Fair one, particularly given the sums of money involved.You can't publish lists with people's names on without their consent and anyone who does consent is a tad foolish.
From JSP 764 Part 5:
PENSIONS AND TERMINAL BENEFITS AVAILABLE ON REDUNDANCY
0316. Immediate Pension. On being made redundant, or directed to retire early under the DER scheme, a person will be entitled to either an Immediate Pension (monthly pension and pension lump sum) on discharge or a Preserved Pension (monthly pension and pension lump sum) at age 60/65, depending on whether he has completed sufficient qualifying service to reach his Immediate Pension point. For Officers, this is 16 years qualifying service from age 21 or 18 years qualifying service from age 18, and for Other Ranks, 18 years qualifying service from age 18.
0318. Calculating Immediate Pension (IP) (Officers). If an Officer is entitled to receive an IP under the rules at para 0316, but does not have 16 years or more reckonable service, his pension is to be calculated using a pro-rata rate of the 16-year Rate for Retired Pay on Compulsory Retirement in issue on the day following his last day of reckonable service.
The officer and OR are in exactly the same boat. There is no 'unfair' penalising for officers. The playing field was levelled under AFCS 10 .
This has played v poorly with the engine room of the Army.
What the para means, having asked the experts, is that if an officer has more than 18 years service but less than 16 years reckonable (ie post 21 service) then THEY qualify pro rata past 21. So, joined at 18, now 36. Has 18 years service, 15 reckon able. Gets a 15/16ths IP. This applies to v v v few officers - Welbexians and some ex rankers. But the VAST majority will not yet have got to 16 years reckonable and will not have more than 18 ACTUAL. So they get no immediate pension. To claim playing field level is ludicrous. Worse, it is iniquitous as an officer will have completed 15/16ths of engagement and get nothing, soldier will have completed 18/22nds and get a full pension. This has played v poorly with the engine room of the Army.
Things weren't exactly equal in the first place, with an Officer having to complete 16 years for an IP and soldiers having to complete a further 6 years. Even under redundancy Officers still only have to serve 16 years as opposed to soldier's 18.
Soldiers have accepted this pension inequality for years, I've never heard or heard of any Officer raising the issue, so your hunt for sympathy is surely going to hit a narrow margin.
Your starting to get whingy about it, sounding less officer, more stacker1.
The playing field was only leveled by AFCS 10 if you opted into it at the time, which in most cases you would have been mad to do.
Most of those officers adversely affected by today's Redundancy terms will have been under the old arrangements and subject to the 16 years reckonable service, which was from age 21. So I think R_F is correct.
Let's not forget that every AFPRB Report I read over 20 years talked in glowing terms of the military pension benefits and long term security of employment before using said facts as a reason to lower the x-factor. We may not have had a contract but it was definitely assumed that pensions and job security were a benefit.
Dingerr - if it was you being affected, you would have been whinging like ****.
And the OR who has served for 17 years gets nothing whereas an officer who has served only 16 gets his full pension entitlement as normal.What the para means, having asked the experts, is that if an officer has more than 18 years service but less than 16 years reckonable (ie post 21 service) then THEY qualify pro rata past 21. So, joined at 18, now 36. Has 18 years service, 15 reckon able. Gets a 15/16ths IP. This applies to v v v few officers - Welbexians and some ex rankers. But the VAST majority will not yet have got to 16 years reckonable and will not have more than 18 ACTUAL. So they get no immediate pension. To claim playing field level is ludicrous. Worse, it is iniquitous as an officer will have completed 15/16ths of engagement and get nothing, soldier will have completed 18/22nds and get a full pension. This has played v poorly with the engine room of the Army.
but does that not just move the date at which the shafting occurs? Any one within 1 year of IP is ok, anyone at 1 year plus 1 day is screwed.The right thing is to allow those who have earned at least 95% of their pension (Offrs) or 82% of their pension (OR),