Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Armed Forces pension

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Armed Forces pension

Old 19th Nov 2011, 07:29
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: London
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No intention to misrepresent - simply answering the question. AFPS 05 is in a different statutory instrument to the EDP scheme. Here are the facts on EDP.

When AFPS 05 was being written, the intention was that it should be AFPS 75 with whistles and bells - including an IP. However, the Revenue told us that it would be outlawing pensions before age 55 except in case of ill-health with effect from 6 April 2006. So, back to the drawing board and the EDP was devised and is quite separate to the pension scheme.

To qualify for EDP you must leave after having served at least 18 yrs and having reached at least age 40 (but before age 55). You will get a lump sum normally equal to your pension lump sum (the 'normally' is to cover those with a pension sharing order who, although sharing their pension, will not be seeing a reduction in their EDP lump sum) and income, at the 18/40 point, of normally (for the same reason) 50% of the value of the preserved pension.

Anyone serving beyond the EDP 18/40 point will get an additional 1.6667% of preserved pension for each additional year served.

You can leave with an EDP and transfer your pension out of AFPS 05. You can leave with an EDP and have your pension paid early with actuarial reduction at any age after age 55.

If you wish to have your personal position set out for you join the Forces Pension Society ( The Forces Pension Society ) and we will delighted to help.
Voxpop is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2011, 13:20
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: any where that will have me.
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Public & Private Pension Increases - change from RPI to CPI

If you draw a Service Pension take note









































The recent Forces Pension Society newsletter tells of an RPI/CPI e-petition which has been established hoping to reverse the Government's decision to link pension increases to CPI instead of RPI. The Government will debate e-petitions that achieve 100,000 signatures, so please can you pass on the following link to ex-servicemen that you know in the hope that they'll sign it, as it affects all of us. The link is:

https://submissions.epetitions.direc.../signature/new























Public & Private Pension Increases - change from RPI to CPI


Responsible department: Department for Work and Pensions


Many workers in the Public and Private Sector have contributed to their pensions on the understanding that on retirement these Pensions would be increased each April by the preceding September's Retail Price Index (RPI) rate. From April 2011 the Government has transferred these increases to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) measure which in the Treasury's own words "...is designed to take account of the fact that consumers tend to shop around, switching to cheaper alternatives when prices of similar goods change." This change, which has been introduced in most cases without any prior consultation, will mean a steady reduction in spending power for pensioners as they progress into their retirement. Given the promises that have previously been made, the RPI measure should be reintroduced without delay to ensure that the spending power of these Public and Private pensioners is maintained.




NB The change from RPI to CPI as a measure of general inflation was, of course, introduced to the UK by that well-known financial genius, Gordon Brown MP. His reason? Purely and simply to reduce government expenditure. While there isn't (and won't ever be) a single, universal and accurate measure of inflation, the CPI has consistently run at around 0.5 to 1.5% per annum less than the RPI. They look to be tiny figures, but CPI won't half reduce the real value of your pension, in double-quick time. Don't let Osborne get away with it! Sign up now, and forward to all your serving and ex-Service mates.







If you draw a Service Pension take note









































The recent Forces Pension Society newsletter tells of an RPI/CPI e-petition which has been established hoping to reverse the Government's decision to link pension increases to CPI instead of RPI. The Government will debate e-petitions that achieve 100,000 signatures, so please can you pass on the following link to ex-servicemen that you know in the hope that they'll sign it, as it affects all of us. The link is:

https://submissions.epetitions.direc.../signature/new























Public & Private Pension Increases - change from RPI to CPI


Responsible department: Department for Work and Pensions


Many workers in the Public and Private Sector have contributed to their pensions on the understanding that on retirement these Pensions would be increased each April by the preceding September's Retail Price Index (RPI) rate. From April 2011 the Government has transferred these increases to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) measure which in the Treasury's own words "...is designed to take account of the fact that consumers tend to shop around, switching to cheaper alternatives when prices of similar goods change." This change, which has been introduced in most cases without any prior consultation, will mean a steady reduction in spending power for pensioners as they progress into their retirement. Given the promises that have previously been made, the RPI measure should be reintroduced without delay to ensure that the spending power of these Public and Private pensioners is maintained.




NB The change from RPI to CPI as a measure of general inflation was, of course, introduced to the UK by that well-known financial genius, Gordon Brown MP. His reason? Purely and simply to reduce government expenditure. While there isn't (and won't ever be) a single, universal and accurate measure of inflation, the CPI has consistently run at around 0.5 to 1.5% per annum less than the RPI. They look to be tiny figures, but CPI won't half reduce the real value of your pension, in double-quick time. Don't let Osborne get away with it! Sign up now, and forward to all your serving and ex-Service mates.




If you draw a Service Pension take note









































The recent Forces Pension Society newsletter tells of an RPI/CPI e-petition which has been established hoping to reverse the Government's decision to link pension increases to CPI instead of RPI. The Government will debate e-petitions that achieve 100,000 signatures, so please can you pass on the following link to ex-servicemen that you know in the hope that they'll sign it, as it affects all of us. The link is:

https://submissions.epetitions.direc.../signature/new
















Public & Private Pension Increases - change from RPI to CPI


Responsible department: Department for Work and Pensions


Many workers in the Public and Private Sector have contributed to their pensions on the understanding that on retirement these Pensions would be increased each April by the preceding September's Retail Price Index (RPI) rate. From April 2011 the Government has transferred these increases to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) measure which in the Treasury's own words "...is designed to take account of the fact that consumers tend to shop around, switching to cheaper alternatives when prices of similar goods change."

This change, which has been introduced in most cases without any prior consultation, will mean a steady reduction in spending power for pensioners as they progress into their retirement. Given the promises that have previously been made, the RPI measure should be reintroduced without delay to ensure that the spending power of these Public and Private pensioners is maintained.



NB The change from RPI to CPI as a measure of general inflation was, of course, introduced to the UK by that well-known financial genius, Gordon Brown MP. His reason? Purely and simply to reduce government expenditure.

While there isn't (and won't ever be) a single, universal and accurate measure of inflation, the CPI has consistently run at around 0.5 to 1.5% per annum less than the RPI. They look to be tiny figures, but CPI won't half reduce the real value of your pension, in double-quick time.

Don't let Osborne get away with it!

Sign up now, and forward to all your serving and ex-Service mates.
coffindodger is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2011, 17:53
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Swamp
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whilst I agree that as many as possible should sign the CPI/RPI petition, I fear that George Osborne may have more cunning plans up his sleeve. Last year, he changed the index for benefit and pension inflation uplifts from RPI to CPI (awaiting a high court judgement of the legality of this change). As CPI is higher than he would like, he is apparently looking for other more imaginative ways to calculate inflation to produce an answer that he does like!! On Friday AM, the BBC were reporting that he was seeking to increase benefits (and possibly pensions) by a 6 month average inflation figure of nearer 4%, thereby avoiding the peak figure of 5.2% for September. Presumably this is so he can divert more UK taxpayers' money as aid to regional nuclear superpowers such as India. You couldn't make it up. Stalin could have learnt something from these thieves. Hopefully some of the grown ups (if there are any left) in the Tory party will persuade him to desist.
F.O.D is online now  
Old 19th Nov 2011, 20:40
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Darling - where are we?
Posts: 2,580
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
Lunchboxlegend,

I agree entirely - they are all as bad as each other. But right now, frankly I can't help but feel the cure is worse than the illness. If I have to listen to Cameron and Osborne remind us how we are all in it together just once more, I'd be sorely tempted to write to my local MP pointing out that this is nothing more than Animal Farm writ large. We are all in this together, but some are in it more than others.

Barring the odd Guards and Cavalry Regts, the vast majority of the Forces fall squarely into the squeezed middle. But not only are we getting squeezed on a daily basis, the Forces have been squeezed further by successive chancellors, and not just in terms of overall equipment levels. During the good times when pay rises across the country were heading north, the Forces' weren't; our pay rises were capped in the interests of preventing inflation - like our pay levels would have an impact on inflation compared to the sort of rises doing the rounds in the City and FTSE 100 boards. Now the country is heading south we are getting squeezed again in an attempt to bolster the government's incoherent and dubious policies. And again, in the grand scheme of things, what our pensions would cost is small change in comparison with what the government doles out to the EU and on various other pet projects and the likely costs incurred when our pensions are whittled down to levels that are so low we are forced into the arms of the benefits system once retired. Whether by design, by accident or through ignorance, the impact of what they are doing will condemn us all to a life of working til we drop.

Our pensions were changed from 75 to 05 not out of the goodness of their hearts, but to save money. The change from RPI to CPI - of which a number of institutions such as the Bank of England have not adopted - will cost the average person thousands over the years, the introduction of pensions tax rules that leads to tax bills on promotion and now potentially taxing gratuities - the electorally safe option and therefore most likely compared to binning tax relief on contributions - will drive yet another nail into the Forces' coffin.

But unlike the rest of the country we have no one to fight out corner and frankly we are getting done over because we are the easy option. Those at the top won't rock the boat too hard; they'll do just enough to cause a ripple in the afternoon sherries being passed around the mandarins' offices so as to be seen to be doing something, but precious little else lest they damage their carefully engineered escape route. With all that happening to our pensions inside a few short years I don't see how anybody can say we aren't getting screwed over royally. The only voice we have will come at the next election, but with the ever shrinking size of the Forces, we would be lucky to be able to oust just one or 2 MPs in the election through protest votes even if we could pool all our votes. But if it helps ease the pain, remember we're all in it together and it's for the benfit of the country
Melchett01 is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2011, 21:30
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 4,333
Received 80 Likes on 32 Posts
As I said in Post #51...

BANK!
Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2011, 22:32
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The only voice we have will come at the next election, but with the ever shrinking size of the Forces, we would be lucky to be able to oust just one or 2 MPs in the election through protest votes even if we could pool all our votes.
The PM should remember that he has a sizeable military vote in his constituency - perhaps larger than it was 18 months ago!

Witney
LFFC is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2011, 05:18
  #67 (permalink)  
sidewayspeak
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
As I said in Post #51...

BANK!
I've done exactly that... no redundancies in my branch in Tranche 2, so taking my 22/44 Option. Bit nervous as to the future - getting out in a recession is probably not the best time, but it's time to take control of my life and stop reacting to what is imposed on me.

So commute to dump the mortgage, pension to pay the bills and the job hunt begins.
 
Old 20th Nov 2011, 06:48
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Melchett's comment about the cure being worse than the illness struck a chord. What is the illness? Complication, in my opinion. EVERYTHING we do in life has become so multi facetted, so layered with meaningless or counter productive, self serving beaurocracy that society as we know it is probbaly already institutionally unmanageable and the traditional method of government is probably unsustainable. Bizarrely, our Bond yields have held up, not because (as George Osborne suggests), we are the safe haven in the EU, but because we have a political system in place that can make decisions. God help the rest of them if thats the case.
Al R is offline  
Old 21st Nov 2011, 21:52
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: stockton-on-tees
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This could have a devastating effect on people like me (and Harrier 123) who've done 11 years of a 16 year commission and were planning on going at the end of commission. Potentially we will no longer receive an immediate pension and have to wait until we're 60. This means we will miss out on 20 years of full pension ie nearly £1/4million...!

There will obviously be hell on by those affected and, I'd imagine loads of PVRs as there'll be no incentive to stay....

'Preserved rights' can be interpreted in many ways. If you haven't done your full 16 years then you could not 'qualify' for anything and potentially get zero immediate pension Despite working for 11 of those years on the assumption that you were working towards an immediate pension.
OpsO1000 is offline  
Old 21st Nov 2011, 22:57
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Somewhere nice overseas.
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
OpsO1000

Fella, I really hope that you are getting this very wrong indeed. My understanding is that just about the only thing you can count on is that what you have earned to date, you will keep.

So, if it all changes in 2015 (for arguments sake) you will at your 16/38 point get 14 or 15 16ths of your currently expected immediate pension. Worst case then is that you will wait 20 odd years to get the other 1 or 2 16ths that you earned after the rules changed.

But it's all a guessing game and my guess is based on nothing but heresay.

So you may be b*ggered after all. Happy to help.
Scuttled is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2011, 00:26
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When we were last visited by the AFPRB we pressed on exactly this issue. The reply was that earnt 'years in' would be kept, but that wouldn't necessarily be reflected in 'rewards earnt'.

i.e. As a AFPS 75 member, having been in 16 years and therefore earnt an immediate pension would translate to 16 'year credits' in the new scheme - but not necessarily an immediate pension.

As I am no expert I immediately joined the FPS.

Oh and promised to leave before it mattered.
orca is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2011, 07:06
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: YORKS
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It would be very interesting to know what will happen to people currently drawing a pension as well. Where will the cut off point be?

Let's assume Flt Lt X retires in Jan 2015 and receives a full payment, immediate pension. Does Flt Lt Y who retires in the May 2015 ( and on new terms) not receive his immediate pension?

I'm really not sure the legalities of all of this, but if people in very similar situations, who have paid, contributed and sacrificed the same, get two completely different pensions?

The uncertainty of it all is actually causing a lot of people undue stress and worry. I've only stayed in these last couple of years on the promise of this pension.
3 bladed beast is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2011, 16:38
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: stockton-on-tees
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think people generally understand that we have very good pensions and they will be cut, somehow, when the government is skint.

However, early 2012 we could be told that after doing, say 15 years 11 months of a 16 year commission on the old terms, you may not be entitled to a penny at the 16 year point and instead get nothing until you're 60. Like I said above, that would amount to about £1/4million in a Flt Lt's case. That would seem massively disproportionate rather than trimming some of the 'gold plate'.

Like Scuttled says, I hope they would still pay you an immediate pension but only the proportion of time served on the old pension scheme and any time spent on the new scheme preserved until 60. But, as Orca says, no-one has been able to state that this will happen in the briefings given already. I can't help thinking there are going to be some very nasty shocks for people in my position.
OpsO1000 is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2011, 18:33
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just a thought from a KOS.

What will be the effect on a Widows pension when She may have herself and several children to cater for?
cazatou is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2011, 18:51
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 2,442
Received 62 Likes on 29 Posts
Might I dare to suggest that people wait until they have a few facts to discuss, rather than pick over "what if scenarios" between now and the time when anything is actually announced...
Biggus is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2011, 18:53
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lunchbox

Old chap let's be very clear about one thing...absolutely no one has mentioned an Immediate Pension Point. Quite the opposite. They have very deliberately spoken of 'normal retirement age' and reinforced that with '55 for AFPS 75' etc, hence the statement that those over 45 will probably see no change.

It is entirely plausible that the '16 year point' will disappear. Unless you are 45 plus you have things to consider. If you are past a 16 year point in Mar 15 then you have the (possibly very attractive) option to walk.

And why wouldn't you? As is often stated, our pensions are brilliant. But you have to leave to get it.
orca is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2011, 22:42
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Reading some of the whining on here I have to wonder how some folk ever got through the Biggen Hill/Cranwell thing....
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2011, 00:27
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The cakestand
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Suspect you mean Biggin Hill. It's quite famous.

I clearly remember venturing in an interview that a 16 year commission suited me as it not only demonstrated commitment on my part, but would be rewarded with a pension. This was met with the absolute approval of the lady interviewing me.

Of course if you did mean Biggen Hill I apologise profusely. Was that an establishment where 54 year olds expressed dismay at the attitude of youngsters from the safety of being 9 years inside the 'won't be touched' criteria?
Short Lift Wet is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2011, 05:33
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 958
Received 11 Likes on 9 Posts


Cracking first post, me old!
The B Word is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2011, 07:59
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Short Lift Wet
Suspect you mean Biggin Hill. It's quite famous.

I clearly remember venturing in an interview that a 16 year commission suited me as it not only demonstrated commitment on my part, but would be rewarded with a pension. This was met with the absolute approval of the lady interviewing me. And of course from that day on every single person you have ever met has either told you the truth or told you things will never change

Of course if you did mean Biggen Hill I apologise profusely. Was that an establishment where 54 year olds expressed dismay at the attitude of youngsters from the safety of being 9 years inside the 'won't be touched' criteria?
Apologies for the spelling mistake, it would seem that a combination of the pub to watch footy as Mrs SFFP held some sort of Candle Party and IPad with it's ability to compulsory spool chuck has caught me out.

20 or so years ago when I went through it was also the place where rigorous testing of candidates was carried out with regard to a whole bunch of differing criterion including aptitude. Clearly if some folk think Prune is the font of all knowledge on this subject and that a verbal promise given all those years ago was somehow set in tablets of stone the entrance bar must have lowered some what over the years.
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.