A long-awaited review has identified several issues with the deficit valuation which played a key role in justifying pension reforms for staff at higher education institutions across the country – proposals which sparked strike action earlier this year.

The panel’s report was published this afternoon, claiming that factors in how the valuation was carried out have led to misleadingly “dampened perceptions” of the outlook of the national pensions scheme.

The review was one of the conditions upon which staff agreed to suspend the strike action in April, two months after the strikes first kicked off.

The panel’s report identified two key issues with the valuation.

It criticised the valuation’s attempts to quantify survey responses when many responses were subjective, and that the ways in which employers’ responses were used to inform their proposals contributed to “strong risk aversion” – this “[appeared] to be inconsistent with many employers’ wishes.”

They also found that the framing and context of questions asked in the consultation had produced “misleading results”.

Furthermore, the panel found that employers had insufficient time “to consider and debate thoroughly the issues” before responding to surveys – a point of criticism particularly pertinent in Cambridge, where it was revealed earlier this year that some college bursars responded to the survey without consulting their college governing bodies, amid broader concerns that college bursars coordinated responses to push for a defined contributions scheme.

In February, a leaked email sent from Simon Summers, St Catharine’s college bursar and chair of Cambridge’s intercollegiate pensions sub-committee sent in September, appeared to call for college bursars to respond in favour of the defined contributions scheme.

Summers wrote: “You will also wish to consider how to achieve a consensus view in your College about the issues facing the Scheme, during Michaelmas Term.”

“A significant landmark in the union’s ongoing campaign to defend members’ pensions”

Amid strike action in March, two Cambridge colleges, King’s and Churchill, came forward about their decision-making procedure for the consultation, where bursars had submitted their responses on behalf of the college without consulting their governing bodies.

In June, Varsity revealed leaked meeting minutes from the University’s finance committee showed finance officials asked one of their sub-committees, Cambridge’s Pensions Working Group, to “formulate a robust response acting as far as possible with Cambridge colleges and University of Oxford to ensure consistency to give weight to the responses.”

Richard Farndale, pensions officer of the UCU’s Cambridge branch, commented on the report: “There now remains the task of persuading the Trustee and tPR to implement and accept the JEP's findings. UCU's interaction with employers is now crucial, since UUK and UCU must agree to share the common cause of limiting the contribution increases.”

He added: “We are delighted to see that UCU's strike action is now fully vindicated.

“Above and beyond the findings of the JEP, the process surrounding the USS valuation – including our industrial action this spring – shows that staff need to be equal participants in university governance... We will continue to work towards assuring that our value as experts, researchers, administrative and support staff and teachers are recognized by our employers now and in the future.”

UCU and UUK are set to begin further discussions in the coming weeks. In a statement, the scheme trustee, the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS), said: “Unless and until an alternative has been agreed, consulted upon, and implemented, cost sharing remains the default process for addressing the regulatory and legal obligations of the 2017 valuation.”

They added: “We have repeatedly expressed the view that the JEP report could provide the basis for UCU and UUK to agree a way forward that could be introduced before the significantly higher phases of cost sharing increases come into effect, and we sincerely hope that comes to pass.”

In a statement, UUK chief executive Alistair Jarvis said the employers’ body would commence consultation with universities on the report’s recommendations next week “to establish which areas highlighted by the panel can be adopted.”

He added: “We look forward to positive discussions with UCU, the USS Trustee and the regulator, so that we can meet our pledge of continuing to offer valuable defined benefits as part of the overall scheme and concluding the 2017 valuation.”

UCU general secretary Sally Hunt said the report is a “significant landmark in [the union’s] ongoing campaign to defend members’ pensions.”

She commented: “’There is no doubt that we have come a long way from this time last year when we faced plans to impose a defined contribution benefit package that would have seen some members lose around £200,000 in retirement.”

• This article was updated to include a statement from Cambridge UCU’s pensions officer, Richard Farndale, on September 14th