Armed Forces must wait five years longer for pension

#1
Blimey!! two posts in a day - I'll have to go and have a lie down, I'm working too hard.

Anyway, back to the post...apparently Cameron is determined to make the most loyal supporters lose faith:

Armed Forces must wait five years longer for pension - Telegraph

Soldiers, sailors and airmen may have to give as much as 23 years’ service before being able to leave with their pensions, up from as little as 18 years at present.

The result would be that the effective minimum age for leaving the Services with an immediate pension would increase from 40 to 45.
.

Under the current scheme of compulsory redundancies will anyone serve long enough to receive a full pension?

Is it me or are they wanting to hand the next election to Labour on a plate?
 
#3
So what? The overwhelming majority of WOs/SNCOs will willingly stay in for 5 extra years - 5 extra years of pay, SFA, free medical and dental care, and CEA, and all the while topping up the pension pot.

It's officers who are going to whine the loudest - the majority of them are only in it to secure their IPP and get their darlings educated on the back of CEA before racing off to the city and some pointless 'job' as a management consultancy manager or something. There are ******* thousands of these scavenging wasters infesting the Army - in every capbadge - and it's high time we cleaned house and got rid. Maybe the NEM will force their hand.

Bah humbug etc.
 
#4
LAIT, got an issue with authority have we?
 
#5
Is it me or are they wanting to hand the next election to Labour on a plate?
Hand it to them on a plate? How do you figure that out, the military vote is nowhere near as large as you might think it is. Pissing off a couple of hundred thousand servicemen and women is a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of teachers, civil servants et al they're smashing with pension reform.
 
#6
#7
It's officers who are going to whine the loudest - the majority of them are only in it to secure their IPP and get their darlings educated on the back of CEA before racing off to the city and some pointless 'job' as a management consultancy manager or something. There are ******* thousands of these scavenging wasters infesting the Army - in every capbadge - and it's high time we cleaned house and got rid.
Bah humbug etc.
My kids weren't old enough for CEA by my 16 year point - I obviously didn't start procreating as early as you would like to think before rushing off to my pointless job to pay tax to subsidise your pointless job.

Just remember, we all leave the Army at some point and I don't know many as can live on pension alone. Everyone will have to plan their exit strategy and the IPP is a major factor in that. I don't care either way, because I've gone, but the 'powers that be' had best be damned sure they don't suffer the law of unintended consequence if they change it.
 
#8
So back to AFPS75 in everything but name then? Hold on pass me that wheel I think I can redesign that for you!!
 
#9
I obviously didn't start procreating as early as you would like to think before rushing off to my pointless job to pay tax to subsidise your pointless job.
Do you mean you weren't paying tax whilst you were in?
 
#10
From the article

To cut that cost, the NEM has recommended a significant increase in the thresholds for early pension payments. The minimum increase in service recommended by the NEM study is two years, but the maximum is five years.

So basically a two year raise to take in to account the VEng (Full) length of service for 24 years. Otherwsie (as it stands) even with two years of Junior service the vast majority wouldn't get the IP.

If they remove the IP, as it stands, you would get a lot more blokes banging out before the 24 point.

Maybe that is a good thing to a bean counter, but probably not to a CO of a Regiment/Army which is decimated at the return from tour/ball ache.

You can regenerate Ptes/2Lts quite quickly, LCpls/Lts not too hard either... Cpls, Sgts, Capts and Majs though.
 
#12
I'm surprised they haven't looked into the whole immediate pension thing, leaving with a pension when you've got another 20 years work in you before retirement and all that. Or is that what the 2015 thnigy will be about.........
 
#13
Because getting a job with hardly a drop in pay at 40, when you've got kids, a house and all that is easy?

You could ask why the MoD should care... well, if you have to make the descision to leave at the 'optimum' time, I'd imagine an average departure date of 26 to 32, coupled wth ranks of entrenched Cpls to SSgts is going to really fcuk the rank pyramid.

And drive up the cost of training as the replacements come in.

Similar affects to the Officer pyramid.
 
#14
I've to work 12 years extra, pay more, get less.
Why do you need to work 12 years extra? Unless you're referring to the nurses retiring at 55 but you wouldn't have got a full pension then. Working to 67, which is the extra 12 years, would put you on the same amount of years as working to 65 would have done.
 

jarrod248

LE
Gallery Guru
#15
Why do you need to work 12 years extra? Unless you're referring to the nurses retiring at 55 but you wouldn't have got a full pension then. Working to 67, which is the extra 12 years, would put you on the same amount of years as working to 65 would have done.
Yes, my retirement age is changing from 55 and yes I would have had a full pension then.
 
#16
Yes, my retirement age is changing from 55 and yes I would have had a full pension then.
Were you working for the NHS before 1995? If so then your retirement age would have been 55 if you had "special" status. However, it would have been based on the number of years you did. Again, if you started work for the NHS before 1995 then you could have stayed on the 95 pension scheme. If you opted into the 08 pension scheme, then your retirement age would have been 60. If you are not "special" status then you have to work to the state retirement age like the rest of the population. The 95 scheme would have given you 1/80th of your pay for every year you worked but the 08 scheme gives you 1/60th. If you moved to the 08 scheme, you would get half pay after working for the NHS (not the military as that comes under the AFPS unless you transferred the benefits across) after 30 years instead of 40. So if you retire at 55, you would still get the same amount of pension by going early that you would have got under the old scheme.
Have a read of your NHS Pension Guides which your practice manager should hold. OK, you will have to work 2 years extra to get the same benefits as before but that is happening to everyone. State pensioners retirement age will also be going up.
 

jarrod248

LE
Gallery Guru
#17
Were you working for the NHS before 1995? If so then your retirement age would have been 55 if you had "special" status. However, it would have been based on the number of years you did. Again, if you started work for the NHS before 1995 then you could have stayed on the 95 pension scheme. If you opted into the 08 pension scheme, then your retirement age would have been 60. If you are not "special" status then you have to work to the state retirement age like the rest of the population. The 95 scheme would have given you 1/80th of your pay for every year you worked but the 08 scheme gives you 1/60th. If you moved to the 08 scheme, you would get half pay after working for the NHS (not the military as that comes under the AFPS unless you transferred the benefits across) after 30 years instead of 40. So if you retire at 55, you would still get the same amount of pension by going early that you would have got under the old scheme.
Have a read of your NHS Pension Guides which your practice manager should hold. OK, you will have to work 2 years extra to get the same benefits as before but that is happening to everyone. State pensioners retirement age will also be going up.
Yes I did work for the NHS before 1995. I don't think you've read what I posted the retirement age is being changed, the same for teachers, prison officers and lots of other public sector workers. It doesn't matter whether you opted out or stayed in the old scheme, they are changing loads of these pension schemes. In my case as posted i'll have to work an extra 12 years to get less out and i'll have to pay more in each month and also for the extra 12 years.
 
#18
No, I realise that the retirement age has been put up. I can't, however, see how you will get less as the amount is based on the years you have completed. I actually left the NHS in 2010 and we were given the option of staying in the 95 scheme or changing to the 08 scheme. I stayed in the 95 scheme but the amount I paid in went up even then. If the new conditions actually change what you had in place then that is wrong. As with teachers and others any benefits accrued up until the new scheme comes in will remain unchanged. I can understand that 2 years extra is the thing you all have to bite the bullet for, but you won't (or shouldn't) get less by working 12 years extra. 20 grand a year and retiring after 40 years would have given you 10 grand a year pension. 20 grand a year and retiring after 42 years will give the same under the new scheme. But, retiring at 55, would have only given you 3/4 of the half pension under the old scheme, not a "full" half pay pension. So saying you have to work and extra 12 years to get less pension must surely be wrong.
 

jarrod248

LE
Gallery Guru
#19
No, I realise that the retirement age has been put up. I can't, however, see how you will get less as the amount is based on the years you have completed. I actually left the NHS in 2010 and we were given the option of staying in the 95 scheme or changing to the 08 scheme. I stayed in the 95 scheme but the amount I paid in went up even then. If the new conditions actually change what you had in place then that is wrong. As with teachers and others any benefits accrued up until the new scheme comes in will remain unchanged. I can understand that 2 years extra is the thing you all have to bite the bullet for, but you won't (or shouldn't) get less by working 12 years extra. 20 grand a year and retiring after 40 years would have given you 10 grand a year pension. 20 grand a year and retiring after 42 years will give the same under the new scheme. But, retiring at 55, would have only given you 3/4 of the half pension under the old scheme, not a "full" half pay pension. So saying you have to work and extra 12 years to get less pension must surely be wrong.
No after 20 years each year is doubled up so I think by the age of 47yrs i'd have paid in the maximum that I can pay. So I still have to pay until i'm 55yrs old, with a pension age of 55yrs for mental health officers i'd get a full pension at 55yrs old not 3/4 of half a pension. I'll have to pay 20 years for nothing.
I am in the old scheme, they are changing the pensions terms and conditions.
 
#20
Stop ******* whining. I'm accruing a second pension through the Govt and I'm now ponying up 40 quid more a month for the same benefit.

Do you think the military are the only ones getting hammered?

Stop dripping. The military are not and should not be a special case.

Get over yourselves. The bedding storeman in Fally isn't Andy McNab.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top