British airways pension to close.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have some perspective from both sides of the coin as I worked for BA many years ago in a different capacity and so have a few years service in a NAPS pension but re-joined a few years ago as a pilot and have a BARP pension.
It is a fact that many long serving NAPS pilot members were retiring on pensions in excess of £100k p.a. at age 55. This is an absolutely unbelievable retirement lifestyle partly because it's an incredibly generous pension figure and partly because you could draw it at such a young age and with modern life expectancy spend 30 years on the golf course with your Aston Martin parked outside the clubhouse.
I understand the argument that NAPS members wish to retain the benefits they were offered when they joined because there is a yawning chasm between the retirement income you can expect as a BARP member and a NAPS one. This doesn't alter the fact though that due to the demographic and financial environment changes explained above it is simply not economic nor arguably right for BA to continue to fund gigantic pension contributions to a gold plated elite at the expense of the majority of employees. The truth is BA is making lower profits, paying out lower profit share, is less able to invest in new fleet and product because of the crippling and open ended commitment to a financially unsustainable pension scheme.
Unfortunately as other posters have pointed out the world is changing and not for the better. Those of us in our middle years wonder how the heck we're going to ever pay our mortgages off, the young can't even imagine how they will ever buy a property. Those coming up to retirement won a demographic golden ticket. Their training was funded entirely by BA, they enjoyed 24 paypoints, they bought houses in the 1970's for peanuts that have now spiralled in value far far above any rise in incomes, they enjoyed incredible guaranteed pensions funded largely by their employer and they savoured long layovers in the suites of 5 star hotels beside aquamarine oceans. It was a golden age but the world has changed beyond all recognition sadly (and I sincerely mean it when I say sadly!!)
I am no lover of modern airline mgt teams, I am a NAPS and BARP member and am socialist and strongly pro-union by nature but even I can't find a convincing argument to continue with NAPS at the expense of the majority of BA employees. I only hope that BA will enhance BARP significantly in return for the savings it will make by closing NAPS (which will benefit all) as I certainly don't want the money saved to just get funnelled into even more bonuses for our 'leadership? team'
It is a fact that many long serving NAPS pilot members were retiring on pensions in excess of £100k p.a. at age 55. This is an absolutely unbelievable retirement lifestyle partly because it's an incredibly generous pension figure and partly because you could draw it at such a young age and with modern life expectancy spend 30 years on the golf course with your Aston Martin parked outside the clubhouse.
I understand the argument that NAPS members wish to retain the benefits they were offered when they joined because there is a yawning chasm between the retirement income you can expect as a BARP member and a NAPS one. This doesn't alter the fact though that due to the demographic and financial environment changes explained above it is simply not economic nor arguably right for BA to continue to fund gigantic pension contributions to a gold plated elite at the expense of the majority of employees. The truth is BA is making lower profits, paying out lower profit share, is less able to invest in new fleet and product because of the crippling and open ended commitment to a financially unsustainable pension scheme.
Unfortunately as other posters have pointed out the world is changing and not for the better. Those of us in our middle years wonder how the heck we're going to ever pay our mortgages off, the young can't even imagine how they will ever buy a property. Those coming up to retirement won a demographic golden ticket. Their training was funded entirely by BA, they enjoyed 24 paypoints, they bought houses in the 1970's for peanuts that have now spiralled in value far far above any rise in incomes, they enjoyed incredible guaranteed pensions funded largely by their employer and they savoured long layovers in the suites of 5 star hotels beside aquamarine oceans. It was a golden age but the world has changed beyond all recognition sadly (and I sincerely mean it when I say sadly!!)
I am no lover of modern airline mgt teams, I am a NAPS and BARP member and am socialist and strongly pro-union by nature but even I can't find a convincing argument to continue with NAPS at the expense of the majority of BA employees. I only hope that BA will enhance BARP significantly in return for the savings it will make by closing NAPS (which will benefit all) as I certainly don't want the money saved to just get funnelled into even more bonuses for our 'leadership? team'
DEsk-pilot
As a long serving NAPS pilot member can I ask if you sure you have the right scheme? The training/lifestyle/pensions benefits you describe sounds awfully like that supposedly enjoyed by the "Hamsters" who were on APS (and best of luck to them).
I'm not sure but I suppose 100k p.a. might just perhaps be possible on NAPs for a select few (perhaps max AVCs, training/management pensionable pay scales) but I'd hazard an educated guess that it certainly isn't the norm, and guys certainly aren't bailing out at 55 looking at anything like that amount.
As an aside:
It is a fact that many long serving NAPS pilot members were retiring on pensions in excess of £100k p.a. at age 55.
I'm not sure but I suppose 100k p.a. might just perhaps be possible on NAPs for a select few (perhaps max AVCs, training/management pensionable pay scales) but I'd hazard an educated guess that it certainly isn't the norm, and guys certainly aren't bailing out at 55 looking at anything like that amount.
As an aside:
The truth is BA is making lower profits,
Last edited by wiggy; 11th Sep 2017 at 07:57.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Barcelona
Age: 41
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The truth is all IAG care about is shareholder value and increasing profit as they have done every year. Cost cutting is a big part of this and labour cost is always in their headlights. Have all NAPS members reached 1 million DB funding cap? If so, it makes no sense to continue scheme. If not then this is IAG transferring wealth from employee to shareholder as they are wont to do.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This country is sleep walking into a huge disaster.
Rising house prices, generations of people that will be renters.
What happens to these renters when they retire. Many are on low paid work, with a pension that will pay about £100 a month..in 30 years i really do worry for what state this country will be. There will be millions on the bread line.
Rising house prices, generations of people that will be renters.
What happens to these renters when they retire. Many are on low paid work, with a pension that will pay about £100 a month..in 30 years i really do worry for what state this country will be. There will be millions on the bread line.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 34
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure people back in the day never spent a portion of their pay packet going to the pub, or buying the latest records etc. Not all money has to be spent purely on surviving (food, water, accommodation). If they'd rather spend their money on a phone rather than going down to the pub then so be it.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure people back in the day never spent a portion of their pay packet going to the pub, or buying the latest records etc. Not all money has to be spent purely on surviving (food, water, accommodation). If they'd rather spend their money on a phone rather than going down to the pub then so be it.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your Pension is Your responsibility.
If you want to offload that responsibility to somebody else (be it management or the government) then you cant complain about what you get.
If you want to offload that responsibility to somebody else (be it management or the government) then you cant complain about what you get.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Barcelona
Age: 41
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually a defined benefit pension is administered by Trustee's and it is they who hold the responsibility for day to day running of such a pension. DB pension law states that deficit is addressed via funding proposal from Trustee's or ultimately by the employer. IAG has multi billions in cash reserves, where do you think management want to deploy these cash reserves...pension for loyal, hard working employee's or maybe just maybe they are incentivised via bonuses to reduce employee cost!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually a defined benefit pension is administered by Trustee's and it is they who hold the responsibility for day to day running of such a pension. DB pension law states that deficit is addressed via funding proposal from Trustee's or ultimately by the employer. IAG has multi billions in cash reserves, where do you think management want to deploy these cash reserves...pension for loyal, hard working employee's or maybe just maybe they are incentivised via bonuses to reduce employee cost!
So its up to the individual to make sure that they have enough saved for a pension, nobody else. Instead of spending $1000 on new iphone buy a new android for $250 and invest the difference - you will then reap the benefits in years to come and you can still make phone calls in the meantime. .
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Barcelona
Age: 41
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At same time Jet II, in this instance you have a company which announced 2 billion plus profits last year and cash reserves many multiples of that, closing a DB scheme which although in deficit is but a mere drop in the ocean compared to their balance sheet. DB Pension funds across the world are struggling mainly due to historically low interest rates post 2008/9. This will not always be the case. I question why a fellow pilot's sympathies lie more with a company who promotes shareholder value at the expense of its employee's rather than with his fellow professionals.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As has already been pointed out, NAPS was closed to new entrants years ago - many BA staff are already on BARP so are on a less generous pension scheme. APS was the Golden age and there were plenty of complaints about them from those on NAPS - now the same is happening all over again.
So why should those staff on BARP accept less good pay rises simply to fund NAPS? - I was in NAPS and even I could defend that.
So why should those staff on BARP accept less good pay rises simply to fund NAPS? - I was in NAPS and even I could defend that.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Barcelona
Age: 41
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NAPS is/was still a DB scheme no? APS is long gone. Seems like company have successfully played the divide and conquer Card in BA via pension. Up to your Union representatives to not allow pay rises to be split along lines of pension schemes but it seems like they've fallen for it.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: pluto
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
qwertyuiop
The annual increase in a DB pension is x 16 against an AA of £40k. Low/zero CPI. So lots of NAPSters are hit with a huge tax charge even with no additional input. A reduction in AA would mean an even bigger tax charge.
A reduction in tax relief would alter the balance between employee v employer inputs. High employee inputs (NAPS) would become less advantageous against the free money provided by an employer input (BARP 2).
Crunch the numbers after November.
Unfortunately, middle class pensions are a chancellor's cash cow.
The annual increase in a DB pension is x 16 against an AA of £40k. Low/zero CPI. So lots of NAPSters are hit with a huge tax charge even with no additional input. A reduction in AA would mean an even bigger tax charge.
A reduction in tax relief would alter the balance between employee v employer inputs. High employee inputs (NAPS) would become less advantageous against the free money provided by an employer input (BARP 2).
Crunch the numbers after November.
Unfortunately, middle class pensions are a chancellor's cash cow.
