BA end pension

[fruitbat]

Oh dear...it has happened.

BA has announced it will end the final salary pension scheme for all new entrants. Others will surely follow...

[fantom]

too right. there is going to be a flood. surprised ours has not given notice yet.....

:(

[6feetunder]

British Airways Changes Pension Scheme For New Employees
Edited Press Release
LONDON -(Dow Jones)- British Airways (NYSE: BAB - News) is to change the pension provision it makes for future new U.K. employees, moving from a defined benefit final salary basis to a defined contribution basis from autumn 2002.
The decision will not affect the pension benefits of the 65,000 members of NAPS, the New Airways Pension Scheme, or the 36,000 members of APS, the original Airways Pension Scheme, which was available to employees who joined before 1984.
The decision follows a thorough internal review of the company's U.K. pension arrangements taking into account the changing competitive environment, new accounting rules (FRS17), volatile markets and rising life expectancy.
Under FRS17, APS/NAPS taken together generate a company accounting shortfall of GBP394 million as at March 31, 2002 .
APS/NAPS have investments together valued at nearly GBP10 billion. Both schemes meet the statutory Minimum Funding Requirement (MFR).
The FRS17 valuation does not have any impact on cash flow.


These schemes have proven to be inadequate due to low funding levels on the part of the employer. The one at CX for example (B-Scale Provident Fund) has been shown by many actuaries to be under funded, leading to lower than average benefits.

Any idea of the contribution level?

[fruitbat]

Will be interesting to see what BALPA have to say... guess it's a done deal.

[jumbodriver]

so,
no final salary pension,inadequate pay and conditions(well below market rate),no SCOPE agreement as yet,time to command moving further and further away(if you join now,think in terms of 20 years),fleet size and route structure diminishing,etc.etc.etc.
I really cannot see why any young proffessional airline pilot would consider it.
As for potential DEP's...I hear Dubai is nice at this time of year..

jumbodriver

[The Zombie]

If things look so bad to new applicants then people will not join and terms and conditions, pay etc. will have to improve again.

Improvements for BA Pilots are already long over due.......!!!!!

Come on BALPA get those negotiations started again if only for the guys at the bottom of the 3500+ sen. list.

[AdrianShaftsworthy]

So thats it,
BA have finally shot themselves in the foot big time. The last remaining reason why any DEP would want to join has now been removed. I'm afraid the prospect of sitting in the RHS of a 744/777 for 15 plus years is not the lure that the hierachy of BA obviously thinks it is.

Result? Large increase in the number of cadets to be recruited, (upto the max stipulated by the insurers ), and a surprising lack of DEP's. Eventual protestations by the aforementioned insurers resulting in a long overdue improvement in pay, T and C's and DEP's return, - maybe!!:(

[driver1]

This is really bad news, we at KLMuk have been battling to keep our final salary scheme,( the company wish to close it to new entrants) this has been fought hard as in years to come when the majority are on the money purchase scheme who is to stop the company closing the scheme to current members?

This industry is getting worse and worse, just seems to be a constant battle to protect what we have. Good luck you BA guys hope you will fight this one tooth and nail!

[fruitbat]

BKB

Assume you are referring to the DEP scale? For the TEP the pay goes up just under 4000 pounds between PP1 and 2. But then I guess we have to catch up with your rates! Oh, I nearly forgot about the 15000 grand over 5 years as well....

[Deadleg]

Honest question-does this mean that those on the new scheme do not have to retire at age 55?

[rich]

Although BA are closing this scheme for the time being I'm sure that DEP's won't be too much of a problem. In case some of you hadn't noticed there is a huge recession. I like many of my colleagues am about to be made redundant. I have alot of TT and a 744 on my licence to name a few, but in six weeks time I'll work for anyone who can cover my mortgage payments and keep the kids fed.

The difference will come in a few years down the road when with no decent pension to counter the poor salary etc ( and more importantly no bond) people like me will be of to the highest bidder.

rich

[cwatters]

I was under the impresion that a final salary scheme typically limited your pension to 40/60 ths of final salary - reduced further if you worked/contributed less than 40 years. By contrast "money purchase" schemes have an "unlimited" payout if the fund performs well (or a reduced payout if it doesn't).

Historically I thought money purchase schemes were better so I guess that the best type of pension scheme to have would be a 'Money Purchase' type with a 'final salary' guaranted minimum as well.

[WhiteSail]

Dream on cwatters.

In order to get anything like a decent pension, you need a fund value at retirement of astronomical proportions.

For example, if you were to try and fund a pension now to a value of £20,000 per year (very modest by salary standards), and assuming an annuity rate of 5% (which would be fortunate for a 55 year old), you would need a fund value of £400,000.

Two points emerge from this simple sum;

1. If you have a potential working life of 30 years, you would need to build a fund of in excess of £13000 per year.

2. Now I know that compounding up over 30 years will have a significant effect on the value of the fund, but so does inflation. What is £20,000 going to be worth in 30 years time?

There is much more to this than my over simplified submission here, but you can see from this example, exactly why companies all over are closing final salary schemes. The bottom line is, they simply can't afford them.

The UK government is running scared, because it knows it has a potential time bomb on it's hands. It has struggled to try to move it's responsibilities on to the private sector, and then promptly (via Gordon Brown) dips it's mucky little hands into the funds by way of taxing the dividends that used to be tax free. It then wonders why, financial professionals are not keen on recommending money purchase schemes! The stock markets around the world have been abysmal performers over the past three years or so, and consequently funds have been showing "negative growth". That's a nice way of saying, overpaid fund managers have not been producing the goods.

In around ten years from now, the "baby boomers" (those born just post war) will all retire at once, and then this problem will really come home to roost. You end up with a retired population that cannot be supported by those left in work.

Anyone that has a final salary scheme, HANG ON to it!:D

[6feetunder]

This is the thin end of the wedge Ladies and Gentlemen. Take it from one of Mr. Eddington's former employees, it won't stop here. Just because it only affects new hires doesn't mean you shouldn't try and stop it. This is how attacks on the Profession of Pilot are done, bit by bit.

He was at CX for the B-Scale and barely got out of Ansett before the collapse. This man will try and take everything from you, little by little.

These schemes have been proven by reputable actuarial firms to be far less beneficial than the one you currently have. The companies that use them notorioulsy under contribute. What seems like a lot i.e. 15 or 20 percent isn't enough to make up for long dry spells in the markets. How well have your investments done over the last 3 years? Think about that for when you are in your early 50s looking at retirment and a shrinking Pfund.

You have a strong union, use it. Stop this and any future infringements on your livelyhood before it gets out of hand.

[Lucifer]

There is little that any union can do - it is not open to argument as is shut permanetly. This is an unfortunate circumstance, but one which was fairly predictable in today's financial envionment.

[Wet Power]

Totally agree with WhiteSail.

I reckon my final salary scheme is worth the equivalent of £800 per month compared to going to another employer offering a money purchase scheme and a nominal 5% contribution.

In other words a money purchase employer would have to pay me an extra £800 per month just to break-even.

[knows]

I pointed this out in early March.
It's a very sad outcome. - Lets hope that applicants (DEP's) realise the kind of crappy deal they are likely to get when applying to BA now.
I can't think of a single reason to join...

[liftyryce]

Lucifer - Pensions are a major part of any employee's Terms and Conditions and as such are always open to negotiation. If a union just accepts any decision on T&C's by the company, then what's the point in having a union ?

[NW1]

All the ire at the change in pension strategy by BA should be aimed 100% at incumbent Chancellor. His repeated theft from this country's pension funds and tightening squeeze on taxpayers and pensioners alike to finance this administration's double-speak, broken promises and incompetance cannot be underwritten by the companies without risking even more corporate failures and mass redundancies.

It should be remembered that many more companies than just BA have been and will be forced to abandon final salary schemes by Brown's latest fiscal manoeuvres. Yes the employee ends up suffering (again), but we have already learned that when they say they won't hike tax on income they mean that actually they will.

[Lucifer]

My point was that as it is shut to all in the company full stop, then even unions would be unable to resurrect it since the company would never let one group of employees have it and not all the others. Too much of a loss of face leading to demands from other unions.

[sky9]

Historically turnover in UK airlines has been minimised by the provision of the Final Salary Pension Funds and the Seniority Schemes. Combined, the two encouraged pilots to remain in a company and wait their turn for a Command.

With the demise of the FS Pensions I wonder if the time has come to modify or abandon the Seniority System and encourage pilots to move employers more often, thereby driving salaries and conditions up.

It is interesting to see in last Sunday’s papers that one of the reasons for easyJet taking over of Go was that they were unable to recruit sufficient pilots to facilitate their expansion.

[Broken Wings]

Sky9

Not sure the last part of your post is true. I'm ex-RAF VC10 5000 hours TT applied to easyJet in early Feb and haven't heard a thing, not even a "thanks but no thanks" email. At least Go said only recruiting type rated at the mo but we'll keep your CV on file for later.

I too hope that other airlines don't follow BA down the pension route - only time will tell but I do wonder in this instant age that we live in whether the recent poor performance of the stock market is a valid reason for scrapping the final salary scheme? Surely the whole point of investment is long term planning and if we are living longer either make us work longer or reduce the payouts/increase personal contributions to new comers but not scrap them totally!

[JW411]

Oh dear, Oh dear, Oh dear, Oh dear!

The last plausible reason for joining BA has finally gone. The bubble has indeed burst.

I have watched with some degree of fascination the postings from the idiots who have never been hungry protesting furiously that they could never ever demean themselves to join the likes of Ryanair or easyJet - they obviously like working in pubs.

From here on in you are going to have to join a money-purchase scheme and that means that the more you can put in your kitty the better it is going to be (always assuming that there isn't a stockmarket crash the day before you retire)!

Therefore, if you have anything useful to offer an aviation employer, it would make sense to go to those who offer the best basic salary. (Expenses don't count).

On the subject of which; I have an ex-BCAL mate who was taken over by BA. He spent his first 24 hours at Heathrow being taught how to "work" the BA allowance scheme. One little wheeze was to "pair-up" with a mate on the 747. When your mate was on "instant standby" and you were on a Far East flight, you would ring in sick at the last moment. He would then get called out at short notice and this was worth £3000 to go to HKG and back. After a decent interval, the favour was reciprocated.

Now I personally think that this sort of practice is quite disgraceful, immoral and indefensible and I was particularly offended by such events when BA was a state airline and I was paying a hell of a lot of income tax so that they could me out of a job.

PS. I have only missed 2 flights in the last 14 years due to sickness. Some of you youngters should realise that every time you pull a "sicky" you screw someone else's life up (unless you are in BA and it is all pre-arranged).

[Captain Airclues]

JW411

I think that your ex-BCAL mate was pulling your leg.

Airclues

[M.Mouse]

JW411

I have been in BA for 15 years, 11 of them LH and apart from never having heard of the scam you mention I have rarely witnessed anybody reporting sick downroute except for very valid reasons, in fact it is something that is done with marked reluctance. Good story though.

If you care to take a step back do you really think that the majority of BA pilots are any different from pilots in any other airline? Most of us have the same morals and concerns as anybody else.

A final point, getting called from standby to go to HKG would not attract anything like £3000, not even close!

[Hand Solo]

Quite, and I think it would raise a few eyebrows when you're called before your manager to explain why you've been absent three times in the last six months (its called an attendance management program don't you know).

Anyway, its perfectly acceptable for the 'youngsters' to have their life screwed up on a daily basis by a seniority system!:cool:

[G.Khan]

Just wondering, is it now possible that BA will come amongst those still on the Final Salary scheme and try and buy them out if they agree to go to the new scheme? There are always some who will take the money.

[Hand Solo]

And what better way to get back to health than a discussion with your manager to ascertain if there are any 'problems' keeping you away from work.

[M.Mouse]

The attendance management programme was not intended to target pilots but CC due to their propensity to be ill whenever an unpopular trip lommed.

It had to be introduced company wide to avoid being seen as unfairly targeted.

Usual braod brush approach.

[Pax Vobiscum]

Sadly, Final Salary pension schemes have been on the way out for years (even before the Chancellor started dipping his sticky little fingers into the funds). They're a wonderful solution for those who can work for 20, 30, 40 years in the same job - but most of us no longer have any realistic expectation of that.

If you change jobs (by design or otherwise) every few years then building up your 'own' pot of money is the best solution (though you'd probably have to save 30% of your salary to achieve anything close to what you'd get from a final salary scheme).

From what I read (and remember I just sit in the back and let you get on with the driving), BA pilots are one of the last major groups of UK employees who do expect/hope to stay in the same job for life. If you are of that opinion, you'll be much better off with a final salary scheme - but do you honestly believe that's a realistic expectation for a new recruit?

Pax Vobiscum

(Lapsed actuary with 20+ years in the insurance industry)

[JW411]

Captain Airclues:

"I think that your ex-BCAL mate was pulling your leg"

I think not; he regaled several of us in the pub for nearly an hour on the subject. Frankly, he was as incredulous as the rest of us. This was some time ago and if the practice has ceased then I for one am very pleased.

M.Mouse:

".....reporting sick downroute....."

That is not what I meant or what I thought I said. The wheeze was to call in sick (when not sick) from home a few hours before reporting to start a long Far East series of flights.

I quite agree with you that if you are sick then you are sick and should certainly not go near an aeroplane. This played a part in the incident when the BA 747 almost demolished the Penta at Heathrow if my memory serves me right.

".....do you really think that the majority of BA pilots are any different from pilots in any other airline?"

I am sure you are right in saying that a lot of BA pilots are just the same as the rest of us. However, you have had more than your fair share of absolute pillocks as well.

My crew and a BA crew got into conversation in my favourite watering hole in Dubai one night. The BA captain told me that it must be awful for me not having the opportunity to fly for a proper airline!

One of the Atlantic barons is a fellow-member of one of the aviation interest groups to which I belong. He is absolutely insufferable (and is also the most boring after-dinner speaker I have ever had to listen to)!

Another Atlantic baron told me one night in New York that BA and Pan American were the only true professionals on the North Atlantic. I thought that was a bit rich since he had exactly the same triple INSs and flew the very same NAT tracks that I did.

A few weeks later a BA Tristar crew forgot to update their waypoints and watched as the aircraft describe a 180° turn in the airway as it went from Waypoint 9 back to Waypoint 1 which was the first point after take-off from Heathrow! The result was that they nearly collided with a DC-9 (?) coming down the airway behind them at the same level.

It did not seem to occur to either of these "professionals" to put the automatics into basic heading mode so that they were heading in roughly the right direction while they sorted their problem out.

[Captain Airclues]

JW411

Are you related to 411A?

I wish that a HKG trip was worth £3000 but unfortunately it's not even close. Of course the pilot who went sick would lose all the FHR and allowances so I can't see the advantage.

There is a rich variety of characters in all airlines. However, the 'Atlantic Barons' of days gone by are no longer tolerated by the modern, post CRM, society.
The vast majority of BA pilots have immense respect for our colleagues in other airlines. Over the history of PPRuNe here have been many 'anti-BA' posts, but very few BA pilots reciprocate.

Anyway, I thought that this thread was about pensions!

Airclues

[6feetunder]

This thread is about pensions, it's also about diminishing conditions in the industry. If BA wants to change to a defined contribution scheme then BALPA must be very diligent in ensuring the contribution level is high enough. If it isn't members will find themselves seeking employment after retirement, not because they want to but because they have to.

If what is assumed here is true, that it's a done deal then the only avenue you will have to ensure adequate retirement money is to fight hard for a decent employer contribution level. If it isn't high enough you will find that more of your current disposable income will be needed to save for retirement instead of using it for frivolous things like food and shelter now.

Watch this one carefully folks or it will bite you in the arse.

[Scottie]

I left bmi's final salary pension scheme (which is also closed to new entrants) to join ezy and am now in their money purchase scheme.

On the final salary forecast from the bmi scheme as an FO I'd receive a pension in today's terms of £25k. I paid a contribution of about £200 of my salary towards the scheme.

To achieve the same thing with easy it will cost me £550 extra. £750 per month out of your salary is a lot. Especially when I have well over 30 years still to run. :mad: :o :eek:

Don't regret my move to my new employer but I wish I was still in bmi's pension scheme!

Think very carefully about leaving those schemes!

I hope BALPA protects all those left in FS schemes when your numbers dwindle. :(

PS JW411 if you want to go on about expenses in BA take it t o a new thread. Pensions are a bl**dy important topic and we should all be aware of the implications of the closure of final salary schemes.:mad:

[M.Mouse]

JW411

You said:

"I think not; he regaled several of us in the pub for nearly an hour on the subject. Frankly, he was as incredulous as the rest of us. This was some time ago and if the practice has ceased then I for one am very pleased."

It sounds as though he enjoyed the attention. The point being the practice didn't exist as far as I am aware.

Going sick at home would mean that the person going sick would lose all the allowances and flying hour pay and the chap being called from standby would be paid those allowances and flying hour pay. Absolutely no gain or loss to the company. One pilot worse off, one better off. What would be the point?

Couldn't agree more about some of the pillocks you mention, in fact I think I know at least one you mention!

Out of the now 4000+ pilots in BA we do have some real idiots. Certainly the proportion seems no lesser or greater than my last two companies.

I think you would be suprised how normal most of us are.

Anyway back to pensions.

As the lapsed actuary says the writing has been on the wall for some time.

At risk of stirring up the hornet's nest now that those in NAPS realise that there FSS is under threat they may well regret taking less interest in the now defunct proposed APS/NAPS merger. Had it happened it might well have safeguarded the NAPS final salary scheme.

Never really did get a satisfactory explanation why BALPA initially gave a £100,000 contribution to the APS anti-merger group to fight the proposal.

[thedude]

Just a quick question, to those of you who understand pension funding.

Company closes final salary pension scheme to new employees.
Company final salary scheme members find out that their fund is greatly under-performing.

Who is responsible for the final salary fund shortfall, and in order to pay out on those pensions, who makes up that shortfall?


No doubt, only when MP's and their fat final salary pension schemes are threatened, will we see protective legislation.
:cool:

[False Capture]

How many companies still offer a final salary pension scheme to new entrants? Any more besides Britannia, Monarch and KLMuk?
:(

[Scottie]

Company closes final salary pension scheme to new employees.
Company final salary scheme members find out that their fund is greatly under-performing.

Who is responsible for the final salary fund shortfall, and in order to pay out on those pensions, who makes up that shortfall?

thedude,

As far as I'm aware the employer has to make up the shortfall. This is why they're all pulling out of FS schemes as the burden/risk is all on them and not on the employee. :rolleyes:

If the company is sold or goes out of business I don't know what happens to the pension scheme. The only good thing about the money purchase scheme is that if your company goes out of business no one apart from you can get their hands on your pension contributions.

No doubt, only when MP's and their fat final salary pension schemes are threatened, will we see protective legislation.

A long time coming I fear. Our First Minister in Scotland was thrown out over misconduct after only doing less than 2 years and had walked away with a pension of £32,000 for the rest of his life. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Nice if you can get it though.

[WhiteSail]

Thats the whole point thedude, it is the COMPANY that is responsible to fund WHATEVER is required.

It is effectively, an open ended cheque book, which many companies are now saying, is not sustainable.

The accounting standard FRS17, is being used as an excuse in many instances; much more significant, is Gordon Brown dipping his mits into the funds via taxing and the poor performance of the stock markets and fund managers over the past few years.

In my (humble) opinion, defined contribution pensions as they are structured at present are a non starter. They are sold on the undoubted tax benefits, whereby if you are paying higher rate tax, you claw back the whole of the 40%, but if you stop and work out how much you will receive back via an annuity, it is a pittance compared to the fund value.

If you take my original post as an example, with a fund value of £400,000, it would take (at 5% annuity rate) 20 years just to get the capital returned. In the meantime, that £400,000, has been earning interest (normally via gilts of around 5%), so effectively, the whole of the fund value, is going to the annuity provider.

The annuity providers would claim they are taking the risk. What risk at 5%?

You might as well put it under the bed!

Everything I have written should be accepted as a personal opinion. Approximations have been used, as I don't have access to detailed rates, I am not an advisor in any shape or form and therefore, no way should anyone consider this advice.

[mjenkinsblackdog]

BA is no longer the company it was , ROD is crewing it up.
Its time to resign .:cool:

[Land ASAP]

JW411, please remind me who employs you, so that I may childishly give irrelevant and slanderous anecdotes about them. My Dad is bigger than yours. I once met an ex Pan Am pilot who was an alcoholic, but I can't see what relevance it would have to a thread about pension schemes. Ner, ner, n-nerr nerr!!:rolleyes:

[P22]

Any future pilot recruits to BA will have a retirement age of 60 in their contract. This has been decided after calculating the contributions that would be necessary to provide a reasonable pension at age 55.

[paddy_22002]

P22

Where did you get that information from. There are quite a few BA pilots approching 55 that could find it useful.
On the other hand perhaps it will give a opportunity for those pilots happy with their FSS pension to go at 50!

Just wondering, that's all;)

[ETOPS]

P22

Whilst I agree it is logical to allow pilots to continue to age 60 under the new money purchase scheme, I would like to know where you got this info. To my current knowledge that hasn't been published yet.
It also raises the question of equality for DEP's like myself who can't acheive a full pension under the "old" scheme having been recruited late in life.

If we end up with crews on differing pay scales and pensions the company will have an ideal opportunity to further divide and conquer.....

[Pax Vobiscum]

It's that lapsed actuary again.

thedude asked about funding. In theory ;), if the actuary responsible for the pension scheme has been doing a good job, there will be enough dosh in the fund to pay out the liabilities even if the company stops paying in (as long as no new members join). Problem is pensions are very long-term contracts - a 30-year old in the BA scheme could still be drawing a pension in 2050. No-one has a clue what economic conditions will be in ten years (cynics might say 10 months) time, so the scheme actuary has to err on the side of caution, which is what helps to make these schemes expensive.

Civil servants (and MPs) have unfunded schemes - the chancellor simply reaches into our wallets and takes out as much money as he needs each year to pay their pensions (this is why my council tax has gone up £200 - to pay for all the retired policemen!).

NB note the word lapsed above - none of this should be taken to constitute financial advice of any kind.

PS (for those who haven't already gone to sleep) the rest of Europe all have 'pay as you go' schemes (like our civil servants). This gives them a huge, looming problem - as the population ages, we run out of ability to take money from those working and give it to the retired. The UK has largely avoided this problem by funding the pensions payments - this is the real reason why they want us to join the euro :D

PPS An actuary is someone who always wanted to be an accountant, but didn't have the personality for it ...

[P22]

paddy

1st floor Eastpoint, this morning.

Just ask an expert to calculate the contributions required to produce a certain pension at age 60 under a money purchase scheme. Then repeat the calculation with a retirement age of 55. I've seen the figures....they are frightening.

[yotter]

The demise of the FS pension for new BA recruits is not unexpected - the company has consitently tried to erode the conditions of service and salary for many years. There is no doubt that the APS which came before NAPS was superior, and that is why its members fought hard to stay separate, having a fully funded sceme which they did not wish to give away. This may seem greedy, but think of it this way - if your neighbour has a larger house than you, do you expect him to give you one of his bedrooms or half his garage?
I don't think BALPA gave the fighting fund anything, M.Mouse - definitely not the £100,000 you claim - I remember at the time giving Mike Post's group £40, but BALPA were neutral as they represented both NAPS and APS people - quite right too.

[6feetunder]

ETOPS, this is where CX was a few years ago with your boss at the helm. Guess what? It gets worse.

[M.Mouse]

Yotter

Regarding APS/NAPS I disagree with your analogy but in order to avoid entering a never ending argument where we would never agree I will refrain from further comment except to say that I do believe that had NAPS members known their FSS scheme was/is under threat the apathy, and indeed, ignorance of the situation might have been less evident.

BALPA agreed to underwrite the costs of the anti-merger campaign. The initial figure agreed was £100,000 and more was available. John Frohnsdorff can confirm it. I also have it in writing.

The high court eventually ruled that the anti - merger campaign costs should be met from the pension fund itself and after this ruling (some months after I sent a letter to BALPA HQ questioning BALPA involvement) I received a reply stating that they didn't in fact give any money to the campaign!

I am sure that the decision to underwrite the campaign was nothing to do with the fact that the people in a position to offer this support were all in APS. Also interesting to note that the majority of BALPA's BA membership are in NAPS.

And some are wondering why many of us have lost all faith in the integrity of BALPA leadership.

Edited for clarity.

[buttonmonkey]

When asked if i had any questions at my final board interview with BA last AUGUST I asked the interviewers (one of who was the then head of recruitment) whether BA would be forced to lift the retirement age limit in order to conform the the new EU regs in 2006 and there was alot of unconfortable shuffling! The reply was "it's currently a hotly debated topic"...(!) Needless to say I wasn't offered the job! Incidently I happen to know there's an action group out there (the name escapes me) taking BA on in the courts with a couple of test cases over retirement at 55 and the resulting loss of earnings. They want £400 to put your name in the hat. Maybe some of you recently retired BA guys know more about it?

[yotter]

I hope it can be agreed that no group should be disadvantaged whilst another group moved up - ideally we should be working to move everyone up. The former would have happened had BA been allowed to raid the APS fund, pay some into NAPS and keep the balance. Three years ago the APS was in surplus, hence the attempt by BA to grab some, since then the market has been hard hit and who knows if BA will have to pump some funds into both schemes.
M.Mouse's point about apathy is very well made - unless battles are fought, the lifestyle of flight crew will be eroded irrevocably.Interestingly enough, there was a well publicised threat by BA to stop the final salary scheme at the time of the proposed merger, and I wrote to the then pilot pension trustee
( now whispering in Singapore, I believe ) with my worries.
The older I get, the more cynical I become, and I'm now positively ancient! Why is it that pay and conditions for staff seem to be going down the plug hole, while pay and bonuses for the senior managers and directors are upwardly mobile. Surely a much more aggressive stance is required from Balpa, reps and the rank and file.

[Anthony Carn]

buttonmonkey and previous contributors have refered to new EU rules regarding changes to our retirement age limits , to commence in 2006 , if I read correctly .

Could anyone with RELIABLE sources , please expand in more detail upon this distinctly worrying possibility -- it really could have massive repercussions upon us all , directly or indirectly , young or old(er) !

[JW411]

Captain Airclues:

No sir; 411A and myself are in no way related. The new system lost my nom de plume and it now comes up with JW411 which was my password.

[yotter]

Final Salary Schemes

According to the Money section of The Sunday Telegraph ( May 19 ), Ernst & Young recently tried to scrap its FSS for existing members as well as new joiners. Fortunately the staff hired good legal council and managed to get E & Y ' to rethink plans in the light of objections from existing members '. In the article Alastair Meeks of Pinsent Curtis Biddle said: ' Many pension scheme conversions are taking place without adequate consideration of the legal restrictions imposed by the terms of the specific scheme. I expect more challenges of this type to emerge.' Also James Mann of Fox Williams ( they hired two firms of solicitors! )
said: ' Employment law places constraints on an employers' ability to change unilaterally key benefits on which employees have placed reliance. It is wrong to imagine that employers can simply steamroller changes through.'
That may be the case - but it doesn't stop the bean counters from trying. My advice would be to get organised now, as it seems highly likely companies such as BA will try it on sooner or later. First they try to buy you out, then force you out.

[Monty77]

Is it conceivable that the young BA cadets on the FSS today, on retirement 30 years from now, may find that the fund cannot pay out as advertised? Or are the funds big enough to deal with all the forthcoming retiring pilots who can expect to draw big pensions into their eighties and nineties?

[exeng]

Monty77,

The large majority of pilots who retire in the next few years are in the APS scheme. All the young BA cadets are in the NAPS scheme which is totally separate.

The NAPS scheme is seriously underfunded and could not, on current projections, meet it's commitments. However BA are obligated under the current rules to underwrite the scheme. However if one were to consider a nightmare scenario where BA goes bust, I believe that pensions would be much reduced or cease to exist at all for some new pilots.

It may be worth pointing out that many years ago the APS scheme was in a very similar position to that which NAPS is now. i.e. it was also seriously underfunded.

That situation was in part due to the vagaries of the stock market, as is also the case with NAPS at the moment. Eventually the APS investments turned around and the scheme found itself in surplus; now the scheme has 'matured' and all investments are by law put in a safe place, i.e. 'gilts'.

I can envisage , hopefully, a similar scenario for the NAPS scheme. (Just so long as BA doesn't go bust in the next few years!)

To sum up. I don't believe that the pilots who are retiring in the next few years will have any affect on the pension prospects of our younger colleagues.


Regards
Exeng

[Jet II]

exeng,

Now that BA has failed to combine APS (suplus) and NAPS (black hole) I would have thought that the company would be seriously looking at scrapping final salary pensions for the current staff as well as the new starters.

This is the route that has already been taken by several UK companies (Iceland the biggest at the moment) to stop any obligation on the company to underwrite a pension scheme that is seriously underfunded.

:confused:

[Hand Solo]

I'm sure they are, but they wouldn't dare. Management know that closing NAPS for current workers is the one thing that would have the entire company enraged. It simply would not be allowed to pass. It also creates the problem that they have then eliminated almost all incentive to stay for the highly skilled, long term tech staff. If NAPS is closed and your final pension from that scheme is fixed, it becomes necessary to seek the best possible pay you can get in order to ensure you accrue sufficient funds for your retiremment through a money purchase scheme. Thats certainly not something you'd get staying at BA and I think you'd see an awful lot of flight crew and engineers jumping ship simply because there really isn't anything to lose anymore.

[Monty77]

exeng: thanks, you seem to know your onions.

handsolo: you too. I value your advice. I'm a 37yr old military bloke with a wife and two school age kids. I'm in the BA hold pool and have been advised by mates in the industry to go for BA shorthaul (fastjet=no longhaul) over the charters on account of quality of life. The facts seem to be that final salary pensions are shortly to be things of the past. Would you move to anywhere else, and if so, why?

[The Little Prince]

Handsolo and mainline mates. How do you perceive the BACitiExpress situation, where we have a similarly proportioned pension deficit, closed scheme (to new members) , and a worried workforce.

Do you think it worth while supporting us, 'cos we may very well the trial case in terms of closing the final salary scheme completely before they do it to you.

We would like to think we must stick together on this one.

[snooky]

Mr. Prince

This seems a strange request considering how recently you seemed overjoyed at the prospect of taking mainline jobs in the form of the RJ fleet.

[Hand Solo]

Snooky - we have to be careful we don't cut off our noses to spite our faces here. I'm sure this is merely step 1 in the grand BA plan to end FSS pensions for everyone, whichever branch of BA/BACX they represent. Its vital that all BA associated flight crew pull together to ensure that the unique nature of our career structure is recognised and access to NAPS remains available for us all. Scope is being thrashed out as in issue in itself.

Monty - not sure why fast jet equals no long haul, unless you don't have a full UK ATPL for some reason. The key problem with joining a long haul fleet as a DEP is that you will be at the bottom of the seniority list for the next 4 to 5 years, which means you will have virtually no control whatsoever over your life. Probably not a desirable situation for family types. Shorthaul does have a large element of stability, few roster changes, no real night flying and you'd probably make more cash and advance up the seniority list sooner. Only snag is that you're supposed to live within two hours of LHR and a DEP wage doesn't buy you very much in that radius. Right now I'm not looking to leave BA as I have the advantage of potentially long service on my side and I'm still in NAPS (though for how long I dont know). That said I think theres a lot to be said for Easyjet, including better salaries, shorter time to command, reasonably predictable roster (6 on, 3 off), the chance to make your money go further by working from an affordable base area, and the absence of orchestrated anti-flight crew attitudes within the company.

[Tandemrotor]

Monty 77

Please forgive my scepticism, but I'm afraid I just can't see why ANYBODY with a licence would want to join BA these days.

Many other airlines offer at least as much security, and pension, few pay less, none have a greater time to command, and absolutely none can have a more anti-flight deck attitude than the "World's Favourite".

Do yourself and your family a favour, and look elsewhere.

[Hot Wings]

Monty77 - I have to agree with HandSolo and Tandemrotor. The deal at BA is poor and the time to command is going to be very long for new joiners. Get a job with Easy and see how much you like short haul. You can always apply to BA in the future but I would say that once you're over 35 its not worth it, as it would take you 10 years to start getting a decent roster (on the 744).
Hopefully, the pay/pensions package at BA will improve one day!

In the meantime, good luck and happy flying.

[Monty77]

Food for thought - thanks all.

[Gin Slinger]

Back to the original topic...

It looks like SOME industry's unions have the balls to stand up for future generations:

Strikes threat over 'pensions robbery' - BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_2030000/2030958.stm)

[sky9]

It was nice to see in the Sunday papers that Lord Marshall is still in the Final Salary Pension Scheme. No doubt his final salary will be enhanced to ensure that he gets as much out of it as possible when he does retire.

It would be interesting to see his Annual Statement; the one that shows how much you have put in over the years and how much you expect to get - now has anybody got a copy by chance?;)

Wouldn't it be really honourable if all the Directors of BA withdrew from the FS scheme forthwith and joined the money purchase scheme that they are setting up for their new employees.

[exeng]

Viewing the FSS versus a money purchase scheme, there is possibly another angle to consider.

NAPS is very badly under funded at the moment. If that situation continues, and for any number of reasons BA go bust, those currently contributing will face a very poor future and may indeed lose nearly all of their contributions. (Pension legislation requires that those in receipt of a pension take precedence over those who have yet to receive one.) Any 'new entrants' contributions will remain 'safe' of course because they belong to those individuals little 'pot'.

I am sure many will say, "BA won't go bust, surely not." Well I hope they never do but no one imagined that EASTERN, BRANNIFF, PAN AM, TWA, SWISSAIR, SABENA, etc would either.

The fact that BA has decided to end FSS smacks of desperation and will only cause moral amongst the troops to further diminish. And if the troops are not pulling together then the chances of complete business failure are that much greater. Of course I wouldn't expect the management team to have thought that far ahead, they are only considering the future funding requirements of an under funded scheme.

They really do seem to have lost sight of the fact that any airlines greatest asset is its staff, if you fail to look after that asset then the future will be bleak. Perhaps they don't teach that these days at Harvard business school.

If you are contributor to NAPS then it really is a question of 'how lucky do you feel'? With the current management team (whom seem to be the on the receiving end of many unpleasant articles in the financial press at the moment) I would be keeping both my fingers and my toes crossed when I go to bed at night.:eek:


Regards
Exeng