Pension Surplus

[heapsy]

The money could be used to improve the supplement paid before state pension age. Would give ageing postman a more realistic option of going before 67. So in a round about way would fulfil the unions idea of lowering the nra. And it wouldn't eat into the surplus all that much either.

They couldn't improve the supplement without discriminating against other section members. Only section C members get it.

That's why I mentioned it wouldn't eat into the sum a huge amount ( not everyone wants to go before NRA ) . Obviously others would have to be compensated somehow. Either way it ought to go to members in some form of other but sadly That's very unlikely.

I agree, but think the only way would be to reduce NRA of the Collective scheme, preferable to 65, bringing it in line with the previous scheme.

[Jefferson Starfish]

So what are the chances of the NRA being reduced?

[heapsy]

So what are the chances of the NRA being reduced?

Don't know, but I'm sure it would be welcome, if it were possible.

[RobertT]

So what are the chances of the NRA being reduced?

As long as the RMCPP trustees have the long term interests of the new collective scheme at heart and IDS plan to keep it open indefinitely, I don't think there's any chance of the NRA reducing from 67.

The scheme's been set up with certain basic parameters in place such as the contribution level, accrual rate and NRA and they should enable it to provide the planned benefits, pending any annual fluctuations.

If one of those parameters is different, at least one of the other two will probably have to change to compensate.
So if they'd gone for an NRA of 65 instead, the accrual rate would have to be lower or the contributions higher, to make up the difference.

If there was an influx of cash from the RMPP surplus to fund a lower NRA of 65, that would obviously boost the coffers over the shorter term. But as time goes by and more people join and everyone builds up more benefits, that cash will slowly get accounted for.

At some point all the surplus will be allocated and the scheme will be left with higher liabilities than it can afford going forward and everyone's pension would go down accordingly, unless the investments keep the ship afloat.

So reducing the RMCPP NRA down to 65 might sound like a good thing to do, but in reality it's likely to have it's consequences.

As the CWU & EP have negotiated to share out the surplus amongst the company and current employees, pending trustee approval, it's largely irrelevant anyway.

[Wullie10]

Looks like it'll be part of a pay deal then. Another lump sum and a small percentage rise.

[RobertT]

Looks like it'll be part of a pay deal then. Another lump sum and a small percentage rise.

The agreement between EP and CWU says the surplus will be split between investment in RMG and the newly formed Employee Collective Benefit Trust.

The RMPP trustees hold the purse strings and they could still say that RMPP members should get their share, which most on this forum seem to think is fair.

Also, there are currently laws in place that mean surpluses can't easily be accessed, so it could be a good while before anyone sees any cash.

According to the CWU, the surplus could be worth around £1.4 Billion, so we're not talking about small sums here.
To put that in context, the RMPP are sitting on over £11k for each of their 123,000 members.

[Hyrrokkin]

As far as i am concerned it is theft and the pathetic CWU are complicit in this.

[mphill007]

Agree they are looking after themselves and there members and not giving a toss about the RMPP members who are no longer employees & CWU members

[Wullie10]

Wow I was thinking a few pound and pennies. That's a huge amount per member. I suppose the company can argue they contributed to the pension fund so are entitled to part of the excess. Nothing is simple when it comes to pensions.

[RobertT]

I don't think anyone has ever suggested all of the surplus should be available, because it's always good to have more than you need, just as it is with your own personal finances.

I think the company are justified in wanting some of it, but the problem I've got is that RMPP members don't seem to have been considered at all in the EP/CWU negotiations.

The CWU are clearly only interested in keeping their subs coming in from current CWU members, over doing the right thing with this money!

[freespeech]

Agree they are looking after themselves and there members and not giving a toss about the RMPP members who are no longer employees & CWU members

I would suggest RMPP members still employed make up the biggest number. My concern is that these are also members of the new scheme so they "may" not have an issue but for anyone retired or close to retirement they could lose out completely if the funds don't find themselves reaching RMPP retired members.

[RobertT]

I would suggest RMPP members still employed make up the biggest number. My concern is that these are also members of the new scheme so they "may" not have an issue but for anyone retired or close to retirement they could lose out completely if the funds don't find themselves reaching RMPP retired members.

As at the last report and accounts, out of a total of 123,366 members of the RMPP:

59,864 were active members of which 4,783 only had DBCBS benefits(section F).
22,007 were deferred of which 762 were section F.
41,495 were pensioners.

So 63,502 or around 51.5% of members stand to lose out!

*Figures include POL members.

[mphill007]

So 51.5% of RMPP members stand to lose out while they’ll be some CWU members but not RMPP members who will benefit.I suppose there will even be a few employees who are neither CWU or RMPP members who will.Great deal for some I suppose!

[norris9]

Does anyone have any thoughts on the following...

Is the pension surplus more likely going to be used to benefit all current employees or more likely going to benefit anyone that is alive today that has paid into any Royal Mail pension?

I am asking this as I am curious as to whether I should make sure I am employed at the time they make a decision on this, as I am considering leaving RM in the next year or 2....

I am at least interested in seeing how Kretinsky changes things and whether the changes are for the better or not as I do like working as a postie for the most part.

[heapsy]

Does anyone have any thoughts on the following...

Is the pension surplus more likely going to be used to benefit all current employees or more likely going to benefit anyone that is alive today that has paid into any Royal Mail pension?

I am asking this as I am curious as to whether I should make sure I am employed at the time they make a decision on this, as I am considering leaving RM in the next year or 2....

I am at least interested in seeing how Kretinsky changes things and whether the changes are for the better or not as I do like working as a postie for the most part.

My personal feeling is that the surplus could be used to reduce the NRA of the new schemes. I'm currently employed with RM and have seen two changes to my pension age. I'm hoping to retire at 60. Just over 2 years away, but there are others who are younger and have longer to go. An NRA of 67 might be ok if you are a distribution driver, or work in the mail centre, but delivery staff will find it tough going. Feeling really let down by CWU for even entertaining an NRA of 67. Even 65 is too late.