Are the BA DEP's getting the final salary pension ?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Plateau of Leng
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha you can bet BALPA have secured the future of the existing final salary scheme mamebers - but that's all she wrote boys!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No they're getting a DC scheme. The companys proposal is pretty gash at the moment and BALPA are in dispute with the company about it. DEP contracts were delayed due to the dispute but now the company have gone ahead with recruitment anyway things are coming to a head. BA BALPA have been given a mandate by their members to press for an industry leading DC scheme, with a company contribution of at least 14% (current industry best). Expect unrest ahead.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Industry best? What a load of b*ll*cks! Just where did BA get that from? First Choice Airways puts in 15% of salary. Quite frankly if a small company like First Choice can put in 15% and have been doing so for over a decade then BA and BALPA needs to come up with something quite a bit better if they want it to be "current industry best"!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: downroute
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly in the consultative ballot that was held - the majority of BA/BALPA members would not consider striking to get new entrants onto the FSS (criminal in IMHO as BA are creating a Bscale but the senior guys wont be affected like i will in 20yrs time)
They did majority vote to support action to improve the DC scheme, however the ballot form was complex, and low return rate - mean real striking support probably isnt there - unless BALPA make it a protest vote at all the other crap BA are up too!! Of course balpa (bacc) keep sticking to this stupid approach of tackling issues seperately instead of mounting a single protest vote.
With the oil price staying high, and the lack of a protest vote backing - i doubt we will see a ballot/strike just for new entrants DC scheme
truly saddening..
They did majority vote to support action to improve the DC scheme, however the ballot form was complex, and low return rate - mean real striking support probably isnt there - unless BALPA make it a protest vote at all the other crap BA are up too!! Of course balpa (bacc) keep sticking to this stupid approach of tackling issues seperately instead of mounting a single protest vote.
With the oil price staying high, and the lack of a protest vote backing - i doubt we will see a ballot/strike just for new entrants DC scheme
truly saddening..
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear, I offer my most humble apologies to 7E7 for my shameful error in being a whole 1% out in corporate pension contributions. I will live with the eternal shame of incorrectly recalling that the best rate was 14% and not 15%. BTW they were BALPAs figures, not BAs. If you know of any company contributing more than 15% to a DC then I'm sure BALPA would love to hear.
tster7444 - I'd hazard a guess I've got as long in BA as you, if not longer. That doesn't mean I live in a fluffy world where final salary schemes are going to be commercially viable again regardless of aging populations, increases in life expectancies and highway robbery from consecutive chancellors. I've heard all the arguments in favour of striking to keep the FSS, but it still boils down to the unpleasant fact that the numbers just don't add up anymore and stamping our feet, crying or going on strike isn't going to change that.
tster7444 - I'd hazard a guess I've got as long in BA as you, if not longer. That doesn't mean I live in a fluffy world where final salary schemes are going to be commercially viable again regardless of aging populations, increases in life expectancies and highway robbery from consecutive chancellors. I've heard all the arguments in favour of striking to keep the FSS, but it still boils down to the unpleasant fact that the numbers just don't add up anymore and stamping our feet, crying or going on strike isn't going to change that.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When we were "consulted" BA were planning to offer the DEPs "12%". This was against other "leading" airlines of, say, 15% (Virgin).
However, BA's "12%" was of pensionable salary - not far off 75% of your "basic". So for BA's "12%" read more like 9%. BA would need to contribute more like 20% to match Virgin's...
Those who have received employment offers from BA, what rate is quoted as Company Contributions?
NoD
However, BA's "12%" was of pensionable salary - not far off 75% of your "basic". So for BA's "12%" read more like 9%. BA would need to contribute more like 20% to match Virgin's...
Those who have received employment offers from BA, what rate is quoted as Company Contributions?
NoD
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA Company Contribution
BA Letter states that the company will pay 12% of pensionable salary and the employee must pay 5% of the same.
As stated by Nigel on Draft, BA pensionable salary is 75% of basic pay (excl any allowances).
The wording in the BA Retirement Plan documentation reads more like the employee pays 5% and the company will make this up to 12% of pensionalble salary!!!
I have been assured by personnel that the letter supercedes the plan documentation.
BTW Where does the definition of Pensionable Salary come from?
According to the Inland Revenue, it is defined as the salary uopn which pension contributions are made (how helpful).
Where have BA come up with this arbitrary 75% from? Is it 75% at each pay pont and how are training / management increases factored in?
For Info: In Virgin, as long as the employee pays in 6%, then the company will pay in 15%, again all of pensionable salary. The big difference is that in Virgin the pensionable salary is the Basic Pay excl. allowances/flight pay.
I underrstand that the BA DEP DC scheme is still not finalised and that BALPA are hoping for a bigger company contribution.
At least if the pensionable salary equalled basic pay (which is slightly less than in VS for starters!) then we'd be on the road to a more comparable scheme to other companies, if still a way off industry leading.
Surely the company can afford to put more in as the main reason for having a DC scheme over a DB scheme is that the company is not liable to make up any shortfall in the investment. The current offer is way short of the final salary scheme so must be saving BA a fortune as well as reducing future liability. Shame it's at the expense of the staff.
As stated by Nigel on Draft, BA pensionable salary is 75% of basic pay (excl any allowances).
The wording in the BA Retirement Plan documentation reads more like the employee pays 5% and the company will make this up to 12% of pensionalble salary!!!
I have been assured by personnel that the letter supercedes the plan documentation.
BTW Where does the definition of Pensionable Salary come from?
According to the Inland Revenue, it is defined as the salary uopn which pension contributions are made (how helpful).
Where have BA come up with this arbitrary 75% from? Is it 75% at each pay pont and how are training / management increases factored in?
For Info: In Virgin, as long as the employee pays in 6%, then the company will pay in 15%, again all of pensionable salary. The big difference is that in Virgin the pensionable salary is the Basic Pay excl. allowances/flight pay.
I underrstand that the BA DEP DC scheme is still not finalised and that BALPA are hoping for a bigger company contribution.
At least if the pensionable salary equalled basic pay (which is slightly less than in VS for starters!) then we'd be on the road to a more comparable scheme to other companies, if still a way off industry leading.
Surely the company can afford to put more in as the main reason for having a DC scheme over a DB scheme is that the company is not liable to make up any shortfall in the investment. The current offer is way short of the final salary scheme so must be saving BA a fortune as well as reducing future liability. Shame it's at the expense of the staff.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cripple et al
The 'pensionable' amount in BA is actually 80% of basic AFAIK.
This came about in the restructuring we did in 2003.
Within NAPS (FSS) all pilots who retire from the same paypoint in the same seat will have the same pensionable pay, as I said set at 80% of the longhaul pilots basic pay. It just so happened to work out that if you retired with a 2/3 pension you would then be entitled to the max pension the government (then) allowed. Things have obviously changed with the pension cap etc.
As to what will happen within BA for new joiners, well the FSS has been lost to them, will the pensionable pay still be 80% of the LH equivalent pay, or 80% of your own pay or some other number? Will the company contributions be increased? Yet to be decided.
The 'pensionable' amount in BA is actually 80% of basic AFAIK.
This came about in the restructuring we did in 2003.
Within NAPS (FSS) all pilots who retire from the same paypoint in the same seat will have the same pensionable pay, as I said set at 80% of the longhaul pilots basic pay. It just so happened to work out that if you retired with a 2/3 pension you would then be entitled to the max pension the government (then) allowed. Things have obviously changed with the pension cap etc.
As to what will happen within BA for new joiners, well the FSS has been lost to them, will the pensionable pay still be 80% of the LH equivalent pay, or 80% of your own pay or some other number? Will the company contributions be increased? Yet to be decided.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TopBunk
Thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to reply to Nigel On Draft's query as to what the new joiners had been told by the company.
I had thought that the Pensionable pay may have come from the Pension Cap vs Top Captains's increment. This 80% therefore makes sense for a final salary scheme. However, as you say, with the pension cap changes and also the fact that in a defined contribution scheme you want to save as much as possible as you are not necessarily going to reach the cap, I don't see the need to define a lower pensionable salary.
The figure quoted as pensionable pay on my contract is exactly 75% of the Year 1 F/O basic pay (which I believe is the same on all fleets). There is no mention of whether this will change with seniority/fleet etc. New joiners are part of the BA Retirement Plan (BARP) which is totally separate from NAPS etc
As to the final outcome.. we shall wait and see. I've already signed up anyway!
Thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to reply to Nigel On Draft's query as to what the new joiners had been told by the company.
I had thought that the Pensionable pay may have come from the Pension Cap vs Top Captains's increment. This 80% therefore makes sense for a final salary scheme. However, as you say, with the pension cap changes and also the fact that in a defined contribution scheme you want to save as much as possible as you are not necessarily going to reach the cap, I don't see the need to define a lower pensionable salary.
The figure quoted as pensionable pay on my contract is exactly 75% of the Year 1 F/O basic pay (which I believe is the same on all fleets). There is no mention of whether this will change with seniority/fleet etc. New joiners are part of the BA Retirement Plan (BARP) which is totally separate from NAPS etc
As to the final outcome.. we shall wait and see. I've already signed up anyway!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Without the new entrants to support the FSS from below coupled with the massive current deficit any pilot under say forty something is living in cloud cookie land if they think expected pension will equal the real one.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The 51st State
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was discussing this issue in the pub last night with a fellow Nigel. The conclusion was, there are ONLY three reasons to join BA:
1. FSS Pension
2. FSS Pension
3. FSS Pension
I wonder how long it will take before the current 9% deal will sink in with new entrants. Hopefully whilst they still have time to do some extracurricular pension provision.
Harry
1. FSS Pension
2. FSS Pension
3. FSS Pension
I wonder how long it will take before the current 9% deal will sink in with new entrants. Hopefully whilst they still have time to do some extracurricular pension provision.
Harry
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I should state from the outset, that I voted in favour of retaining the FSS for new joiners. I think it has been short sighted in the extreme for some people to imagine that this issue (as currently resolved) will not affect 'their' FSS.
I also feel somewhat ashamed that we have been complicit in the creation of what has already been described as a 'B' payscale.
My only question is this, and it has already been alluded to by other posters: Why WOULD anybody now join BA, bearing in mind the very significant disadvantages of so doing?
I really hope the people accepting their job offers don't end up very bitter and disappointed, in 10 years time, when they are still looking at another 5 years for their first command.
Still, at least they won't be 'trapped' by an FSS!
I also feel somewhat ashamed that we have been complicit in the creation of what has already been described as a 'B' payscale.
My only question is this, and it has already been alluded to by other posters: Why WOULD anybody now join BA, bearing in mind the very significant disadvantages of so doing?
I really hope the people accepting their job offers don't end up very bitter and disappointed, in 10 years time, when they are still looking at another 5 years for their first command.
Still, at least they won't be 'trapped' by an FSS!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: England
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creation of what is, in effect, a B scale may one day prove to be very divisive amongst the pilots. Twenty years from now some of you may be looking forward to retiring on a nice final salary.
Then you're told that the the fund cannot support it and can only service those who have retired, leaving you to retire on less than you expected. What sort of support/sympathy do you expect from the B scale guys for industrial action? You reap what you sow.
Then you're told that the the fund cannot support it and can only service those who have retired, leaving you to retire on less than you expected. What sort of support/sympathy do you expect from the B scale guys for industrial action? You reap what you sow.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monty
You are possibly correct in that it could end up being a divisive thorn in BALPA's side in BA.
However, what you seem to ignore is that the BA Executive Team would never have reopened the FSS just for pilots, as if that had even being intimated, every other staff group would have been back to the table. That is what happens in BA - every staff group is examining every detail of what happens to every other group. The Executive had taken a corporate decision to close the FSS to new joiners and they would have seen the company go under before they would have reopened it to anyone. For that reason the BACC, after consultation with BALPA members, took the pragmatic view that we must endeavour to get the best possible (industry leading) DC pension scheme for new joiners. At present we have a way to go on that objective, even though the new pilots are getting a higher company contribution rate than most.
You are possibly correct in that it could end up being a divisive thorn in BALPA's side in BA.
However, what you seem to ignore is that the BA Executive Team would never have reopened the FSS just for pilots, as if that had even being intimated, every other staff group would have been back to the table. That is what happens in BA - every staff group is examining every detail of what happens to every other group. The Executive had taken a corporate decision to close the FSS to new joiners and they would have seen the company go under before they would have reopened it to anyone. For that reason the BACC, after consultation with BALPA members, took the pragmatic view that we must endeavour to get the best possible (industry leading) DC pension scheme for new joiners. At present we have a way to go on that objective, even though the new pilots are getting a higher company contribution rate than most.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: England
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Top Bunk
Take your point totally. I'm not with BA but have mates that are. What I will say is that nobody under 40 years can bank on the cast-iron certainty of final salary schemes. The only folks who can (and that's not 100%) are ex-public employees - civil servants, MOD etc because our taxes guarantee it. Once a scheme is closed, that's it. It can only pay out and the only money coming in is from investment returns.
I would hope that 30 years from now the last cadet retires, lives till he's 90 and then croaks, leaving a few grand to donate to the annual Christmas bash. Recent experience has reinforced the view that pensions can be double-edged swords. Diversify.
Take your point totally. I'm not with BA but have mates that are. What I will say is that nobody under 40 years can bank on the cast-iron certainty of final salary schemes. The only folks who can (and that's not 100%) are ex-public employees - civil servants, MOD etc because our taxes guarantee it. Once a scheme is closed, that's it. It can only pay out and the only money coming in is from investment returns.
I would hope that 30 years from now the last cadet retires, lives till he's 90 and then croaks, leaving a few grand to donate to the annual Christmas bash. Recent experience has reinforced the view that pensions can be double-edged swords. Diversify.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pensions - Tonight with Trevor McDonald
Looking at these interesting posts I wondered if anyone can help me. ITV1's current affairs programme, Tonight with Trevor McDonald, is researching an important programme on pensions and we are looking for willing participants. We want to raise awareness of the concerns surrounding pensions and why proper regulation of the pensions industry is so important.
If you have a deferred company pension (DB) - for example with British Airways or another company - or you are paying into a final salary scheme now, you are one of millions who might be interested in finding out more. If you have a private or stakeholder pension we would like to hear from you also.
Please feel to contact me on 0161 827 2408. Any initial conversations will be treated confidentially.
Many thanks,
Ross
Ross Charnock
Tonight with Trevor McDonald
Tel: 0161 827 2408
If you have a deferred company pension (DB) - for example with British Airways or another company - or you are paying into a final salary scheme now, you are one of millions who might be interested in finding out more. If you have a private or stakeholder pension we would like to hear from you also.
Please feel to contact me on 0161 827 2408. Any initial conversations will be treated confidentially.
Many thanks,
Ross
Ross Charnock
Tonight with Trevor McDonald
Tel: 0161 827 2408