12 year engagements

[Lima Juliet]

I've just read that in the latest Manning Newsletter that all Officers and Airmen will join under a 12 year engagement. Also, if I read it correctly as I was in a rush, that those on shorter current engagements will be offered the chance to go to 12.

Great news for a lot of people.

LJ :ok:

[ALM In Waiting]

Was this under the banner of the NEM?

[Lima Juliet]

I believe so.

[Jumping_Jack]

The 12 year engagement has been suggested as it ties in with the requirements to earn the resettlement grant.

[Lima Juliet]

The other thing I read was that extensions of service and continuance offers may also increase.

I think it was called the "RAF Personnel Bulletin" and it was signed off by Air Marshal Baz :ok:

The details were pretty sketchy but these 2 items were the ones that stuck out. I don't remember reading dates, but it was a glossy type newsletter.

LJ

[ALM In Waiting]

Was it laying around in the crew room or equivalent? Or a P1 type admin office? I'm keen to find one that's all.

[Lima Juliet]

ALM

It was printed out. I asked the person who had done it and they said it was on the RAF Airspace website - you need a log in to see it.

Otherwise, looking at it, it is the Spring 2014 RAF Personnel Bulletin. So I would expect PSF are just about to distribute it?

LJ

[ALM In Waiting]

Thanks LJ, I'll try and find my login.

[Party Animal]

ALM,

If you have access to Dii, you can find it on the RAF page. 2 clicks and you're there.

[gr4techie]

For Airmen this is northing new. From what I remember, you originally are signed for 9 years, then can apply to extend to 12 years. After promotion to Corporal you are then automatically offered 22 years. Sergeants can extend to 30 years.

However this has been flexible with the amount of manpower. When manpower has been low, SAC's could sign on for more than 12 years.

Pension wise I think you qualify for a half pension at the 12 or 15 year point and will receive it at age 65. After serving 22 years you qualify for a full pension starting immediately. I think LOS 30 doesn't give you a bigger pension (I don't see the point in it, if you can get another job elsewhere after 22).

Interestingly I know SAC's who have PVR'd. Then while waiting the 6 months to leave they have been promoted and offered 22 years, and they still turn it down and leave. In my own opinion, if NEM f***s with peoples pensions then they will be little incentive for good experienced NCO's to stay in.

A lot of SAC's I know no longer want to do more than 9 or 12 years. It's common for NCO's who have done a lot of years to remain in only because of whats nicknamed the "The pension trap".

[Jumping_Jack]

Don't confuse the new pension with NEM. NEM is looking at the way in which the Terms Of Service can be better aligned with the new AFPS15. This provides for a resettlement grant at 12 years (so it makes sense to have a 12 year initial engagement) and EDP at 20 years (so another engagement to 20). Then a final engagement to MEOS (could be age 60).That said the 3 services still want departure points between and beyond those proposed by NEM.

[ALM In Waiting]

Thanks Party Animal.

[Melchett01]

I originally posted this on the AFPS 75 and NEM thread, but having just seen this thread it probably sits better here.

"In case you haven't seen it, there is a draft version of the new Terms of Service IBN doing the rounds. Guess what - the vast majority of people will be transferred to ToS based on Length of Service with most of these only being able to serve to a maximum LoS 35 ie for a 35 year career from joining up. There will be some service to 60 and therefore to pension age for aircrew promoted to sqn ldr, selected flt lts, PAS and for the ground branches (excluding specialist branches) once you hit wg cdr / gp capt and then by selection only rather than automatically, otherwise you're out at LOS 35 at whatever age that might be. So unless you fall in to any of these categories, service to the AFPS 15 pension age will be very difficult for most, especially those in ground branches joining up before they are 25. Edited to add I guess that means more deferred pensions for 10-12 years rather than paying full pensions from kicking out age at 55 and therefore a nice little saving for the Treasury?

If you're already in, as with the pensions, transitional arrangements will apply and nobody will be forced on to the new ToS if it disadvantages them. However, as I read it, there is a caveat to this safety net and it only applies as long as there is no change of circumstance. So if you are promoted or offered PAS or change from a SSC to a PC you are likely to move on to the new LoS based Ts&Cs and may therefore find it harder to serve to the AFPS 15 pension age. Oh and did I mention that for aircrew the change from an initial 12 year commission to a 20/40 commission I.e. the new version of a PC will be automatic on successful qualification on first operational type.

Hands up who fancies leaving at 57/58 and trying to find something meaningful to do until you can draw your pension?????? If this is an example of aligning the pensions and careers, God only knows what they would have come up with if they set their minds to screwing people over. If you can get hold of a copy of it, I really don't recommend reading it just before a medical!!! "

[Lima Juliet]

Melchy

Hands up who fancies leaving at 57/58 and trying to find something meaningful to do until you can draw your pension??????

Surely after you pass your 22/40 point then you qualify for an EDP instead? So if you are on LOS35 then you will get an EDP of 35/47ths of your career average final salary (that bit might be in error on the exact amount paid), of which you can reverse commute at £1 pension commuted to generate £12 tax free lump sum (up to 25% of the pension)?

It's just the same at the moment on AFPS75 and AFPS05 once you pass either your ORD or EDP before reaching the full retirement date of 55. So if you don't make 60 on AFPS15 but get past 22/40 then you don't have to wait until age 65/66/67 (as required) for a large proportion of pension.

Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?

LJ

[Melchett01]

LJ,

I don't think either of us have the wrong end of the stick - frankly, the current situation is so damned complicated, with so many knowns, unknowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns that if you even recognise that it's a stick you're probably doing better than most at the moment.

If you don't make it to serve to 60, yes, you will get an EDP plus lump sum and I'm sure there are other ways and means of making up the gap in income such as reverse commutation or going onto an FTRS (FC) contract if you can get one. However, the point remains that at the moment, you can serve a full career and get a pension at the end of it, but the way the new pension and TOS have been set up, it appears almost impossible for the vast majority (lets be honest, aircrew at sqn ldr +, PAS etc are a minority of the RAF's total manpower) to serve on full pension earning terms.

Once again, it's yet another attempt to chip away at terms of service and the attractiveness of the package. For them to paint this as a fantastic move that offers flexibility (it does if you're Manning) is to ignore the fact that if you put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig. Not only are they moving the goal posts, they are making it almost impossible for anyone to play the game in a fair manner. The way the deck is stacked in favour of the services means it's starting to look more and more like a Casino with the dealer dealing himself a straight flush on every hand.

[Lima Juliet]

if you put lipstick on a pig :D:D:D

Fair enough, I do agree there is a large sh!t sandwich to be swallowed by many compared to how it was. However, as you mention, FTRS is a good alternative. There are real problems in recruiting for FTRS at present (any of Home, Limited or Full Commitment) and I hear of some job adverts being run 2-3 times before the right candidate comes along. But this pension and TACOS is for a long game in that:

1. It saves money. (Which the Govt wants)
2. It doesn't affect those with 10 or years left to go from 1 Apr 12. (Which those that are starting to think about retirement need)
3. Future Reserves (FR) 2020 and NEM is supposed to deliver flexible working from 2020. So it is early by 2 years to allow those reaching 55 on/after 1 Apr 22 on AFPS15 alleged opportunities to switch to a reserve contract to age 60 whilst accruing on AFPS15. (Which gives at least a 10 year run at a chance of aligning oneself for promotion or a FTRS opportunity)
4. There is actuarily reduced pensions available to those between 55-60. (But my brain is too small to work out what that actually means apart from a slightly smaller immediate pension?!)

Now, as I said, this is not a great deal compared to what went before, but there is at least some 'wriggle room' for a somewhat sh!tty stick. With my glass half full - in my opinion, it could have been far, far worse!

LJ :ok:

[Lima Juliet]

Being a sad git, I ran 3 scenarios for a bog-standard 55 year old Flt Lt retiring under the 3 different schemes at age 55years.

Flt Lt born 1990, joined 2010, LOS35.
AFPS15 pension EDP £17k per year at age 55, tax free lump sum £76k and full pension £33k at age 68.

Flt Lt born 1965, joined 1985, served to 55.
AFPS05 pension £23k at age 55, tax free lump sum £69k

Flt Lt born 1965, joined 1985, served to 55. (As pensionable service starts at 21, this is only 34 years of pensionable service)
AFPS75 pension £23.5k at age 55, tax free lump sum £70.5k

So under AFPS15, the Flt Lt would be £6k per year worse off in annual pension for 13 years after age 55 but be £10k per year better off at state pension age. The Flt Lt would also have an extra £6k tax free lump sum.

Win some, lose some, but I would say that it is still pretty generous for someone to use to supplement a lower paid job until they retire properly?

LJ

PS. Of course, it is midnight and I may have spooned the calculator!!!

[Melchett01]

I probably have a slightly more jaded view of FTRS than you LJ. Not because of the FTRS scheme in itself, just that in my current post I have been thwarted at pretty much every turn by the bean counters when I have tried to recruit FTRS. There have been several posts where in order to get the right calibre of individual an FC contract would be required; however, in their infinte wisdom, the men with the clipboards have either cancelled existing FC contracts or have refused to allow us to bid for new FC contracts and have forced us down the HC route.

Again, nothing wrong with HC per se - if you happen to be in an area where there is a ready pool of qualified, experienced and available individuals to recruit from. If there isn't you run the risk of getting money for old rope types who just want to get out of the house to avoid the wife nagging. There's no pension or other entitlement with it, just the very basic rate of pay to turn up between set hours.

Given the experiences I've had these past couple of years with trying to get FC contracts established or maintained, I just don't see how it will be viable to base future financial planning on the possibility that you will be able to get a pension earning FC contract to bridge the gap. Fair play to you if you can manage it, but it's taking a damned big risk.

[Lima Juliet]

Melchett

If I may?

There's no pension or other entitlement with it, just the very basic rate of pay to turn up between set hours.

Yes, there is. FTRS of all types (HC/LC/FC) are entitled to pension (RFPS05 or AFPS15). The main differences in terms of service otherwise are:

HC - not deployable, no X factor, no HDT and no entitlement to SFA or medical dental. Saves about 40% of the cost of regular.

LC - deployable up to 21 days a time for up to a maximum of 35 days a year, 5% X factor, no HDT and no entitlement to SFA or medical/dental. Saves about 25% of the cost of a regular.

FC - same as a regular. No real cost saving and not used very much.

All three types can be mobilised into the regulars at any time (normally national emergency and times of significant crisis).

I hope that helps the jading?

LJ

PS. Plus all do fitness test, CCS and out of hours station duty jobs (eg. SDO, OO, OSNCO, etc...). The HC may also be asked to deploy/have nights away from home (remembering that it is a contract and not a given it will renewed by the line manager if they continually refuse!).

[5 Forward 6 Back]

re: service to 60 for aircrew Sqn Ldrs and PAS; does that mean that those of us who fall into those brackets but currently have offers of service to 55 can expect an automatic extension to 60?

[Just This Once...]

That question has been asked a number of times with no satisfactory answer to date.

Clearly one side does not want an automatic extension offer whilst the other side of the debate is watching the haemorrhaging of manpower, the forecast deficit of aircrew and desperately wants to restore confidence in the system.

It would hurt the PAS system somewhat if those currently serving had no offer to serve to the new pension point.

[Party Animal]

5F6B asks a very simple and very obvious question. I really find it quite disturbing that if the same question has been asked several times, there is no satisfactory answer out on the streets.

This smacks of both a half thought out idea with half unkown solutions. Not a good place to be with NEM being imminent!

[Just This Once...]

I got the impression the RAF was pushing for the maximum number of extensions whilst elements in the MoD were pushing back. I also understand that the RAF had their transitional arrangement in draft well ahead of the RN and Army. Some people are working very hard to get the right deal to keep the 'offer' attractive; it's not over yet.

Still, it is of great concern with less the 11 months to go that the final pension arrangements are not sorted and that so little of the NEM is finalised.

[junket]

Was chatting to the Sqn Ldr who works in the NEM area at AIR, last week, about the transitional aspects in the new engagement structures. Basically 2 IBNs about to go live. One details (as much as they can at this stage) the new structures from 1 Apr 15 and the other the details about the alignment offers to get a whole bunch of SP to LOS 12 (about 10000 people).


The LOS 12 bit is being done now because they have the authority in existing structures to go with it. A team have been stood up to manage the process of getting the letters out (similar to the EDP extensions) and the unit clerks are going to AIR this week to get the in brief. Apparently there is a big push on this element as they need to get a whole load of offers out there before August so they can inform the training targets for 2015.


The new engagements they hope to offer to everyone where it is favourable for the individual in the Autumn - they have to wait until Parliament approves the structures in the Summer - so, for example, if you commissioned after age 25+, and now a Sqn Ldr, then you get offered LOS 30 (the new structure) as it will be more favourable. There are about a dozen nuances they are looking to action across all ranks.


As for age 60 - they aren't expecting to offer this (to the current cadre of SP) until at least late next year as there is some considerable modelling to do in order to get this right. Too many offers and it could log jam promotion flows for some time.


The impression I get is that the NEM team are working really hard to try and get the best deal they can for the Air Force, despite some severe obstacles (for example he is the only one in the team at the moment which just seems mad to me).

[Just This Once...]

As for age 60 - they aren't expecting to offer this (to the current cadre of SP) until at least late next year as there is some considerable modelling to do in order to get this right. Too many offers and it could log jam promotion flows for some time.

This will do little to address the current PAS problems. The offers over the last few years are tied to age 55, despite age 60 being on the cards for AFPS15. This is especially difficult for the PAS scheme as it is specifically linked to an enhanced pension, which is tantalising out of reach for the current cadre who fall short of the 10 year protection. They should have linked the offer to the full pension point (rather than 55) as there is zero problem with promotion flows with PAS.

Quite frankly they do not have time to wait another year or so as the deficit, loss rate and poor uptake are problems right now. Once they are gone, they tend to be gone forever….

[Biggus]

junket,

Check your PMs......

[ALM In Waiting]

Thanks Junket, your NEM knowledge is always appreciated. Any idea whether non commissioned types signed on to 22 years will be 'aligned' to LOS 30 automatically like the 9 to 12 year crowd, or will it continue to be based on promotion/spec sign on?