Royal Mail pension news and discussion.Please note the advise given in this forum is unofficial, please use the links we have for a more detailed response or see an independent financial adviser.
A4 letter today with a million pension illustrations all based on figures most of us don't earn!
Give this sh#t a rest
I know people who have taken their age 60 benefits who basically had as close to a full pension as possible with no reductions and they said their lump sum was nothing like the figures floating around in these phantasy leaflets let alone the new super inflated lump sum... Best pensions!
We are getting done over big time doesn't matter how they dress it up,fiddle our earnings etc
Standard lump sum for me was just over 21000 to a max of just over 42000 if you gave up a 1000 per year pension and that's for near on 30 years service
Yes these illustrations are based on someone who earns over £30k a year over the past 30 years, Not your typical postie is it, maybe a brown nosed runner would earn that much.
The DB pension is based on pensionable pay, so it doesn’t include overtime. Personally my full time section C pensionable pay is about £18,700, so a lot less than the figures quoted on the illustrations we’ve been given, which deem them largely pointless for the average postie.
Remember section C members have the Lower Earning Deduction of £3,328 per year taken off before their pensionable pay is calculated.
If you don’t know what your pensionable pay is, multiply the ‘pensions contrib. pay’ amount on your pay slip by 52.
I wouldn't even be surprised if they are using all the 25k as pensionable to get to these ridiculous figures...
The CWU really do need to get Hillary Salt from First Actuarial to run through this rubbish I can't believe it's not been done already this stuff has been floating about for ages!
mark.cup wrote:I wouldn't even be surprised if they are using all the 25k as pensionable to get to these ridiculous figures...
The CWU really do need to get Hillary Salt from First Actuarial to run through this rubbish I can't believe it's not been done already this stuff has been floating about for ages!
Buried in the small print is a rather disturbing snippet re 'The Member is assumed to live for 20 years ......and is not survived by a spouse' whereas my present pensions do give a surviving spouse a 50% pension.
mark.cup wrote:I wouldn't even be surprised if they are using all the 25k as pensionable to get to these ridiculous figures...
The CWU really do need to get Hillary Salt from First Actuarial to run through this rubbish I can't believe it's not been done already this stuff has been floating about for ages!
They are doing that!
Robert, I assume you mean the 25k bit (rather than getting First Actuarial to look at these figures).
We (the members via CWU) really need independent expert advice to confirm/not confirm RM's figures as a matter of some urgency.
BeamishStout wrote:Buried in the small print is a rather disturbing snippet re 'The Member is assumed to live for 20 years ......and is not survived by a spouse' whereas my present pensions do give a surviving spouse a 50% pension.
As the CB/DC proposal just involves saving a pot of money for the rest of you RM career and not actually building up any pension. What happens to that pot on your death depends on what you do with it when you access it.
If you buy an annuity with it, whether your spouse will get anything will depend on the type of annuity you buy.
If you draw it down or take it all as cash, it will depend if you’ve spent it all by the time you die. If there’s some left it will be part of your estate.
However, there are spouse benefits with CB/DC if you die in service, which is covered on page 7.
Your spouse will still get any death benefits from your pre 2018 pension entitlement.
mark.cup wrote:I wouldn't even be surprised if they are using all the 25k as pensionable to get to these ridiculous figures...
The CWU really do need to get Hillary Salt from First Actuarial to run through this rubbish I can't believe it's not been done already this stuff has been floating about for ages!
They are doing that!
Robert, I assume you mean the 25k bit (rather than getting First Actuarial to look at these figures).
We (the members via CWU) really need independent expert advice to confirm/not confirm RM's figures as a matter of some urgency.
Yes i meant the £25k, but I agree First Acturial should be looking into it.
RobertT wrote:
If you buy an annuity with it, whether your spouse will get anything will depend on the type of annuity you buy.
Which is why RM appear to have deliberately given a pension figure excluding a living spouse drawing a 50% pension if you were die before they did. All the pension illustrations I have up to now appear to have this valuable benefit included. Obviously getting an annuity on the open market would be maximised if you exclude the possibility of spouse surviving you after death in retirement.
The Death in service benefits part I did notice so at least that has not disappeared
BeamishStout wrote:Which is why RM appear to have deliberately given a pension figure excluding a living spouse drawing a 50% pension if you were die before they did. All the pension illustrations I have up to now appear to have this valuable benefit included. Obviously getting an annuity on the open market would be maximised if you exclude the possibility of spouse surviving you after death in retirement.
The previous illustrations in the original DC proposal booklet all factored in buying an annuity with the pot you build up, after taking the maximum lump sum.
And that annuity pays out similar benefits as you'd get from the RMPP, i.e a 50% spouses pension on your death.
They now seem to be finally making it clearer that buying an annuity is just an option.
HarryPoorer wrote:Yes these illustrations are based on someone who earns over £30k a year over the past 30 years, Not your typical postie is it, maybe a brown nosed runner would earn that much.
He may earn that but it'd be overtime so not on his pension.
More pie in the sky by royal mail no postmen get these figures how can you base your decision on a fabricated piece of fiction J K ROWLING would be proud of this!
I recently got my NRA60 estimate for my pension next year. I intend to go for the complete pension and use my small Bonusplan for the lump sum. But if I look at the lump sum figure given for my 32 years and look at their suggested figure for 65 years, even allowing for the fact I don't even earn £25000 the remaining 13 years would given an even bigger figure than the 32 years! I don't think so!!
So if they give completely incorrect figures for the current pension which you are able to calculate quite precisely, why on earth should I trust them on their replacement scheme with no real guarentees at all! I look forward to seeing my personal estimate in the next few weeks!!
