Mandatory Training = Pension ?

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by saladin, Nov 22, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Just an idle thought but if the plan is to order us to turn up then does not the "casual labour" argument that we could choose if and when to soldier fail ? Will that mean that Future Reserve 2020 will need to deliver a Pension ? I see nothing about it in the Green Paper....
  2. Was that tongue in cheek @.@

    I thought the Army Reserve (TA for the older generation) already had to carry out Manadatory Training, bit of a clue in MATTs :idea:
  3. msr

    msr LE

  4. I have spent a fair few years with the TA starting as a PSI and this question of pensions was raised regulary. By the sounds of it the Army Reserve will be asked for more commitment but at the end of the day you will still be a part-time volunteer and thus not pensionable unless mobilised.

    Fail your MATTS and lose your bounty. Whats MATTS got to do with pension?
  5. If you want to use your pay towards a pension you could always invest it. Do think how much pension you'd get out of a part-time job earning for many a few £k a year for not many years.
  6. msr

    msr LE

    Exactly: TA Forum FAQ - ARRSEpedia
    • Like Like x 1
  7. I'm one of those who has long advocated hunting down and burning the bastard who described us as "Casual labour" but that is indeed the line MOD used to defeat legal moves to require us to be pensionable. the argument was that ALL TA attendence was voluntary and that no contract existed that required us to attend - this despite the fact that such compulsion does theoretically exist, its just the system never actually enforces it. BUT....If the new legislation does include real compulsion then surely the original MOD "casuals" argument will fall ? Hmmm. Backdated at 60-80 MTDs per year to to 1977.....that Carribean villa may be mine yet :)
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Look with the amount of pay most TA soldiers get with the few years service most do, you'd be looking at a quid a year pension. Invest some of the pay in whatever you choose.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. I have no objection to the TA receiving a pension though I would be pissed off if they were to receive a yearly tax free bounty as well.

    To put it in perspective 100 MTD's per year for 22 years adds up to a tadge over 6 years total service. Its a nice little bonus when you hit 60 but it wont be a life changer.
  10. This is the issue.

    If we are part time it is a legal requirement to pay benefits pro-rata (holidays & pension etc)

    The government defeated this on the grounds of casual labour.

    We are one of the above, not whichever suits at the time.
  11. I asked this very Q in the 145XX briefing day on saturday.

    First thing I noted was the word "mandated" which - surprise - does not equate to "mandatory"

    Secondly - the answer was pretty much "no".

    For those that think being part-time excludes you from pension right, you are wrong. Its been established for sme years, but as we are deemed "casual labour" we are excluded. The moment we get legal status as part time, we'll accrue pension rights.

    Also worth noting that under the Treaty of Rome, pension payments are treated as deferred pay. As such, the TA DROP is less than that of Regulars, even if you ignore X Factor.
  12. Look pensions will not be earning any money for a long time.
    Save money, buy gold, buy silver, collect stamps or antiques.
    If you were allowed a pension it'd have to be bought, you'd pay fees, you'd pay taxes. It's visible, don't have things that are visible.
    Stop whining about what could be when you've got money now.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Shut up.

    You clearly don't know what you're talking about despite your eloquence. The Regulars don't "buy" their pension, they contribute towards a very good defined benefit scheme.

    I'm just detailing some facts and outlining the law in this area.

    Should also point out that you've given Financial Advice without taking a factfind, which is a breach of FSA Regulations. You're also liable should anyone act on this information and take a financial loss because of your "advice".

    You stick to the Health Sector.
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Right so if you're suggesting not buying a pension but paying into a govt scheme how much pension do you think you'd get for paying (for many) very little contributions?
    If my pension would be reasonable after 40+ yrs of contributions working full-time, what will a few years of part-time work pay?
    Please feel free to report Jarrod248 off the Internet to the FSA.
  15. Can' be arsed with you.

    Like I said, all I've done is point out the law in an area that I'm pretty knowledgeable about.

    No need for your teddy / corner relocation behaviour.