New pension finalised
It'll be interesting to see what the MoD does to maintain interest with the thrusters, who tend to lose out with career average schemes
In a pensions briefing earlier this year we were told, or I misunderstood, that for currently serving personnel, their 'starting salary' for AFPS-15 would be what they were on at the time of transition and that we shouldn't worry about pensions calculations potentially based on our original joining salaries in the 90s. If this is the case, then surely it puts us at a potential advantage? We get to keep what we have earned up to the point of transition and then start the new scheme at whatever level pay point you are on in current rank at transition i.e. potentially 50k+ .
Or have I got this wrong? Will they in fact go back to my salary level when I first joined - which would effectively give mean my service so far generating 2 pensions? Confused! Wish they would get on and produce the new pensions calculator - I've got an option point in 2 years
Last edited by Melchett01; 28th Oct 2012 at 17:31. Reason: Shocking grammar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: London
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pensions going forward
What you have got is protected. Going forward the amount you accrue is 1/47 of you pensionable pay. So, no, you do not go backwards to an earlier rank or rate of pay.
I'm in the same situation as Melchie - aged less than 45 so will be going from AFPS75 onto AFPS15. I think the key line is that pointed out by Voxpop - according to the literature, the annual pension under AFPS15 grows by 1/47 of pensionable pay for each completed year. For those of us who have already completed the lower-earning part of our careers, the transition appears to be an excellent deal - the AFPS75 we have already earned is 'safe' and will be based on whatever rank we retire with in 15-20 years' time, and the AFPS15 we are about to earn will start accumulating from the reasonable base of a mid-career salary rather than the Plt Off's pittance.
If that's not to be the case, a specific clause would have to be written somewhere to modify the annual salary-based accrual for those transitioning from previous schemes - and I haven't found any such clause... yet!
If that's not to be the case, a specific clause would have to be written somewhere to modify the annual salary-based accrual for those transitioning from previous schemes - and I haven't found any such clause... yet!
Last edited by Easy Street; 28th Oct 2012 at 09:41.
I appear to be in the same situation as above, so if I have this right I have secured the high accrual rate of the early part of the AFPS 75 scheme and rather than following the tapering off part of the 75 scheme I will now move onto the flat 1/47 accrual at a mid-career rate of pay.
Compared to some of my contemporaries who moved on to the 05 scheme I appear to be a 'winner'. Why we should have winners and losers for personnel who joined on the same day and earn the same pay is beyond me. It appears to be a financial punishment for those who believed the 05 pension scheme literature.
Compared to some of my contemporaries who moved on to the 05 scheme I appear to be a 'winner'. Why we should have winners and losers for personnel who joined on the same day and earn the same pay is beyond me. It appears to be a financial punishment for those who believed the 05 pension scheme literature.
JTO,
Why all this bashing of the 05 pension scheme? As I remember at the time, the 05 scheme literature simply described the details of how it worked. There was no "hard sell" at my unit to switch across to it, indeed, unlike the new scheme, you had the choice of staying on 75 or moving across to 05, depending on your personal wishes.
I knew many people who didn't bother to try and understand 05, both on the basis that "pensions are complicated", and out of a cynical attitude that "no new pension scheme will be better the the one it replaces".
Well, guess what, for some people 05 was better than 75. You take the combination of PAS and 05, and you were in a win/win situation.
Yes the 75/05 decision did take some thinking about for many, depending on your situation and intentions, and no doubt there were "winners" and "losers" if you got the decision wrong, or your circumstances changed drastically. But the information was out there, and it was your choice whether to stay on 75 or switch. There is no such option with the 15 scheme.
Why all this bashing of the 05 pension scheme? As I remember at the time, the 05 scheme literature simply described the details of how it worked. There was no "hard sell" at my unit to switch across to it, indeed, unlike the new scheme, you had the choice of staying on 75 or moving across to 05, depending on your personal wishes.
I knew many people who didn't bother to try and understand 05, both on the basis that "pensions are complicated", and out of a cynical attitude that "no new pension scheme will be better the the one it replaces".
Well, guess what, for some people 05 was better than 75. You take the combination of PAS and 05, and you were in a win/win situation.
Yes the 75/05 decision did take some thinking about for many, depending on your situation and intentions, and no doubt there were "winners" and "losers" if you got the decision wrong, or your circumstances changed drastically. But the information was out there, and it was your choice whether to stay on 75 or switch. There is no such option with the 15 scheme.
So, me, PAS on grandad rights to get to top level with 3 yrs to spare, with 10 yrs to 55 as of 2015, how do I fare?
My question revolves around making the decision to jump by no later than 2015, by which time I'll be 45; what are the upper age limits to airline recruitment? Am I betting the farm to stay fit enough to fly to 60-65, or do I stay to 55+ with the mob on a decent salary? Questions, questions?
?
My question revolves around making the decision to jump by no later than 2015, by which time I'll be 45; what are the upper age limits to airline recruitment? Am I betting the farm to stay fit enough to fly to 60-65, or do I stay to 55+ with the mob on a decent salary? Questions, questions?
?
Last edited by Hueymeister; 28th Oct 2012 at 10:44.
Biggus, I think you are taking a deliberately oblique view. Clearly there was a great deal of literature during the OTT and clearly individual circumstances can change. If you were cleaver enough to predict the wholesale closure of the of the '05 scheme for some people after just 10 years then well done to you.
I retain my sympathy for those who find themselves in the position I describe above; they did not get their decision wrong or fail to do the correct thinking - someone else changed the rules of the game.
I retain my sympathy for those who find themselves in the position I describe above; they did not get their decision wrong or fail to do the correct thinking - someone else changed the rules of the game.
JTO,
You're entitled to your opinion.
The point I'm trying to make is that the current situation is not the fault of the 05 scheme, or the people who designed it. Neither is the 05 scheme itself the villain of the peace, as often seems to be portrayed by those on 75. It was a good, optional to join for those already in, scheme, with undoubted benefits to some, that has been overtaken by events beyond its control.
Switching from 75 to 05 for some individuals was not a clear cut decision, and a certain amount of risk was inherent in switching for a variety of reasons. On this basis some stayed with the horse they knew, and maybe they were right to do so.
I do sympathize with anyone who will lose out having switched to 05 only to see it close. No doubt that was a risk they didn't anticipate. However, there was no MOD conspiracy to introduce 05 and then close it later just to save money and disadvantage some people.
I haven't kept abreast of all the details of 15, but I believe that anyone with 10 years or less to serve in 2015 will stay on their original pension scheme. Therefore anyone over 35 when they switched to 05 will stay on that scheme until retirement, providing up to 20 years of cover.
You're entitled to your opinion.
The point I'm trying to make is that the current situation is not the fault of the 05 scheme, or the people who designed it. Neither is the 05 scheme itself the villain of the peace, as often seems to be portrayed by those on 75. It was a good, optional to join for those already in, scheme, with undoubted benefits to some, that has been overtaken by events beyond its control.
Switching from 75 to 05 for some individuals was not a clear cut decision, and a certain amount of risk was inherent in switching for a variety of reasons. On this basis some stayed with the horse they knew, and maybe they were right to do so.
I do sympathize with anyone who will lose out having switched to 05 only to see it close. No doubt that was a risk they didn't anticipate. However, there was no MOD conspiracy to introduce 05 and then close it later just to save money and disadvantage some people.
I haven't kept abreast of all the details of 15, but I believe that anyone with 10 years or less to serve in 2015 will stay on their original pension scheme. Therefore anyone over 35 when they switched to 05 will stay on that scheme until retirement, providing up to 20 years of cover.
Last edited by Biggus; 28th Oct 2012 at 11:18.
Biggus, I don't regard the '05 as the villain and I retain my sympathy for those who made an informed decision to transfer in 2006 from the older scheme.
To gain protection under the '10 year' rights and individual would have to have been over 39 years old when the OTT happened in 2006 (it was only open in 2005 for new entrants). For those who made a decision to transfer to '05 post their IPP this has become quite a key point.
Whilst the new scheme is not expected to come into force until 2016 the 10 year point is an arbitrary line drawn at age 45 on 1 Apr 12 - in other words it will provide protection for those aged 49 or over in 2016 when the scheme is predicted to go live. Or as one wag has pointed out the 'protection' will insulate all bar 2 air ranking officers from the change.
To gain protection under the '10 year' rights and individual would have to have been over 39 years old when the OTT happened in 2006 (it was only open in 2005 for new entrants). For those who made a decision to transfer to '05 post their IPP this has become quite a key point.
Whilst the new scheme is not expected to come into force until 2016 the 10 year point is an arbitrary line drawn at age 45 on 1 Apr 12 - in other words it will provide protection for those aged 49 or over in 2016 when the scheme is predicted to go live. Or as one wag has pointed out the 'protection' will insulate all bar 2 air ranking officers from the change.
Huey,
Transitioning to AFPS 15 on PAS would appear to be a bit of a bargain. The accrual rate of 1/47th on all of your £70k+ salary would make the deal quite attractive. It actually doesn't change your situation now from the old PAS /05 benefits. The question is whether or not someone will balk at the idea of giving a Flt lt a Wg Cdr / Gp Capt pension.
I don't believe the PAS situation has been clearly stated yet but in my book average earnings are average earnings. Stand by for a shafting though, possibly through the introduction of PAS flying pay bands which sit outside of the new scheme. Just a (cheery) thought.
Transitioning to AFPS 15 on PAS would appear to be a bit of a bargain. The accrual rate of 1/47th on all of your £70k+ salary would make the deal quite attractive. It actually doesn't change your situation now from the old PAS /05 benefits. The question is whether or not someone will balk at the idea of giving a Flt lt a Wg Cdr / Gp Capt pension.
I don't believe the PAS situation has been clearly stated yet but in my book average earnings are average earnings. Stand by for a shafting though, possibly through the introduction of PAS flying pay bands which sit outside of the new scheme. Just a (cheery) thought.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
or exclusion of pa from pensionable salary, with the only thing promised an extended fp scheme (say 20k /25k for enhanced rate) and the only benefits being extension of pensionable benefits to flt lt/sqn ldr salary.
I think many have misunderstood the afprb comments ref. the fairness of fp for pa vs non-pa. in the current environment, its a prime area for savings surely?
If it goes though the outflow rates will be pretty savage.new aircrew fri would work out cheaper in. the long term, but with cost savings targetted at the short term, i cant see where the light at the end of the tunnel is?
I think many have misunderstood the afprb comments ref. the fairness of fp for pa vs non-pa. in the current environment, its a prime area for savings surely?
If it goes though the outflow rates will be pretty savage.new aircrew fri would work out cheaper in. the long term, but with cost savings targetted at the short term, i cant see where the light at the end of the tunnel is?
Last edited by VinRouge; 28th Oct 2012 at 15:00.
FTRS mates are also 'quids in' vs the old RFPS05 - we used to accrue at 1/70th for each year of FTRS for a pension and lump sum, we now accrue at 1/56th if you account for the 1:12 commutation rate to generate similar lump sums to go with a pension.
I reckon that my combined pensions at age 60 will be equivalent to a Gp Capt's - whereas, if I'd stayed to the bitter end as a Wg Cdr then I would have about £7k a year less.
So for once in my life I am a winner - or something beginning with a 'w'!
LJ
I reckon that my combined pensions at age 60 will be equivalent to a Gp Capt's - whereas, if I'd stayed to the bitter end as a Wg Cdr then I would have about £7k a year less.
So for once in my life I am a winner - or something beginning with a 'w'!
LJ
Al R,
I believe (hope?) that is something being looked at as part of the introduction of this New Employment Model. If they do allow service to 60, it will be win-win for individuals and the Service as they get to retain experience and we get another 5 years of salary and pensions before hopefully retiring for good.
If not, it will put AFPS-15 in the same situation as AFPS-75 i.e. it incentivises people to go early. Nobody in their right mind - or without a substantial second income - is going to 'sign up' to Ts & Cs which boot you out 5 years before you can draw a pension other than by taking an actuarially reduced one, and then expect you to scrabble around in your mid-late 50s looking for work. People will just go at their first option point and start a second career - which is one of the things AFPS 05 hoped to try and stop.
Then again, it would require a bit of joined up thinking, so I wouldn't be surprised if the answer was no.
I believe (hope?) that is something being looked at as part of the introduction of this New Employment Model. If they do allow service to 60, it will be win-win for individuals and the Service as they get to retain experience and we get another 5 years of salary and pensions before hopefully retiring for good.
If not, it will put AFPS-15 in the same situation as AFPS-75 i.e. it incentivises people to go early. Nobody in their right mind - or without a substantial second income - is going to 'sign up' to Ts & Cs which boot you out 5 years before you can draw a pension other than by taking an actuarially reduced one, and then expect you to scrabble around in your mid-late 50s looking for work. People will just go at their first option point and start a second career - which is one of the things AFPS 05 hoped to try and stop.
Then again, it would require a bit of joined up thinking, so I wouldn't be surprised if the answer was no.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reference the PA question,
I think the problem is that PA needs a lot of clarification. This year, manning offered an unprecedented number of PA slots. In return, they received an unprecedented level of rejection.
For that to change on subsequent boards, there needs to be some definitive comment as to the future of the scheme, an acceptance of the toll being taken by current changes to Service life and an idea of how retention will be effected.
T
There is an undoubted requirement to maintain experience; I sit here watching almost every first tourist co-pilot doing their ATPL with a view to using it in the near future...with the push-factors seemingly growing by the day, the level of retention incentive increases proportionately for those with the requisite experience...
Or am I missing something?
I think the problem is that PA needs a lot of clarification. This year, manning offered an unprecedented number of PA slots. In return, they received an unprecedented level of rejection.
For that to change on subsequent boards, there needs to be some definitive comment as to the future of the scheme, an acceptance of the toll being taken by current changes to Service life and an idea of how retention will be effected.
T
There is an undoubted requirement to maintain experience; I sit here watching almost every first tourist co-pilot doing their ATPL with a view to using it in the near future...with the push-factors seemingly growing by the day, the level of retention incentive increases proportionately for those with the requisite experience...
Or am I missing something?
Uncle G
Do you have any info' regarding the numbers of PAS? I know of a couple of people who turned it down and I may be making a similar decision myself in the new year.
Since the current FRI finishes in Apr 13 I don't want to make any decisions until I know if/when it will be replaced. Sadly I think my Deskie is too busy with promotion boards to reply to me at the moment!
BV
Since the current FRI finishes in Apr 13 I don't want to make any decisions until I know if/when it will be replaced. Sadly I think my Deskie is too busy with promotion boards to reply to me at the moment!
BV