UK Armed Forces annual pay award

[Biggus]

The 2002 report of the Armed Forces Pay Review Body was published on 29 Jan 02. I'm not sure when the 2003 report came out, but the numbers were on the streets by mid Feb 03. I am therefore assuming the 2004 announcement is not far away. Has anyone out there any news/rumours/useful input on the likely award this time around?

[Spur Lash]

Biggus,

Defence budget scrabbling to recover £3 billion,

Public sector having equally intense time,

Go on, have a guess at say, 2.6%.

Regards,

Lost in space.

[Stan Bydike]

May be enough to keep pace with tax and NI increases but probably not :sad:

[propulike]

Same increase as the firemen got ? :hmm:

[Down 4 Reprogram]

Based on the facts that we have just won a war (so won't be needed for a few years in the politician's eyes), the Defence budget being massively overdrawn, and the Defence White Paper hinting at numerous redundancies.

My own predictions are:

1. 2-2.5% (or whatever figure around or just under inflation the Government think they can get away with).

2. FRI's reduced by 50% (with heavy hints that they will be binned completely next year).

[Maple 01]

Food and accom to increase above rate of inflation and/or pay increase?

[gearontheglide]

Naturally the food and accom will increase by a greater rate. And don't forget that the pay rise will be split 1.25% in Apr and the other 1% in October but all charges will increase in one fell swoop in Apr.

[FOMere2eternity]

But the Armed Forces Pay Review Board are independent, like...well, Lord Hutton.

Theoretically the AFPRB could blame us for the war because there wouldn't have been one if we'd not showed up in Iraq and could also claim we have WME (Weapons of Mass Expense), thus requiring us to be removed by a coalition of review teams immediately...

:hmm:

[Impiger]

Before this thread descends into a rant about the AFPRB I thought I could add some value!

The AFPRB is truly independent and on the whole Forces friendly. If you have worked with them or spoken to them during their visits, and they go everywhere including the operational theatres, you will know they are well informed, fair and at no stage does the word 'affordability' come into their deliberations.

The Government (Treasury & MOD) and all three Services give evidence to the AFPRB formal sessions and their report - if you can be bothered to read it - sets out quite clearly what they believed from the evidence and the areas where they were less convinced.

The real problem starts when their recommendations arrive with the Government. MOD now have to fund the increase from within current budgetary provision (at one stage HMT gave an automatic uplift to cover the pay award but this stopped some 10 years ago). So PUS and 2nd PUS who are responsible for the cash get into a tremendous tizzy about affordability. It is these hoods who have in the past (but not recently) suggested staging awards.

If it all looks like going pair shaped CDS will wade in on behalf of the Forces. One year the PUS of the day was trying to balance the budget and suggested that the X-factor increase could be reduced - after all we had increased separation and associated allowances and that was what X-factor was all about, wasn't it? CDS firmly told the PUS to stop being daft and read the small print - with over 25% of the Forces deployed to places where people shot at them he thought failing to implement the AFPRB's recommendations on X-factor could turn out to be a career limiting move!

Hey ho - I reckon 2.6 average but 3.2 for lower ranks and less for the brass. Watch recruiting and retention adjustments - they after all designed to do what it says on the tin and lets all pray for a big increase on X-factor as the Forces are stretched well above the design limit put in place by SDR in 1998.

[Scud-U-Like]

I agree with Impiger. AFPRB are very fair and impartial. They have never recommended staged pay awards, which have always been a Treasury ploy. Come to think of it, we haven't had a staged pay award for some years now. The current Chair of AFPRB is Brenda Dean, the former print workers' union boss and, therefore, hardly a pillar of the establishment. Anyway, don't take my word for it, read their last report: Armed Forces Pay Review Body Recommendations - 2003 (http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/issues/cm5717.pdf) And if you can't be bothered to do that, then don't bleat about something you know cock-all about.

Provided the pay award tracks inflation, I'm happy. I'm not sure what more we should expect.

[vascodegama]

I do not want to dampen anyones spirit but the chances of an increase in X factor are nil. Examination of last years report will reveal that the 5 year X factor review was brought forward to 2003 (vice 2004 I believe). How nice and independant one might think. I would say b*****ks. Since it is obvious that the Govn already wanted to to war before said review then it was to their ie the Govs advantage to review the X factor sooner rather than later. Heaven forbid they might be forced to increase it after a War. Funny old thing it was unchanged!

[BEagle]

Whatever you guys get, it'll be more than those who are on a post-PVR pension will get until they reach their equivalent 55 point. I knew that and it doesn't affect me, but I wonder whether some PVR retirees are aware of it. But we'll get a jolly nice pay rise when we do reach our equivalent 55 year points, of course...

And yes, many of us knew several months before Trust-Me Tone sucked Mad George's ar$e so publicly that we were being set up for another Gulf War. Nothing was going to stop him doing "What ma' Daddy bin' startin', y'all, ah'm goin' t' finish. Yee-hah, let's go kick us some Eye-raqi butt.."

I hope that you all get the pay rise you so richly deserve. But I'm so glad I punched out.

Added later: I agree, the AFPRB teams do listen. If you ever get the chance to attend one of their information-seeking visits, TAKE IT!!

[Vage Rot]

Pay Review Body Report is out on 16 Feb - or so says my source!

[Lord Trenchards Brat]

Heard in the office, belived I think from RN sources, that its between 3.7 and 4.2%. Apparently its public within some RN areas. Can anyone confirm or deny?:confused:

[MrBernoulli]

BEagle,

Here I am doing my daily bit in the skies over 'Eye-Rack' wondering just how little the Forces are going to get. I personally am convinced it will be below inflation and staged. With the great holes that have 'suddenly' appeared in the MOD budget recently it would not surprise me if there was NO rise!

[Down 4 Reprogram]

LTB

The figures you quote are exactly the same as the 2002 pay award - are you sure that some joker hasn't passed your RN chums a copy of an old report with a new cover on it?

D4R

[Lord Trenchards Brat]

D4R

You may well be right. I knew the figures were "strangely" familiar :O

Still 4.2% will probably not cover my Council Tax increase...................but then it never has:mad:

It will never be enough;)

[DP Harvey]

I've always believed that the AFPRB carries out an annual independant review and then makes recommendations only. The MOD/Treasury then accepts or modifies the AFPRB's recommendations.

I think the government would be on a hiding to nothing if they did not accept the AFPRB's recommendations this year; more than most.

[Yeller_Gait]

DP H,

If I rememeber rightly, the government have always (within reason), accepted the AFPRB recommendations in recent years, the only added bonus (as far as the gov't is concerned) is that they have phased in pay rises in the past, though this has not been the case recently though.

Lets hope that we get a decent/deserved rise this year, though I guess 3% is the best we can hope for.

[Briney]

Just found out:

The 2004 Reports of the Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body and Senior Salaries Review Body are expected to be published during the morning of Thursday 12 February 2004. Details will be available on dNet (http://centre.defence.mod.uk/dgcc_newsportal/stories/0402/afprb.htm) and on the MOD internet site (http://www.mod.uk/issues/pay/index.htm) as soon as possible after 1100 hours.

There will be dancing in the streets, I don't think

From MOD Intranet
NEWS CONTINUED
2004 Reports of the Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body (AFPRB)


On Thursday 12 February the Secretary of State for Defence is expected to announce the publication of the Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body Thirty-Third Report 2004.
At 1100 hrs on Thursday 12 February the following documents will become available on this page:

Written Ministerial Statement
Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body Thirty-Third Report 2004
Signal to All Military Personnel
Review Body on Senior Salaries Twenty-Sixth Report 2004

Those lucky enough to be viewing from an IGS machine can gaze upon our revered 'leader'
http://centre.defence.mod.uk/dgcc_newsportal/images/hoon.jpg
The Secretary of State for Defence, Rt Hon Geoff Hoon MP


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Hard Bernard]

2.8% (except for some LACs and SACs who will get 3.2%)

[teeteringhead]

And no sign of any FRIs? Or have I missed something:confused:

[DP Harvey]

The reason for the lack of any comments or recommendations relating to existing FRIs is because they are set to continue at the existing rates for 5 years since inception. Last year's AFPRB report clearly states this fact and indicates that they will be producing a review of the effect of the existing FRIs in the 2005 Report.

The new FRI for NCA (£20K at 17 years) is mentioned in this year's Report and is fully supported by the AFPRB.

The FRIs are not subject to indexing linking. They are fixed amounts payable to particular personnel meeting specific requirements.

Hope this helps to allay any fears that the FRIs are no longer in place. :cool:

[insty66]

I guess I should have been a fireman:{
If the pay review board is truly independant why should they take into account affordability (it's in the report) surely they put forward a reccomendation and the government should then cap it.
My initial reading of this suggests they have been given a budget and told "spend carefully and we'll keep the change if you don't mind" :mad:
Still if I don't like it ..........................tough

[Slotback]

This pay award, for it certainly is not a pay rise in any real terms, is nothing more than a derisory insult to all the men and women who have worked so hard over the last 12 months.

The audacity of a government that has the military doing firemans jobs(because they cocked up that pay deal) and then sends the same troops of to war is unbelievable. And have you seen the size of the pay rises that ministers and MPs have recieved! It couldn't be more insulting.

I urge everyone to do as I am, and write immediately to your MP, make your views know and make sure that pressure is also applied up the chain. This way we may not get a change in the pay award, but hopefully we will get a change in the leadership of the MOD and once and for all get rid of that waste of space Hoon (Exactly what has he done that has benefited the forces, and not his career). Make sure those at the top know we're not happy. especially as they are sending us away from home and family more often.

[zedder]

I'm afraid I have to go against the flow and say that the pay award is not that bad considering the huge black hole that is appearing in this Governments finances.

People always seem to forget that for the Officer Ranks, unless you've 'peaked out' in a particular rank, you get an increment as well as the Pay Award within any calender year. From my quick bashing on a calculator, for most, the pay rise over the whole year will be about 4.6%.

Then there are those that either jumped across, or will within this calendar year, to the PA Spine. As you can't take a pay cut and the pay rates are not perfectly aligned, this is worth about another 0.3%.

Ask around your mates out in civvy street and see what type of pay and pay rises those of your vintage are getting. I bet many of them won't be seeing nearly 5%, assuming they've still got a job at all that is.

I don't see much green grass on the other side of the fence, so to quote a Monty Python favourite of mine..."Always look on the bright side of life". When you consider what a non-contributory pension is worth as well, we aren't badly paid really.:ok:

[FFP]

I agree. I know of many people that work v hard in civvy street and receive .5 to 1% as a pay rise. We don`t actually do that bad.

I like the spin given though. " MOD give a warm welcome to the pay award and say it reflects the hard work done"

Not sure how to take that . .. . . .. .

Anyone know how much Flying Pay is going up by ? Can`t seem to access the document

[Oggin Aviator]

pdf file posted on MOD site here. (http://www.mod.uk/issues/pay/index.htm)

[FFP]

Still can`t access it . . . . ..

[Melrin Dip]

As I sit in my Office working 8-5 getting a full whack of flying pay I just cannot believe the moaning bunch of t£$%$rs out there.

This is an above average, above inflation pay rise.

Ask the Civil Servant or contractor who works next to what he got and how much he is really paid.

Waht do you guys want more money or less flying hours/runs ashore and subs.

:E

[Tiger_mate]

If it is anything like the last 2 years, then once the taxman gets his bit, you get less per month in hand.

I earned more in Apr 2001 than I did in Apr 2003!!

That is progress I believe. ..... and yes I am a fellow whinger, cause I am well beyond being a "Career Yes man!"

[Down 4 Reprogram]

IMHO it's not a bad deal. The 2.8% seems to apply across the board (basic + flying pay etc). More than I expected anyway.

DP H

The reason people like teeteringhead are asking about FRI's is because, although not mentioned in the AFPRB reports, the MOD Q&A briefs made heavy mention of (and I quote) "ARR FRI rates will be governed by the manning situation and market forces. These will be reviewed annually by MOD. Manning evidence is provided to the Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body by MOD annually and the level of ARR FRIs and remuneration may be altered accordingly."

As far as I know no mention is good - i.e. the levels remain unchanged. However, standby for the major revamp next year.

D4R

[Biggus]

Reference FRI, my understanding of the situation is that FRI is guaranteed to exist for a minimum of 5 years, but the ACTUAL AMOUNT is subject to variation on a year by year basis depending on retention requirements!!!

[insty66]

Mdip..............I'll bite, most of us don't get flying pay, the only extra money we get is LSSA/B GYHD etc etc an admission like yours As I sit in my Office working 8-5 getting a full whack of flying pay deserves utter contempt. It merely re-enforces my opinion that there are too many people in the RAF who just polish chairs and take the money.
I believe it is a rotten deal when compared against the "brave firemen" it was the military who once again bailed out a government who had messed up pay negotiations (I know the argument about employers negotiating but it's the treasury who hold the purse strings), not to mention the Iraq fiasco, where it now seems many good people lost their live under false pretences.
The only thing I am grateful for is I'm not a teacher as their pay is set to be cut in the next two years.
Having checked my pay packet from jan 02 I find that my take home pay has risen by just short of £35 I can't imagine where it all goes.:{

[betty_boo_x]

I've just checked, and I think you'll find that in case you thought you were elsewhere, that this is pPrune so a small part of it is populated by PILOTS.

[Lionel Lion]

So to summarise:

A 22% increase in leaky garage charges (over 3 years)
2.8% pay rise - more than HCIP (new way of considering inflation) but less than the RPI/RPIX
Increases paid for out of existing budget
Net cost to the services £196 million

Now since we have a £3-4 billion overspend in the next 3 years, what else will be cut to pay for this:

£196 million = a type 45? 4 Eurofighters?

[insty66]

bbx I'd got that far but I stand by my comments. There are far too many people in the RAF who " just sit in their office 8-5 and collect the money." If you re-read you will notice that I never mentioned Pilots/aircrew it was a general comment about the great many who do not do their share. I hope that the Army and RN are better off in that respect otherwise there is not much hope for the military in the UK. We will soon be so top heavy there will be an officer for each enlisted person.
The pay deal still stinks and I'm still glad I'm not a teacher or any other of the myriad of public servants this government appears to hate.
minor rant over:\

[Down 4 Reprogram]

Biggus

The FRI's as originally described in the 2002 AFPRB Report were to run for a minimum of 5 years, i.e. 2002-2006.

Consider though this from the latest report:

2.27 We welcome the effect of the remuneration measures on Aircrew manning. We have called for a full review of all Aircrew measures, including Flying Pay, for our 2005 Report. In view of the re-emergence of competition from the commercial market and the impact of the new Service pay arrangements, we ask MOD to provide an assessment of progress against various targets to achieve manning balance and subsequently “sustainable experience profiles” and the continuing requirement for the short-term FRIs.

Just because the 2002 report said FRI's would run for 5 years doesn't mean they will. I am thankful for those this year who will get their well deserved FRI if they decide to sign on. However, looking a little further down the line to those who qualify for an FRI in 2005-6, as usually nothing is guaranteed.

[Lord Trenchards Brat]

Insty66

For your information

many people in the RAF who " just sit in their office 8-5 and collect the money

wish to be out on sqns and amongst the real RAF, RN and Army, but as the many who are out there do not wish to rotate through staff jobs (because they may have houses localy etc and dont want the move "The comfort zone!"), we retain the constant PMA trawls to fill posts. Additionaly those that get sent here can rarely find a post to get back to :mad:

I suggest you wake up and volunteer for a staff tour (branch and rank permitted) and see what actually goes on. Nights away from home on a weekly basis in places as exotic as Bristol or in our wonderfull Messes :yuk:
coupled with 10 hr+ days in support of the "Hard" working front line.
I do not deny that you may work long hours and go on OOAs (we are not exempt OOA and Fresco stuff etc) but please only rant when perhaps in a position to do so.:p

LTB

[[email protected]]

Chapter 4 of the report on page 27 deals with Specialist pay (flying pay). Having had an increase of 15p a day I took the following paragraphs as interesting:

"4.4 MOD’s evidence proposed the introduction of standard daily rates of Specialist Pay from 1 April 2004 comprising 100 rates at 50p increments (from 50p to £50 at 2003 prices).
Transition would be to the nearest increment. This would produce different increases for different groups but, following the principle in other major pay changes, no one would take a pay cut as a result."

"4.5 We welcome the introduction of common arrangements under JPA and MOD’s efforts to rationalise the plethora of extra payments and allowances which cloud the remuneration
system. We note that some items of Specialist Pay have already moved, or will move, to common principles as a result of our periodic reviews. We anticipate receiving further evidence in preparation for the full transition under JPA. In the meantime, the early introduction of standard rates of Specialist Pay will do much to clarify the system in the minds of personnel themselves and will make it easier to manage future modifications or targeting of specific groups. We therefore recommend the introduction of standard rates of Specialist Pay from 1 April 2004. We further recommend that the standard rates be increased in line with our overall pay recommendation. MOD explained in the evidence
paper that when it transfers personnel to the new rates on 1 April 2004 differential increases will be produced."

sorry for the legth of quote.

[betty_boo_x]

I 66
I'm annoyed at myself for doing this but,...............who else gets Flying Pay ? apart from Aircrew?
Not all the people doing 8-5 want to be there. Much rather be upside down looking at clouds!
Just another change we are all going to have to get used to, and it could have been a whole lot worse.
Glad I'm not a Teacher,Nurse,Fireman,Policeman even when I am in the office

[Unmissable]

Barking..

I always understood that flying pay was A
'additional pay' and not specialist pay. Specialist pay is for special duties eg deep sea divers , etc.

Therefore, your extract is hopefully not erlevant to flying pay.

[insty66]

bbx.........who else gets Flying Pay ? apart from Aircrew?
Airborne? Technicians E3's (Ithink)
LTB..........I happily aknowledge the OOA & FRESCO point. I have worked at every line available to me bar one, hopefully that will be my next job.
My posts are not aimed at those who want to do their share but those who clearly do not. I cannot believe you have not encountered at least one or two of those creatures. Quotes like I highlighted before do not sit favourably with me nor should they with you, if MD was fishing well I bit.
For my part I feel that there should be an enforced move for people from units after a maximum time limit, say 5 years and we should be reqiured to plan our lives on that eventuality.

[[email protected]]

Unmissable

Like most people I can't seem to keep up with all the changes! I am amazed that this report uses so many words to say so little. JPA seems to mean that all 3 services will have the same pay system. Cynically I believe it won't work as it relies on IT and programmers.

The following paragraph from the report makes me believe that specialist pay is part of additional pay:

"Chapter 4
Specialist Pay, Non-Specialist Pay and Compensatory Allowances

Introduction

4.1 The 1998 Review of Additional Pay established three categories of payment: Specialist Pay; Non-Specialist Pay; and Compensatory Allowances. For this report, only two Additional Pay items were scheduled for periodic review – Mountain Leaders’ and Hydrographic Pay – and our recommendations for these are set out below. In addition, however, as part of MOD’s modernisation of the pay system in preparation for JPA, we received evidence on how Specialist Pay would operate under JPA and the transitional arrangements to take effect from 1 April 2004. "

I got the impression that flying pay will progress annually under JPA in much the same way as Pay 2000 increments do. Maybe it is just a new rate guide and then you jump after qualified service as now. But as with all these recent anouncements there is a hint of what is going to happen but no hard facts.

I could of course be barking up the wrong tree........

[DP Harvey]

Additional Pay is broadly what it says it is: any (temporary) pay additional to basic pay and it is not pensionable. Specialist Pay (Pro aircrew, dentists and hydrographers, etc) is augmented basic pay and is therefore is pensionable.

Submarine Pay, Flying Pay, Pay for Work of an Objectional Nature, etc, as temporary payments, are all forms of Additional Pay.

Thefeore, Flying Pay is not on the same spine as Specialist Pay.

[Braveheart]

Insty66,

What is your argument, I don't understand. Are you saying aircrew who do ground tours should not get flying pay? If so, why not? Answer my questions.

[betty_boo_x]

Airborne Tech's wholeheartedly deserve their extra pay,for the duration of their FLYING tour,because thats what they get.
Similarly Flying Stewards, Ground Engineers,Aeromeds.
If I'm CAS I will change a few things, but as I've spent a very long time getting this far, I fear that I've peaked.
Most people I work with deserve the pay they get , an awful lot deserve a whole lot more. But on the whole the retention plot is working (except for career Navs) and the spread of cash is to target those most difficult to replace.
The threat of a Ground tour is enough to make SOME people leave.
Everyone(even the military) has a choice,and but one life.I have no issue with any kind of extra pay for anyone,we all deserve at least what we get.

[The Gorilla]

Boo

I very much agree with your comments. I even agreed with the FC's getting flying pay whilst on E3's. Something that not many of my brethren agreed with!!

If you get the pay you deserve it!!

:ok:

[wiffletree]

2.8% is better than nailing a rusty nail through your b******s! And it is more than other public sector workers are going to get. And just think of all those great left wing minority causes that can be given extra money!

[insty66]

Braveheart, you didn't say please:(
Still having checked my posts to be sure. I never mentioned cutting flying or any other kind of pay. It just seems that I have made my point rather poorly. My gripe is not with any branch/trade but with the attitude that some people have. That attitude of "sit back and let some other mug do it" Is my pet hate.
Removing flying pay for Aircrew on a ground tour would save money but I suspect that very soon there might be a rush for the doors. So I'm against that one. It might make an interesting thread though:E

[Unmissable]

Quote:

"But on the whole the retention plot is working (except for career Navs) "

Please expand, I would have thought that Navs would be the first to take the money and stay considering their employability outside!

[betty_boo_x]

There are "some" people in every walk of life. Some get paid more,some less. Some people are a right laugh,some people grip my s***. I drink coffee,beer and talk to the former most of the time and the latter only when I have to. I just let it drift by and appreciate now that not everyone can be as perfect as me. And not everyone is getting 2.8%

(That bit about perfect was a joke!)
Edited because the bit about Navs was also a joke - as soon thats all there will be-all 25000 or whatever the latest number is.
I once flew with one nav who if it wasnt for gravity would never had found earth again.

[Biggus]

b_b_x

And what did you do about it, apart from gather material for yet another nav joke? Inform his flight commander, supervisor, nav leader, get him checked out by somebody else with a view to extra training or a chop ride, or just carry on as some pilots do with the 'all navs are c**p' attitude that does everyone a disservice, including the nav in question?

Ah, I was forgetting, navs are just good for jokes.....

[betty_boo_x]

Easy Tiger:cool:
I love Navs..........and relax. Breath in......and out....and in.....and out.
Now about this 2.8%

[insty66]

bbx.................You are right there are some people in all walks of life, That doesn't mean I have to like them.:mad:

[Vage Rot]

Unmissable,

Unlike pilots, Navs might not have a ready made job to go out for, however, they have less and less of a reason to stay. I joined as a Pilot, was chopped (might have passed if I'd had all the flex that the girls did at the time but 7 hours was my lot!) but have had a great time as a Nav watching Biggled **** up. The future isn't so bright for young Navs these days!

I've been offered PAS but they can ram it where the sun don't shine - not because I'm bitter, simply that I'm more employable now than in another 5 years time (I'm not naive enough to think my job will last until 55!!)

The smaller the RAF becomes the fewer promotion slots will be available for Navs and the worse the problem will become. The RAF's answer will be that they don't need to retain Navs - partly true but you do need them to join in the first place and retain them for a fair time - If I was offered a job as a Nav today I wouldn't even consider it - there's few long term prospects and for the young guys and galls virtually no prospect beyond 38 - and that's from a Nav.

:sad:

[I_stood_in_the_door]

Dear all,

Are we not all volunteers? Any pay rise (hopefully greater than the infaltion rate!) is welcomed - don't you all do it for the love of the job?

As they say 'Sign on the line, do the time!'.

:8

PS If you voted for Mr T Bliar, its your fault......and someone had to! Bring on the Conservative revolution - Mr Howard and his slim line government for me!!

ISITD

:}

[Ginseng]

Getting back to the actual detail of the pay award, it was about what I'd hoped for and rather better than I had feared at the worst. I don't think we could realistically have expected any more. However, what is going on with specialist/additional pay? No actual award rates yet published, only the recommended rates in the AFPRB report, which despite the text saying that they were based on the same general per-centage recommendation as basic pay, are actually variable between 6+% and 1% in the NCA bands. And on top of this, the promise of a new standardised banding from 1 Apr 04! The AFPRB and the Government can't even agree on whose idea it was! The report says that the MoD told AFPRB of its intention to introduce this system, which the AFPRB thought was a decent idea in principle and thus recommended it. The Award signal is worded to give the impression that the whole thing was the AFPRBs idea in the first place! Whichever is right, the AFPRB says that the MoD told it that to introduce this system would cause variable per-centage award rates. All very strange, and not a little worrying as they haven't shown us the real detail yet.

[Anton Dhorn]

Has anybody heard anything about the retention bonus for NCA at the 17 year point. My new car hangs in the balance!!

[wiffletree]

Have you considered a 12 year old Skoda?

[Grimweasel]

Pensions.......

After some advice on the subject above. As pensions are the most favourably taxed savings is it worth making extra voluntary contributions to the forces pension rather than saving using unit trusts/ISA's/etc??

Also can someone who has already left after 8 years make VC's to the forces pension??

All advice greatly received;) ;)

;)

[Ginseng]

Grimweasel

The answer to your first question is MAYBE. You need to take independent professional financial advice, since the answer will depend on a balance between FSAVC performance, Annnuity Rates, possible future changes in pensions legislation and a whole host of other things.

The answer to the second question is ALMOST CERTAINLY NOT (even if the 8 years were served on a pensionable engagement). Even current members of the AFPS cannot make AVCs to buy extra years between actual retirement and age 55, where retirement is expected to occur before the age of 55. The relevent In-Scheme AVC is only available to buy-in previous years of lost Reckonable Service, either due to joining after the starting age for Reckonable Service, or to having left and re-joined where the intervening years are not elligible for benefits from another occupational pension scheme. My reference document is a little dated, but I have no reason to believe the position has changed. For clarification, you may wish to contact your relevant service pensions office.

Not much help, I fear, but sent with regards.

[Grimweasel]

Ginseng.......... many thanks old chap!!

Bloody IFA's have a stranglehold on us all....