If the current scheme is closed to new entrants what will the underlying cost to the company be to maintain it for those of us still included?
As the years go by and we have no new people joining and more people retiring- hence drawing from the scheme and no longer making contri's, what will the underlying cost become then?
Surely it could feasibly get to the stage where the number of living retirees greatly outweighs the remaining contributors? This would mean that the company would have to meet a proportionally greater underlying cost does it not?
Worst case scenario- 1 person left in the scheme (probably me) making contri's- 2.5k people retired and drawing from it. Will the company fund that?
The new scheme proposed is only semi decent if you pay the max 9% contri's. Not many people starting on 10k will be doing that.
On top of that you're responsible for the way in which your own "pot of money" is invested. This is a real cop out- no guarantees as to what you'll get at the end but as long as the company have matched your contri's x2 they're covered.
Prospect Rep said that this proposed new scheme was a lot better than the one they negotiated for BAA staff. Was BAA's old scheme as good as CAAPS? Are the skill bases and job types between the 2 companies comparable? I don't think they can be but...