Frequently Asked Questions
1. Who controls the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan? Can’t teachers unions just vote to divest?
The pension plan is governed by the Board of Directors, half of which are appointed by the Province of Ontario, and half by the Ontario Teachers Federation (OTF), which is made up of the presidents of each Teacher union in Ontario. The OTPP board creates policies, hires the CEO, and provides general oversight. Day-to-day investment decisions and management is done by the CEO, Jo Taylor, and his executive team.
The plan was specifically designed so that the plan “Co-Sponsors” (the government of Ontario and the Ontario Teachers Federation) would be arms length from the operation of the plan, which means the plan does not have to listen to or take direction from either of the Plan co-sponsors.
Despite this structure, representatives of the Ontario Teachers Federation (i.e. the presidents of Ontario Teachers unions and their designates) meet regularly with plan executives, sit on governance and policy making committees with Plan executives, and can and do provide recommendations and advice about plan policy and governance.
The two largest unions in the Ontario Teachers Federation Executive, OSSTF and ETFO, have both passed motions to officially demand the plan divest from weapons manufacturing. The plan has explicitly rejected this request saying weapons companies play “an essential role” in “a fragmented world” and the plan has “a duty to invest in a manner that delivers returns.”
2. If the plan doesn’t have to listen to sponsor demands, how do we get them to divest?
The plan has told us specifically they take “reputational concerns” very seriously and admit that some investments create “irreconcilable risks” for the plan’s reputation. Indeed, it’s for this reason the plan divested from Tobacco companies – soon after an infamous Rick Mercer Report – judging that the moral and reputational risks outweighed the financial benefits.
We get the plan to divest by removing the “social license” to invest in companies which UN Experts, the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, and Amnesty International, have indicated are likely complicit in war crimes and crimes against humanity, including genocide.
3. How do we know what we’re invested in? The OTPP doesn’t list weapons company investments on their website. How do we know what War Crimes these companies are complicit in?
The plan explicitly states they only list their major ownership investments (those over $250 million and/or those they own majority interest in) on their website. However, every 3 months the OTPP must publicly declare their investments in US -based publicly traded companies with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
As of their last public filing the OTPP remains invested in Honeywell, Textron, Northrop Grumman, and Leidos, all of which are listed on the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) index of major weapons manufacturers.
Both World Beyond War Canada and the American Friends Service Committee have documented the ways in which these companies (and others) continue to profit from War and War Crimes.
4. Would divesting from these companies hurt the financial health of the plan?
No. The plan CEO, Jo Taylor, has told us directly that in the large scheme of the plan our investments in weapons companies are so small (relatively) that he’s not even informed about them on a regular basis.
The plan manages about $250 Billion per year, and these investments – as of the last filing – total $641 million, which is %0.2 of the plan’s investments: not even worthy of the CEO’s attention.
That said, complicity in War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity isn’t worth any price.
5. What’s the point of divesting? Won’t some other plan just buy up those shares? Wouldn’t we be better off owning some of these companies so we can influence their corporate behaviour?
The demand for divestment comes directly from those most affected: Palestinian teachers and the entire Palestinian Labour movement who have specifically called for international labour solidarity in taking action against the arms trade and those companies profiting from the genocide.
The routine objections to divestment – it doesn’t work, it’s complicated, the investments are too small to make a difference, they are too big and will hurt retirees, we should stay invested to exert influence – were dismissed by the OTPP and labour leaders themselves in their historic choices to divest from tobacco, land mines manufacturers, and Apartheid South Africa.
The casual dismissal of divestment avoids the fact that these investments are choices, and maintaining them is choosing to remain complicit in war crimes and genocide.
You don’t need to be an expert on the structure or governance of the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan or international finance law to know that investing in War Crimes and Genocide is wrong.
The routine objections to divestment – it doesn’t work, it’s complicated, the investments are too small to make a difference, they are too big and will hurt retirees, we should stay invested to exert influence – were dismissed by the OTPP and labour leaders themselves in their historic choices to divest from tobacco, land mines manufacturers, and Apartheid South Africa.
The casual dismissal of divestment avoids the fact that these investments are choices, and maintaining them is choosing to remain complicit in war crimes and genocide.
You don’t need to be an expert on the structure or governance of the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan or international finance law to know that investing in War Crimes and Genocide is wrong.