I went to the brief because i wanted to hear whatever they could come out with to convince me to slit my own throat and vote "Yes".
I listened, I questioned and i changed my mind. Two main reasons.
1. My "Vote No" was based mainly on the fine and well intentioned information contained in this here thread. I found the case presented by the NTUS team was well thought out and although not the rosiest of pictures, not half as black as painted here. If the same problems are besetting all final-salary schemes, I bet our solution is better than most, if not all.
2. I witnessed the member of the NTUS team who represented my own grade, a man whom I trust as a representative of our entire grade structure and a dyed in the wool Union man, tell me that this was as good as we are going to get. Any attempt at trying to scar Barron or NATS with a "No" vote was counter-productive and that although it pained him to say it, he recommended a "Yes" vote in order to protect what we have already.
Good enough for me.
I don't think we're going to get much more than RPI = 0.5% anyway for the forseeable. My pension will increase. My pay may increase more. My pension is still better than anyone else's [especially the poor wee buggers on a standard Civil Service Pension].
I will be voting yes.
A thought. If we spent a bit less time "fighting" management, we wouldn't need so many bloody managers. Now that is what I call win/win.
Another thought. There seem to be some pretty provocative posts coming from relatively new posters. Not an accusation, but something to consider...