Discussion in 'Armed Forces Pension Scheme' started by squigeypie, Nov 2, 2006.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
ive heard that ta soldiers are eligable for a pension has any one heard anything similar?
Run along and play...
what ever, cumquat
No, no and no.
You may have misheard - a holiday letting in France may have been up for grabs. Arrsers are always out to rent their little pied-a-terre investments. Good value too - mine's up for grabs.
Cumquat - a small chineese tree; its round orange fruit.
Personally, I prefer my insults to be a bit more carnal.
Weapons tight guys. Squigeypie is not completely wide of the mark here.
The reason that TA soldiers have to get permission to train beyond 117 days in any given year is because the nature of the employment contract changes from casual to part-time and therefore attracts pension rights amongst other things. I use the word 'rights' advisedly as I have been over that mark several times before but have never been told anything materially changed, let alone anything about a pension. My advice is to hang on to your payslips.
Beware, though, a casually employed soldier can elect not to turn up on a training weekend; a part-time soldier can be told to turn up or be held in breach of contract.
I believe that the system will become somewhat clearer in 2007 but anyone who is curious just has to call Glasgow...
Actually Sticky, I think he is well wide of the mark. This question was put to the Duke of Westminster recently and his answer was such that it left no one in any doubt.
The phrase "not on my watch" was in the closing line.
Edited to add: And I agree wth him. Pro rata of a regular pension, based on 29/365th or whatever ratio after 22 years will be 4/5th of F all. It will only benefit those long serving TA soldiers who probably would have stayed the distance anyway. For the vast majority of TA soldiers who stay in less than 5 years, the bounty will be a fairer reflection of the work they do, and thus more retention positive.
My comment is based on information contained in a very recent presentation given by a fairly senior bod from Glasgow.
If you read my post carefully, I make a very clear distinction between an all-comers TA pension and the rights which come into force if you cross the 117-day rubicon and become a part-time employee in the eyes of the law. No matter what the real Duke said, it is incorrect to say that a TA bod cannot earn the rights to a pension from his/her TA service.
Getting it paid is another matter entirely...
Of course TA soldiers can get a pension. All you have to do is sign on for the superannuation scheme in your civvy job.
Noted and accepted, however it is a long way from a TA pension, more a vague possibility of a pro rata pension for the full time part time. Not exactly something to base your future on!
Worth watching out for, if only for the laugh!
Agreed, T_D! And I also agree that an all-comers pension would be a serious backward step because those tight-arses in the Treasury would immediately stop the bounty scheme. I'd prefer to see something like the National Guard education bill introduced...but that would be way too forward-thinking.
Don't hold your breath.
If there is ever to be a TA Pension - and it's a bloody big if - then it will certainly, definitely, be funded from Bounty.
What do your young lads want - the vague chance of a pittance of a pension, 95% of which will go into the Admin costs of the scheme - when they are 60, or a Tax Free Lump Sum every year?
For those who train for over 117 days a year (and everyone else as well) - there has, as I have pointed out many times here, always been the opportunity to open a private pension scheme, taking advantage of the tax reductions avaialble on its premiums. I've had one for years, so if there is ever a TA pension I suppose someone will work out all the tax I should have paid on the premiums, and get me to pay it back? Some hope.
how much 4 the 3rd week in june?
No pension scheme - least of all one funded by HMG - sees 95% admin charges.
Separate names with a comma.