Gurkhas will be sacked early to reduce their pension rights

#1
I could not believe the MOD would be so stupid to even try to use this again after the slapping they got last time round with the biddiss case .Words fail me :roll:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/mick_smith/2006/03/it_should_never.html

The MOD's response is typical what they failed to realise is that MCP never had a 15 year point before. It was only introduced during the Ghurkhas Terms and condition of Service review held only this year

Are there means of getting this translated/distributed for our Gurkha colleges in the forces?




http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3056720.ece?Submitted=true

Michael Smith
THE Ministry of Defence (MoD) is facing legal action over plans to cut the pensions of Gurkhas by sacking them three years before they are due to leave the army.

The move, which means the MoD will avoid having to pay an ordinary Gurkha soldier more than £200,000, is to be challenged in the courts by the British Armed Forces Federation (BAFF).

The policy was introduced by civil servants after they were forced to increase the Gurkhas’ pay and pensions to bring them into line with the rest of the army. An official briefing document on the new pension scheme shows that 80%-85% of Gurkhas will be discharged early, so missing the better payments.

They will lose out not only on the immediate pension they would get after 18 years’ service but also on a lump sum departure payment of the equivalent of three years’ pension.

Related Links
Cheating our armed forces
Gurkhas have been put on the new army pension scheme, which applies to all other soldiers, after years of campaigning by their supporters. The full pension will be worth around £6,500 a year for a rifleman, the basic Gurkha rank – plus the one-off departure payment.

In the past, most Gurkhas served only for 15 years, after which they received an immediate pension that was much smaller and worth only about £1,200 a year for a rifleman.

But Gurkhas on the new scheme will now get nothing until they are 65, if the MoD decides they are among the 80%-85% who are to be thrown out at 15 years.

For most Gurkhas who join the army at 18, that will deprive them of a total of 32 years’ pension money, £208,000 for a basic rifleman, and far more for an NCO.

The briefing document says the army will recruit far too many Gurkhas if they are allowed to serve to the 18-year point, so most will be discharged after 15 years with no immediate pension and no departure payment.

The ready availability of recruits for the Gurkhas among young Nepalese men has led the MoD to decide to discharge older soldiers early rather than cut the number of recruits.

A “manning control scheme” was used from the late 1990s until 2002, in an attempt to cut the MoD’s pension liability by preventing some soldiers serving to the point at which they received an immediate pension.

But its deliberate intent to cut pension payments was exposed in 2002 after a series of cases in which highly experienced soldiers with extremely good reports were thrown out at a time when the army was desperately short of such men.

Ministers ordered civil servants to stop using the scheme to discharge good soldiers and it has not been used since. It has been revived specifically to control the numbers of Gurkha soldiers.

Doug Young, the BAFF chairman, said it was staggering that “the MoD should consider reintroducing their discredited manning control policy for anyone, let alone for Gurkha soldiers only. This raises several important legal issues, not only racial discrimination, serious as that would be”.

Read the document

Read Mick Smith's blog
 
#2
A disgrace. The Gurkha soldiers serve this country with great distinction.
It should be pointed out, however, that the call to revise their pension rights would lead to another attempt to screw them.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#3
Have they not been doing that to 'locally enlisted' squaddies for some time? ISTR that Options for Change was a prime mover in this field.
 
#4
This just goes to show that the Government does not care about the Armed forces, Every time we think something is going in our favour they introduce something else to feck us over. Nothing this Government does surprise’s me now. As was said this is blatant discrimination of a single group, bring on the ARRSE lawyers. If they get away with this where will it end? :evil: :evil: :evil:
 
#6
once this filters back to Nepal, I wonder how many will as keen to join up.
 
#7
What a bleedin shower of XXXX we have running our country. They throw money at undesirables and rob our best to pay for it.
:x
Damn their eyes!

EDIT to add: I bet you anything you wanna that the politico scumbags will not have their pension rights negatively affected. It is just one bad decision after another.

We probably need a new political party. One that promotes the values the majority of citizens want. Reward good behaviour and punish bad. Look after our own and only help others when we can aford it. WTF is the government doing promising aid to Africa and he World Bank while our own people are short on basic care, rewarding ilegal immigrants while leaving Iraqi interpreters in the cold and now the Ghurkas are getting screwed to pay for their crap?
 
#8
This seems to be a clear case of "The Law of Unintended Consequences". People were unhappy about the previous terms of service under which Gurkhas served and viewed them as discriminatory. It was pointed out that there were very good reasons for these particular Terms and conditions not least the agreement between India, Nepal and the UK dating back to 1947. Nevertheless, it seems the Gurkhas have been put on the same terms and conditions as the remainder of the Army and guess what, it ain't all it was cracked up to be. Seems to be an argument for leaving well enough alone and not letting ill-informed sentimentality (and no small amount of political correctness) get in the way of the facts.
I like and admire the Gurkhas and would happily see several more battalions recruited, why this hasn't already been done is a mystery to me, presumably something to do with the proportion of Gurkhas in the Army as as wholle and the infantry in particular?
 
#9
Lads, I think you will find that this was pretty much always on the cards.

The Gurkha TACOS took the early departure in to account, despite the fact the annual payout was less, it started earlier than the Pension (75) for British TACOS.

You put Gurkhas oon British TACOS so they are dealt with the same as a Brit. If he leaves prior to the IP point, then no IP.

The Gurkhas have had this form of "MCP" in place for donkeys. Only a select few will reach the 22 year point.

However, I have heard that certainly the QGS are moving in to the RSigs for continuation. Esp if they retrade to a trade currently not held on the strength of the QGS.
 
#10
Not correct Jaeger
MCP never had a 15 year point before, Also MCP was stopped in April 2002 after the mentioned case. It was only introduced during the Ghurkhas Terms and condition of Service review held this year. After Mr Hoon agreed that Ghurkhas could transfer to the AFPS 75/05. The offer was made Sept/Oct this year and the new GTOS came out just before they could change pension schemes, what a surprise. :roll:
 
#11
Kenny, whilst not in name, an MCP HAS existed in the Bde of Gurkhas for some time now.

If you don't reach Sgt by a certain point you are out. If you do you have a certain amount of time to reach C/SSgt before your discharge. Only a few Gurkhas have ever reached the 22yr point.

I may be wrong, but I think it was 15 years, 18 years and a further 2 years awarded for WO2. (Bearing in mind that certainly the QGS doesn't have a WO1 slot as it isn't a formed Regt, this may be the case for the other Corps Gurkhas).

You also have to factor in the Commissions for the Gurkhas also.

Edit to add
semper said:
once this filters back to Nepal, I wonder how many will as keen to join up.
I very much doubt this will affect recruitment. The spaces available each year are in the low hundreds, the potential recruits in their thousands for the British Gurkhas alone. The Gurkhas have the option of not just the British Gurkhas, but also the Singapore Police and the Indian Gurkhas.

Nepals biggest export and greatest earner is man power to countries who need it. You'll find Nepalese working in every country going, all over the Middle East as Nannies, cooks and body guards not to mention the Far East, and more and more in the USA.
 
#12
Rather them than me, besides many are on the gravy train living of the rep of the many distinguished Gurkhas..I have Gurkha mates and I have Gurkhas I hate for one reason or another...But the terms and conditions of their contract is known to them from the start...Its the classic old 'Me no understand'...
 
#13
Their terms and conditions weren't known to them from the start. They were changed a few years ago.

The Gurkhas recruited under the new TACOS are still quite junior. It is the old boys and their numberies who are being affected.
 
#14
newlynpirate said:
Rather them than me, besides many are on the gravy train living of the rep of the many distinguished Gurkhas..I have Gurkha mates and I have Gurkhas I hate for one reason or another...But the terms and conditions of their contract is known to them from the start...Its the classic old 'Me no understand'...
Leaving aside the no doubt unintended racism of "me no understand", the story is about the MOD wanting to move the goalposts.
 
#15
This is an extract for the AFPS 05 Q and A paper.

Why is the Army using MCPs now, when they haven’t been used for several years?

In the context of managing the complex transition to the introduction of the new Versatile Engagement from 1 January 2008, where individuals will serve side-by-side on a range of different engagements, it is likely that there will be surpluses in the Army’s structure which will continue to exist, particularly beyond the 12-year point. It is for this reason that the Army may wish to reactivate the use of MCPs and has introduced a new MCP at the 15 year point.
 
#16
Kenny that sounds like a new MCP for the whole Army. However, I am pretty sure the Bde of Gurkhas had one at the 15 year point for quite a while prior to this..

I'll have to make some enquireies.
 
#17
Yes sorry no pun intended with the me no understand bit..Alot of Gurkhas are good guys, but alot are on the gray train and live of the old reps...Some no names are lazy, obnoxious, rude, and oblivious toanyone or anything but themselves..It is these people that live of the old boys reps and areon the gravy tain, and that use the 'me no understand' when THEY don not WANT to understand!!
Old boy Gurkhas I have many of them as friends, BUT alot of the new boy Gurkhas are almost CHAV like in their own way..
 
#18
Correct me if I am wrong here but if you leave the Army with insufficient service for an immediate pension, you are entitled to a ‘preserved pension’, provided that you have at least 2 years’ service counting from the age 18 for soldiers.

Preserved pensions are payable at the age of 60 (Not 65 as stated) or earlier in the event of permanent disablement. Gratuities are also paid at this time, again at the rate of three times the annual pension awarded.

Resettlement Grants. In addition to a preserved pension, soldiers who complete at least 12 years’ service from age 18, receive a resettlement grant. If you receive an immediate pension, you are not be entitled to a resettlement grant as well.

Does this not also apply to Gurkhas if they convert to the AFPS ?

Also does not the 15 year MCP apply to all OR's and not just Gurkhas?

Problem with Gurkhas is they tend to stay in longer than British soldiers, and perhaps an extra 15 year MCP is needed to thin out the older private soldiers making room for younger fitter recruits. Only so many can be promoted to Lance Corporal and so on up the ladder. Like any other part of the Army you need young recruits every year to maintain the balance.
 
#19
newlynpirate said:
Yes sorry no pun intended with the me no understand bit..Alot of Gurkhas are good guys, but alot are on the gray train and live of the old reps...Some no names are lazy, obnoxious, rude, and oblivious toanyone or anything but themselves..It is these people that live of the old boys reps and areon the gravy tain, and that use the 'me no understand' when THEY don not WANT to understand!!
Old boy Gurkhas I have many of them as friends, BUT alot of the new boy Gurkhas are almost CHAV like in their own way..
Thanks for that, newlynpirate. Understood.
 
#20
The difference is that in the past when Gurkhas left at 15 years they did get an immediate pension but now if they dont serve to 18 years they wont get one. So a Gurkha signing over to the new system, as they started doing in October, will be thinking he is going to get a better pension and only has to serve 18 years to get it. He is then quite likely to find himself getting manning controlled at the 15 year point and left with no pension at all. As the document explains, the manning balance means that 80-85 per cent of Gurkhas will still have to leave at the 15 year point.

The preserved pension age for AFPS 05 and RFPS is 65 for all service, but 60 in AFPS 75.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads