some facts
Hi all, read most of this thread and found quite a lot of incorrect info.
As of 2016, 75% of the NAPS fund was invested in equity and property, 25% was in bonds and guilts. The fund grew in 2016 by 2.7 billion. Most of this increase is not company contribution or employee contribution or deficit reduction payments, its return on investment.
Please be clear, NAPS fund is not all invested in low yield bonds. However the deficit calculation uses the assummed yield of low yield bonds.
I am waiting for a reply from BA at present related to figures in their 2016 end of year accounts, they are published and available on the internet. In it, in employee benifits, section 31 i think, are figures from 2015 and 2016, the one I am most interested in is the remeasurement of liabilies. In 2015 it was 363 million-a positive figure, in 2016 its about (4500)-a negative figure.
So in one year through changing assumption you get a change of nearly 5 billion? I'm not buying it.
Mortality rates have been flat between 2010 and 2017 (official figures) These changes in predicted life span have not been factored in to the equation to estimate deficit.
IAG have an active bid now for Air Berlin, 7th largest european airline that has resently failed. I dont know what part/ parts IAG are bidding for and I believe it is unlikely they will win their bid, but they are bidding.
850 million was given to share holders 2016/2017. (dividend and share buy back) Mr Walsh has predicted at least 10% increase in dividend year on year until 2020.
I have simpathy for those BA employees that are in BARPS, it is a poor DC scheme that will not provide a suitable level of pension. I apposed its introduction and actively inform my colleagues of how poor it is and that I believe a DC scheme needs to have a contribution level of 25% to return a desent level of pension. I joined BA 32 years ago and part of my deferred pay was a NAPS pension that I paid 5.25% for, a great benifit. (It costs significantly more now and is diluted). Those that have joined since 2003 had BARPS. That is not my fault, my doing or something I like. Please remember this was BA's doing, not NAPS members.
I could continue for some time but will cut to the chase, I do not believe there is a massive black hole in the NAPS pension fund. I believe the method used to calculate the future liabilities is extremely inaccurate, perhaps deliberately. British Airways/ IAG is now and predicts in the future it will continue a strong financial position of profitability and growth. This is not the profile of a company that can not afford is legal obligation to its pension schemes.
It will be difficult to stop BA closing NAPS. The best way I can see is a court case that challenges the assumptions to create the deficit and the ability for BA to support the schemes. Please petition your unions to take on this case should the trustees agree to rule changes that allow closing for future accrual.
Beyond this the DC scheme that they plan to provide instead of NAPS and BARPS is still a poor provision. Combined contributions of at least 25% are required, this level is not available to anyone short or long term and needs to there for all, permenantly, not just some.
This issue could bring all employees together irrispective of age profession or date of joining. It needs to to help ensure all of our futures.