In the early ‘90s I subscribed to group that raised funds to obtain a counsel’s opinion on the merits of a carefully selected test case. Unfortunately the opinion was not favourable and there was deemed very little chance of success were the case to be pursued. That was where it ended and the group was wound up with the residual funds being returned to the subscribers.

There has not to to my knowledge subsequently been any organised attempt to reopen the matter. Should anyone know differently and be able to provide either evidence or knowledge gained first hand I should be very interested to hear it.

YS

Hang on a second. If what you’re saying has merit then why are you just thinking of your own subset? Surely the argument holds true for anyone who has ever been in receipt of flying pay (or similar taxable allowances) and subsequently drawn a pension.

Its all me, me, me isn’t it?!

For the record, I’m PAS so Jack’s onboard. Haul up the ladder.

BV

You were in the military once, I presume?

You call my post vitriol? You couldn’t sense the banter?

Probably best that you left when you did.

This post is also banter by the way. But then, you knew that already right?

BV

As far as I am aware, neither the Treasury or MoD has ever been called upon to justify or defend their position. As I stated earlier, I was party to what I believe to have been the only organised and funded attempt to challenge the situation and that fell at the first hurdle, the merits of our case with respect to the law. That was the paid for opinion of counsel with experience and knowledge in the field using as their basis a test case that was typical of the affected group which had it proceeded to court and been successful could have established precedent and been applied across the board.

Naturally, those who supported the campaign were disappointed with the result but accepted that the law was not in our favour and any continuation of action was highly unlikely to be successful. I say again, that as far as I am aware, neither the Treasury or MoD have been formally challenged on the matter as with the law in their favour it would be pointless.

I feel that there is an unfair element in the situation but it can only be addressed by political not legal means. Having had subsequent dealings with the Pensions Regulator in a matter requiring a ministerial decision I am afraid that with very limited leverage available one is better finding more rewarding ways of spending ones time.

YS

it’s Time aircrew got smart and pointed out that until we get our own blunty distinct pay scale, the retention issues are going to continue. We ain’t short of pilots. We are desperately short of retained experience. Forget FRI and tinkering with PA. when people wake up to how screwed the system is, we as a community need to grab the opportunity by the nuts and squeeze.

In comparison with civilian reality you guys are being screwed, totally cheated out of your just entitelment.

In my airline, my additional pay as a training captain was FULLY pensionable.

Still can’t understand why the RAF employs spec. aircrew and then considers flying pay as an allowance. Bizarre !