HPS members or the HPA solicitor to be directly affected parties...
What kind of brain dead organisation is TPR? So having our pensions cut by unilateral imposition of RRA doesn't affect us? That decision (not to inform us) must be liable to judicial review surely?
John Ralfe : Recurring theme is 'accept it or go bust'. More blackmail.
CH2M prospectus issued 22 April 2016 accepts ongoing pension deficit in risks and these have been factored in. It doesn't state anywhere that any part of the business is going into administration. Failure to disclose such intention undermines validity of the prospectus.
Turnover in 2015 $5.361 billion. Profit $134.8m or $80.4m (page 7, 112). Page 138: 'Contributions to defined benefit pension plans $37.1m'. There are three US plans as well as HPS. A further breakdown on page 165 shows net cost of $19.6m for non-US plans.
So its not going to bust the company but will dent profit margin. Inconvenient.
http://www.fieldfisher.com/publications/2016/06/tata-steel-offers-new-approach-for-distressed-business-pension-schemes#sthash.nhDnrFLu.dpbs
Members might like to note the following quote by Mrs Justice Asplin at the secret Court hearing of 2015
"The fact that the legislation permits the benefits in payment to be reduced on winding-up does not mean that the members' right to the benefits has been reduced."
These are the rights HPA is now pursuing.
ref https://www.sackers.com/pension/pollock-v-reed-high-court-18-december-2015/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/21/port-talbot-steelworks-sale-at-risk-as-ppf-attacks-pensions-shak/
This article shows that the PPF is concerned about setting precedents, which the proposed HPS deal would also do.
A letter from HPA's co-chair Edward Evans was published in the Financial Times today as a response to Chris Martin's letter of last week which was a response to John Ralfe's article mentioned above.
Put "Trust me I'm a trustee" into your favourite search engine and look for something on FT.com and you might be able to read it (it worked for me). The site doesn't like sharing of links and we can't publish it for copyright reasons.
The previous correspondence is available on the official Halcrow Pensions site (http://www.halcrow.com/pensions/index.php) (but you will need a user name and password).
Article about HPA's meeting with Swindon South MP Robert Buckland
These articles have appeared in the Sunday Times
Another article in the Sunday Times
Sunday Times report
Article in the Daily Mail
'TPR defends its practices by publishing Halcrow pension report'
According to Pensions Age Magazine available online 11 July
http://www.pensionsage.com/pa/TPR-defends-its-practices-by-publishing-Halcrow-pension-report.php%20.php (http://www.pensionsage.com/pa/TPR-defends-its-practices-by-publishing-Halcrow-pension-report.php%20.php)
It is so nice to hear according to the article that ' we (tpr) are pleased that the pension trustees are now consulting them about their options' . Unbelievably biased view from complacent pension 'professionals'.
Anyone have a link to the report referred to?
http://www.thepensionsregulator.gov.uk/regulate-and-enforce/section-89-reports.aspx
Link to section 89 report
Thanks for the link to all sectn 89 reports, the Kodak one is worth a read and the changes in their scheme seem to be largely copied by HPS2 except for the pre 1997 part. Their trustee publishes data online which gives the details of the offer when their scheme was changed in the document:
http://www.kodakpensionplan2.co.uk/pdf/document-kodakpensionplan2-trust-deed-and-rules-20140328-f.pdf (http://www.kodakpensionplan2.co.uk/pdf/document-kodakpensionplan2-trust-deed-and-rules-20140328-f.pdf)
Here is an article on the Halcrow Pension Scheme predicament, published by Punter Southall Transaction Services. Punter Southall is a company that "adds shareholder value through pensions", a phrase that succinctly summarises its activities.
These two links are to articles in Pensions Expert, which is a service from the Financial Times. One needs to register in order to gain access but that is free of charge.
The articles, which both refer to the Halcrow Pension Scheme, are entitled respectively: Halcrow plots rescue of DB scheme (09 May 2016) and What to consider before moving members to a new scheme (06 July 2016).
http://www.pensions-expert.com/Special-Features/Case-Studies/Halcrow-plots-rescue-of-DB-scheme
http://www.pensions-expert.com/Comment-Analysis/What-to-consider-before-moving-members-to-a-new-scheme
This link is to an article in Building Magazine. One needs to register in order to gain access but that is free of charge.
The article, entitled This pensions crisis can only get worse (08 July 2016), descries the crisis in the Halcrow Pension Scheme, and refers to HPA's fight against planned cuts to pensions.
http://www.building.co.uk/analysis/news-analysis/this-pensions-crisis-can-only-get-worse/5082461.article
This link is to an article in Pensions Age, entitled Halcrow Pensioners' Association to launch legal challenge against scheme deal (12 July 2016).
http://www.pensionsage.com/pa/Halcrow-Pensioners-Association-to-launch-legal-challenge-against-scheme-deal.php%20.php
Here are links to the articles regarding the pension issue identified under the CH2M title by the Newsnow site:
http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Industry+Sectors/Construction+&+Engineering/Engineering/CH2M+Hill
TPR: pensions and jobs protected by Halcrow agreement (12 July 2016)
http://www.pensionsworld.co.uk/article/tpr-pensions-and-jobs-protected-halcrow-agreement
TPR defends its practices by publishing Halcrow pension report (11 July 2016)
http://www.pensionsage.com/pa/TPR-defends-its-practices-by-publishing-Halcrow-pension-report.php%20.php
This link is to an article in The Daily Telegraph, entitled Pension victims £24k a year worse off as the Government delays reforms - because they 'don't suit its PR agenda' (19 July 2016).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/19/pension-victims-24k-a-year-worse-off-as-the-government-delays-re/
It appears that one can access the article without a subscription to the online newspaper.
This link is to an article in Professional Pensions, entitled TPR disputes legal challenge over Halcrow restructuring (21 July 2016).
http://www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/news/2465534/tpr-disputes-legal-challenge-over-halcrow-restructuring
This link is to an article in Building magazine, entitled Halcrow pensioners press on with legal challenge (21 July 2016).
http://www.building.co.uk/halcrow-pensioners-press-on-with-legal-challenge/5082753.article
This link is to an article in The Actuary, entitled TPR faces legal challenge on pension restructure (14 July 2016).
http://www.theactuary.com/news/2016/07/tpr-faces-legal-challenge-on-pension-restructure
The subheading is:
The Halcrow Pensioners' Association (HPA) has announced it will launch a legal challenge to protect the Halcrow pension scheme from being altered.
This link is to an article on the website of Macfarlanes, solicitors, entitled Halcrow: Latest Restructuring
of a Pension Scheme (July 2016).
http://www.macfarlanes.com/media/666303/halcrow-latest-restructuring-of-a-pension-scheme.pdf
This link is to an article in The Sunday Times, entitled Pensioners scrap with regulator (24 July 2016).
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/pensioners-scrap-with-regulator-vl3l9q9b9
It is about the HPA's pursuit of a court review of the deal agreed by Halcrow, the HPS trustees and the Pensions Regulator. The text is:
A group of pensioners at the engineering consultancy Halcrow have launched a legal challenge to plans that will cut the benefits of 3,200 current and former staff.
The Halcrow Pensioners Association, which claims to represent more than 500 members, has asked for a court review of a deal agreed by the company, its trustees and the Pensions Regulator.
In May, Halcrow told its retirement savers of an agreement that would give them the option of transferring to a new scheme or entering the Pension Protection Fund (PPF), the industry-backed lifeboat, which imposes cuts of at least 10% in the benefits.
The new scheme will offer members a one-off boost of up to 2.5% to their savings but will cut their annual increases from the current level of about 5% to the rate of inflation as measured by the consumer prices index, which stood at 0.5% in June.
The announcement comes after several years of fretting over Halcrow's pension fund, which had a deficit of more than £630m at February on a "buyout" basis — the cost of insuring it with a third party.
CH2M Hill, the American engineering giant whose projects include Crossrail, bought Halcrow in 2011. It has warned that without a solution, the fund could push Halcrow into administration.
Edward Evans of the Halcrow Pensioners Association said he saw the legal challenge as "the only way to stop this secretive deal to slash our pensions for the benefit of the American parent company".
The Pensions Regulator, which is contesting the challenge, said the restructuring was "the best outcome that could be achieved in very difficult circumstances".
Halcrow Pensioners' Association withdraws legal challenge
This link is to an article in Professional Pensions, entitled Halcrow Pensioners' Association withdraws legal challenge over Halcrow Pension Scheme restructuring (28 July 2016).
http://www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/news/2466294/halcrow-pensioners-association-withdraws-legal-challenge-over-halcrow-pension-scheme-restructuring?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PP.SP01.Daily_RL.EU.A.U&utm_source=PP.DCM.Editors_Updates
Copy attached.
A report from the Guardian which is surely of interest and relevant to us all.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/jul/30/state-pension-triple-clock-doubts
A piece from the Daily Mail which pours cold water on my earlier post. :-)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3716506/I-won-t-ditch-triple-lock-Theresa-insists-WON-T-slash-retirement-pots-elderly-people-leaked-government-memo-proposed-scrapping-rules-boost-state-pensions-2-5.html
All over the media this morning.
PPF compensation cap may not comply with EU law, says Court of Appeal
Here is a piece from Professional Pensions, entitled PPF compensation cap may not comply with EU law, says Court of Appeal (29 July 2016).
(How come they can afford to go all the way to the Court of Justice of the European Union, whereas HPA cannot get to the Upper Tribunal?)
Frozen Pensions
Further to the previous press report (above) is an article of Monckton Chambers 28 dated July 2016 (link below) suggesting that an EU ruling might be made that pensioners in receipt of PPF compensation must receive at least half of any entitlements to annual increases in their pension.
"Of potentially even greater significance than the impact of the ruling on the cap is the potential impact of any ruling that pensioners in receipt of PPF compensation must receive at least half of any entitlements to annual increases in their pension. Such a ruling will potentially benefit thousands of PPF members, including those who were initially in receipt of 90% or 100% of their original pension but who have lost any rights they had to index-linked or guaranteed annual increases."
http://www.monckton.com/gerry-facenna-qc-james-bourke-secure-court-appeal-reference-european-court-justice-ppf-pensions-cap-indexation-rules/
What are the possible ramifications of this? On the face of it, by agreeing to enter the new, inferior Halcrow scheme one might lose the benefit of such a ruling. However, perhaps one is protected from that eventuality by the rule that Halcrow has stated will "ensure that, if at any point you or your survivors would have received more pension if you had chosen to go into the Pension Protection Fund, the new scheme will pay the amount the Pension Protection Fund would have paid." (Halcrow letter ref 11 dated 31 May 2016, third page, second paragrph)
I wonder if this is why the deadline has been extended, excellent research Tim;
and here's me thinking they were being thoughtful
Businesses 'milking and dumping' to shed pension deficits
Businesses are 'milking and dumping' to shed pension scheme deficits, according to a report by the Pensions Institute at Cass Business School. The author says that the study is particularly topical, given what has been happening at companies like BHS, Halcrow and Tata Steel – with allegations of excessive dividends paid to proprietors, bludgeoning pensioners into accepting lower benefits, proprietors distancing themselves from legal liability and incoming proprietors seeking to avoid liability altogether.
http://www.pensionsage.com/pa/Businesses-milking-and-dumping-to-shed-pension-deficits.php%20.php
Tim. Your post 1/08 regarding frozen pensions and the potential HGL/Trustee safety net clause ref 11 31 May 2016 letter does state that even if you elected for HPS2 you would be guaranteed commensurate improved PPF benefits should that retrospectively occur. As for instance the Hampshire case at court of appeal now with the ECJ for a ruling. This is reassuring if this is really a cast iron guarantee by CH2 and HGL. All the same I am of the view that a personal complaint to the Pensions Ombudsman to put all transfers on hold until this case is heard is entirely sensible and reasonable.
Good work Tim.
Those with a subscription to the Times / Sunday Times can read all of this report (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/savers-hit-as-firms-milk-and-dump-pensions-xfcdssbrv) from today's edition.
Yes, excellent coverage in The Sunday Times: front page of the Money section! Well done, Jane, Mike et al!
This is the first time that I have seen CH2M Hill linked with Philip Green: "This hands the Sir Philip Greens and the CH2Ms of the business world a trump card...".
I have this morning pointed out to the reporter that I do not see us as "savers". Instead I see us as "creditors". The right to and quantum of our pensions is defined in our contract of employment. Payment of defined pension is as much a right as is salary. Withholding pension because funds have not performed well has as much validity as does paying reduced salary because the firm has had a bad month. If payment is not made according to the terms of contract, the company is in breach of contract and that is why the company has to go into liquidation if the pensions cannot be paid. The RAA mechanism is a means of circumventing contract law and as such is, to me, of dubious legitimacy.
I did not give the reporter the figures that she quotes. It is misleading (journalistic sensationalism?) to say we will be tens of thousands of pounds worse of. In numerical terms in years to come and compared with our contractual entitlement the statement will be correct. The figures I gave her were for a typical engineer who worked all his life for Halcrow and were discounted to today's prices, so they made more sense. I said for a couple of months he would be a few hundred pounds better off, but already by 2017 a few hundred pounds worse off than his entitlement. I estimate in about 15 years time the value of his pension at today's prices will be approaching £10,000 less than it is today and approaching £20,000 less than his contractual entitlement.
Businesses 'milking and dumping' to shed pension deficits, continued...
Here is another article, in FT Adviser, on the report by the Pensions Institute at Cass Business School. Reference is made to a backdrop of problems in defined benefit pension schemes, from BHS and Halcrow to Tata Steel. The gist of the article is that employers are exploiting pension scheme members by finding ways of manipulating pension schemes in order to shed or sidestep deficits.
http://www.ftadviser.com/2016/08/03/pensions/personal-pensions/companies-milking-and-dumping-db-schemes-6FD5WGwZjEz4c7i0OsOrIL/article-0.html?ftar=true
MORE NEWS FROM THE WORK AND PENSIONS SELECT COMMITTEE...
Work and pensions select committee begins further inquiry into pensions regulation. This will look at issues such as antiavoidance powers to ensure that owners cannot wriggle out of paying retirees their due.
This may mean strengthening the powers and resolve of the Pensions Regulator to act against those who seek to avoid their pension responsibilities.
Articles published on 08 August 2016:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37010506
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/08/pensions-regulators-powers-to-be-scrutinised-by-mps
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2016-08-08/business/mps-to-take-on-pensions-regulation-after-bhs-kddt9rxdv
SUNDAY TIMES COVERAGE - 7TH AUGUST 2016
...and here attached is a copy of the front page of the Money section of The Sunday Times, as provided to us by the paper.
(We have been permitted to put it on the forum but not to distribute copies, so please respect this restriction.)
Article in the Guardian on Pensions - 13 August 2016
Another report on pensions has appeared in the Times "Britain's pension system and lessons from BHS". To read this article you should put the title into your search engine and look for an article from FT.com dated 12th August. You should be able to read it all and we won't infringe copyright.
FT article: Britain's pension system and lessons from BHS
I have found that, in order to read this article in the FT, one needs to be a registered user. This involves no payment. It allows one to read three articles per month (!!!). Go to:
https://register.ft.com
Other reports on the same topic are to be found (without access restrictions) at:
http://www.theweek.co.uk/65196/bhs-pension-deficit-now-above-700m-say-experts
http://uk.businessinsider.com/bhs-pension-crisis-the-pensions-regulator-ceo-lesley-titcomb-calls-for-deal-veto-2016-8
http://www.professionaladviser.com/professional-adviser/news/2467778/pensions-regulator-eyes-m-a-veto-power
Here is an article from Professional Pensions that seems to be substantially based upon a press release from CH2M Hill:
http://www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/news/2467960/halcrow-members-embrace-new-scheme-following-restructure#
A possible alternative headline is "20% not persuaded of benefits of new scheme".
Has anyone else seen the article on Telegraph website today re. radical government plans to reform final salary pensions?
Full of "ifs" and "could" but perhaps a sign of things to come.
See link - I hope it works.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/radical-government-plans-to-reform-final-salary-pensions-could-c/
Thank you for that, Martin.
I see that it says that "fears are mounting that unscrupulous firms could take advantage of the system to cheat employees out of pension increases, which are designed to protect their incomes from being eroded by inflation, over the longer term." This seems extremely hard to believe, don't you think? What sort of employer would do that?
More broadly, will this initiative foreshadow a more general move to forgiveness of debts? Maybe mortgagees could be let off, and also clients of construction companies who find the bill higher than they can conveniently manage.
The government has been trying to encourage pensions. If this move were to succeed, what are the chances that in future employees will shun pension schemes and put their money into buy-to-let houses?
Lets have a total re-write and start with removing the tax relief incentive to put money into a scheme.
I can hear the screams from the Pension Industry leeches already.
Here is an FT article dated 11 September 2016 by John Ralfe, which refers to Halcrow's situation:
"If a company is on the brink of going bust it can apply to the regulator to reduce its pension promises, using a tried and tested legal mechanism that is currently happening for Halcrow, the engineering consultancy with 3,300 pension scheme members."
"tried and tested legal mechanism". Hmm?
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dfb18aca-742b-11e6-b60a-de4532d5ea35.html?siteedition=uk#axzz4JzFhJU59
That looks like a CH2 planted soundbite.
The section 89 Report page 5 sets the facts out. http://www.thepensionsregulator.gov.uk/docs/regulatory-intervention-section-89-halcrow.pdf
'RAAs are extremely uncommon and the continuation of a scheme following the conclusion of an RAA is even rarer.'
RAA could be on the cards for British Steel scheme following 'collapse' of special deal to change pension law
Article in Professional Pensions dated 14 September 2016:
http://www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/news/2470759/raa-could-be-on-the-cards-for-british-steel-scheme-following-collapse-of-special-deal-to-change-pension-law?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PP.Daily_RL.EU.A.U&utm_source=PP.DCM.Editors_Updates
Tim,
One common theme - non UK parent company. Kodak and Halcrow - US; TATA Indian. These foreigners need to be taken to task.
Brian
In this case, if it commences and they intend Tata to continue trading, there will be a union with considerable resources to overcome so it will be interesting to see how the trustees and tPR cope.
Interesting article.
Frank Field condemns plan to 'dump' Bernard Matthews pension scheme
"The new employer must not be allowed to get away with dumping the Bernard Matthews pension scheme into which workers have paid," Field told Sky News.
"The Pensions Regulator needs to act robustly and quickly to stop such activities being mimicked by other asset buyers who wish to dump pension liabilities.
"We cannot have firms changing ownership at the price of pensions being dumped with the Pension Protection Fund – such dumping involves promises being broken, and the cuts in benefit that result."
Sound familiar?
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/sep/19/frank-field-condemns-plan-to-dump-bernard-matthews-pension-scheme
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3797289/Now-Frank-Field-MP-calls-pensions-probe-Bernard-Matthews.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/17/chicken-king-to-buy-bernard-matthews-turkey-empire/
https://www.mw-w.com/smaller-suppliers-could-bear-brunt-of-bernard-matthews-deal
Bernard Matthews turkey firm confirms it has found a way to wangle out of its pensions obligations
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/20/turkey-giant-bernard-matthews-to-be-rescued-by-the-chicken-king/
Press reports as a result of the Work and Pension Select Committee enquiry into pensions.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/robbing-workers-of-future-pensions-wont-solve-companies-problems/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/robbing-workers-of-future-pensions-wont-solve-companies-problems/)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/13/mps-given-veto-on-next-pensions-regulator/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/13/mps-given-veto-on-next-pensions-regulator/)
Radio 4 tonight File on Four 17:00 - about 20 minutes in http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07x2zp8#play
PENSIONS OUTRAGE OVER TAX DEAL FOR HS2 FIRM
The Times reports today:
"An American engineering giant (CH2M Hill) with a key role on the new High Speed 2 rail route has quietly booked a £37m tax gain due to slashing the pensions of 3,300 British savers.
"CH2M, which is working on plans for the London to Birmingham stretch of the £56bn line, reaped the tax boost from a controversial deal last year with the pensions watchdog. This allowed it to cut benefits owed to workers in its Halcrow engineering subsidiary in Britain.
"Edward Evans, a former Halcrow engineer of 25 years, led a band of pensioners who unsuccessfully fought the pensions cut. Evans, 75, from Wiltshire, said the tax boost was 'another nasty surprise'.
"'The whole thing really stinks. Over the remaining years of our life, we are going to lose about 30% of our purchasing power.'"
See the full article:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tax-windfall-for-pension-raider-gq6w6dj07
There is an industry rumour that CH2 and Atkins are in merger talks. See here: http://www.infrastructure-intelligence.com/article/jan-2017/ch2m-atkins-merger-mooted
Quote from: chrishoggart on January 31, 2017, 09:03:48 AM
There is an industry rumour that CH2 and Atkins are in merger talks. See here: http://www.infrastructure-intelligence.com/article/jan-2017/ch2m-atkins-merger-mooted (http://www.infrastructure-intelligence.com/article/jan-2017/ch2m-atkins-merger-mooted)
This rumour has its own discussion (http://www.halcrowpensioners.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=212.0).
Here is an article of 30th January 2016 from Professional Pensions, entitled Halcrow Pension Scheme - complex restructurings need to be well managed. Nothing new, just a lawyer's puff, really!
CH2M "TARGET OF JACOBS TAKEOVER"
It is reported in The Times of 20th July 2017 that CH2M is understood to be in advanced talks to be taken over by Jacobs. Reference is made to the Halcrow pension débâcle. (Apparently CH2M was "dragged into a row over pension liabilities"! I thought CH was responsible for the whole thing. Funny how the memory can play tricks.)
"CH2M ... has been dragged into a row over pension liabilities for UK professionals, dating from its 2011 entry into the British construction engineering mainstream via its £230 million acquisition of Halcrow."
And another memory failing: I don't recall CH2M intentionally paying £230M for Halcrow although it might have cost that much including clearing debts.
This article (http://www.enr.com/articles/42377-is-jacobs-close-to-deal-to-acquire-ch2m) contains a couple of links to other reports with more details of the possible Jacobs - CH2M acquisition.