Military pension on 2nd career in public services
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: London
abatement
In reply to:
"Was it not the case that your pension was abated to keep your FTRS pay at no more than the previous rate for the rank? Earned £40k, new pension £10k, FTRS pay (Home Commitment) £40k-15% = £34k therefore pension limited to £6kbringing total pay back to £40k."
What you are describing is how abatement works but the reason for the abatement was that the new pensionable job was by virtue of the previous military service (ie. it was not subject to 'fair and open competition').
"Was it not the case that your pension was abated to keep your FTRS pay at no more than the previous rate for the rank? Earned £40k, new pension £10k, FTRS pay (Home Commitment) £40k-15% = £34k therefore pension limited to £6kbringing total pay back to £40k."
What you are describing is how abatement works but the reason for the abatement was that the new pensionable job was by virtue of the previous military service (ie. it was not subject to 'fair and open competition').
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: UK
I was a civil servant 1973-2003 but my 12 years RAF service 1961-1973 did not count towards my civil service pension because I left the RAF before 1975.
The Government undertook to look into that recommendation, but oddly enough never reported back to Parliament on that point.
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 975
Likes: 20
From: Uranus
Voxpop
I don't doubt what you say. But I would love to know a job that is completely open to "fair and open competition". Most jobs have experience requirements, qualification requirements, location requirements, ability to travel requirements, etc... So why are we penalised for a "must have been a regular or reserve" requirement?
Seems grossly unfair from my end of the telescope!
The B Word
I don't doubt what you say. But I would love to know a job that is completely open to "fair and open competition". Most jobs have experience requirements, qualification requirements, location requirements, ability to travel requirements, etc... So why are we penalised for a "must have been a regular or reserve" requirement?
Seems grossly unfair from my end of the telescope!
The B Word
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: London
abatement
That's HM Treasury for you - it is their rule. It isn't really that long ago that Retired Officers in the Civil Service suffered abatement but a change of name and opening applications up to 'others' saw the end of it.
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 62
Likes: 2
From: Under the EGOS circuit
Indeed so Voxpop.
When I PVR'd for a CS post in DARA, my RAF pension was unaffected. As some may know, I am now in a uniformed MSF (Military Supoport Function) post in the CS (son of ROs) but pension still unaffected. Only if I were FTRS would the pension be abated or lost (temporarily until final retirement, when it comes back).
When I PVR'd for a CS post in DARA, my RAF pension was unaffected. As some may know, I am now in a uniformed MSF (Military Supoport Function) post in the CS (son of ROs) but pension still unaffected. Only if I were FTRS would the pension be abated or lost (temporarily until final retirement, when it comes back).
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,580
Likes: 10
From: Darling - where are we?
What you are describing is how abatement works but the reason for the abatement was that the new pensionable job was by virtue of the previous military service (ie. it was not subject to 'fair and open competition').
If on leaving the military you get another job, which you have to apply for, then frankly it's none of their business whether you have a second income or how you got that income stream. And frankly, saying you are only eligible for the job by virtue of your previous experience, that is little short of bare faced cheek.
I can't think of any other organisation that would penalise you for your previous experience, which THEY wanted to use and benefit from. If anything, previous experience should attract a premium to your salary in recognition of the fact that they are getting a finished product and don't have to invest in large amounts of training and development time.
Last edited by Melchett01; 4th February 2013 at 10:57.
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,513
Likes: 3
From: UK
I suspect part of the problem with nailing this stuff, is the rate of change of pension schemes in public sector.
I left the mob in 2003 on AFPS 75 and briefly (18 months) worked for the MOD. the civil service had just binned their existing scheme and replaced it with a three choice scheme, one of which was a stakeholder scheme (I believe these have now also been replaced?) Knowing I was only going be in the job a little while, I went for the stakeholder thing. What a snafu, that turned about to be. Apparently I was only one of seven people in the entire civil service who went down this road and it took forever to get it established.
I had the last laugh though...I paid in a total of £480 in 18 months and last year it coughed out £4K tax free and a slap up dinner for two every month from now to endex!
As others have said, RAF pension and aforementioned Civil Service thingy, completely separate and unaffected by each other. Shouldn't read too much into it though.
I left the mob in 2003 on AFPS 75 and briefly (18 months) worked for the MOD. the civil service had just binned their existing scheme and replaced it with a three choice scheme, one of which was a stakeholder scheme (I believe these have now also been replaced?) Knowing I was only going be in the job a little while, I went for the stakeholder thing. What a snafu, that turned about to be. Apparently I was only one of seven people in the entire civil service who went down this road and it took forever to get it established.
I had the last laugh though...I paid in a total of £480 in 18 months and last year it coughed out £4K tax free and a slap up dinner for two every month from now to endex!
As others have said, RAF pension and aforementioned Civil Service thingy, completely separate and unaffected by each other. Shouldn't read too much into it though.
Last edited by The Old Fat One; 4th February 2013 at 21:41.
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,304
Likes: 1
From: @exRAF_Al
Melchett,
I could be wrong, and I stand by to be corrected.
But isn't AFPS 'as good' as it is (was?!) because of the nature of the military contract and that a second career and decent employment after a military career wasn't a given and there weren't so many possibilities of further employment?
The erosion of the military contract is meaning that the benefits of the AFPS are being lost. Some will argue that they are being lost because a military career structure is more closely accessible and aligned to one in civvy street and that therefore, the terms can be the same.
I could be wrong, and I stand by to be corrected.
But isn't AFPS 'as good' as it is (was?!) because of the nature of the military contract and that a second career and decent employment after a military career wasn't a given and there weren't so many possibilities of further employment?
The erosion of the military contract is meaning that the benefits of the AFPS are being lost. Some will argue that they are being lost because a military career structure is more closely accessible and aligned to one in civvy street and that therefore, the terms can be the same.
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,304
Likes: 1
From: @exRAF_Al
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,113
Likes: 2
From: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
I left in '95 after 22 years and became a teacher. I took an early teacher's pension last year at 55 (still teaching, just took the pension) and there have been no penalties that I'm aware of anywhere down the line.
