The Pension Solution.

[RobertT]

Hmmm. I suspected the LEL thing was government related to help businesses out.
I don't believe I was ever given the option to choose a contribution level. I have been a postie since 1997. I think I will ask our DOM about it tomorrow.

From your previous posts. I’d assumed you were in the RMDCP(joined after April 2008), but if you’ve been a postie since 1997 you should be in section C of the RMPP. In which case your contribution rate is a set 6% of your pensionable pay with RM paying in whatever it takes to keep the scheme funded.

If you want to pay extra then have a look at paying AVC’s via Bonusplan and/or Flexiplan. Although with the impending closure of the RMPP, it hasn’t yet been confirmed whether AVC’s will continue or not!

[stephen500]

We will have to wait and see what has actually been agreed. My view remains unchanged, in that, the only really acceptable transitional arrangement for existing DB members is to keep the current scheme open until the new CDC is actually open to members. Why would the CWU settle for less, given that there are legislative hurdles to overcome ?

Lincox, the impact on my pension is still significant with only 3.5 years to go! I have done the calculations. Unless, there is a major change to the new pension proposals, as outlined in the Mediator’s report,I will be electing to take control of my own DC pot rather than rely on the CDC scheme that is being jointly proposed.

The trustees hinted in their last report that if the scheme was left open and the surplus ran out, then unless more money was forthcoming that one of the options was to reduce it's benefits. So I for one, hope they close the scheme, as I don't want to see what I have earned so far reduced.

[Lincox]

I don't see why the Trustees would say this. The scheme does not have to be in surplus so it is reasonable for the underlying assets to be reduced but the assets must always be sufficient to meet all of the future liabilities of the scheme in respect of the benefits earned by the members up to the date that the scheme is discontinued. To comply with pension law the scheme will still be subject to regular review to make sure that the underlying assets remain sufficient to finance future liabilities and if this is not the case then Royal Mail remain liable to pay sufficient funds in to the scheme to increase the assets to the level required. They cannot reduce the contractual benefits that you have accrued to date but if the scheme remained open then it is possible to reduce any future accruals.

[fishtank]

The only thing likely to reduce accrued benefits would be company insolvency. I think you may have misread the trustees report stephen. Of course any change to future benefits will change the final overall picture.

I don't know how long you've been with the company but with a reasonable length of time in the pension it's unlikely that 3.5 years will make a significant impact on your final position.

[Lincox]

If the company became insolvent having left the scheme underfunded then members benefits are protected to the tune of 90% by the Pension Protection Fund.

[stephen500]

I don't see why the Trustees would say this. The scheme does not have to be in surplus so it is reasonable for the underlying assets to be reduced but the assets must always be sufficient to meet all of the future liabilities of the scheme in respect of the benefits earned by the members up to the date that the scheme is discontinued. To comply with pension law the scheme will still be subject to regular review to make sure that the underlying assets remain sufficient to finance future liabilities and if this is not the case then Royal Mail remain liable to pay sufficient funds in to the scheme to increase the assets to the level required. They cannot reduce the contractual benefits that you have accrued to date but if the scheme remained open then it is possible to reduce any future accruals.

Please see Trustee letter to members and it is exactly what they are saying: May 2017 https://www.royalmailpensionplan.co.uk/ ... 17.pdf.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[stephen500]

If the company became insolvent having left the scheme underfunded then members benefits are protected to the tune of 90% by the Pension Protection Fund.

Except any lump sums are not protected. Which is a lot of money to members.

[Lincox]

I don't see why the Trustees would say this. The scheme does not have to be in surplus so it is reasonable for the underlying assets to be reduced but the assets must always be sufficient to meet all of the future liabilities of the scheme in respect of the benefits earned by the members up to the date that the scheme is discontinued. To comply with pension law the scheme will still be subject to regular review to make sure that the underlying assets remain sufficient to finance future liabilities and if this is not the case then Royal Mail remain liable to pay sufficient funds in to the scheme to increase the assets to the level required. They cannot reduce the contractual benefits that you have accrued to date but if the scheme remained open then it is possible to reduce any future accruals.

Please see Trustee letter to members and it is exactly what they are saying: May 2017 https://www.royalmailpensionplan.co.uk/ ... 17.pdf.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That is an adviser giving reasons for Royal Mail to stop the scheme. The fact remains that Royal Mail are totally responsible for the funding of the scheme and for any accrued benefits accumulated prior to any stoppage of the scheme and for any future accruals if the scheme were to remain open.
We have a situation at the moment with Carrilian where the Board of Directors have continued to pay out excessive dividends to shareholders and excessive bonuses to the directors at a time when they knew of warnings regarding the profitability of the company and at a time when they refused to fund the pension scheme of their employees despite actuarial valuations of the scheme recommending further investment into the pension funds. These directors will be held to account for their mis management of this company.
There is nothing in your statement that allows for a reduction in accrued benefits. See below statement

Key points
• The closure will happen at the end of March 2018.
• The benefits you have built up already, and which are protected by law,
are secure and are not being reduced.
• The Trustee’s decision was not taken lightly and rigorous independent advice
was taken throughout the process of considering the proposal.
• The Trustee concluded that agreeing to Royal Mail’s proposal to close Sections
B and C of the Plan was the best outcome for the membership as a whole.

[stephen500]

I don't see why the Trustees would say this. The scheme does not have to be in surplus so it is reasonable for the underlying assets to be reduced but the assets must always be sufficient to meet all of the future liabilities of the scheme in respect of the benefits earned by the members up to the date that the scheme is discontinued. To comply with pension law the scheme will still be subject to regular review to make sure that the underlying assets remain sufficient to finance future liabilities and if this is not the case then Royal Mail remain liable to pay sufficient funds in to the scheme to increase the assets to the level required. They cannot reduce the contractual benefits that you have accrued to date but if the scheme remained open then it is possible to reduce any future accruals.

Please see Trustee letter to members and it is exactly what they are saying: May 2017 https://www.royalmailpensionplan.co.uk/ ... 17.pdf.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That is an adviser giving reasons for Royal Mail to stop the scheme. The fact remains that Royal Mail are totally responsible for the funding of the scheme and for any accrued benefits accumulated prior to any stoppage of the scheme and for any future accruals if the scheme were to remain open.
We have a situation at the moment with Carrilian where the Board of Directors have continued to pay out excessive dividends to shareholders and excessive bonuses to the directors at a time when they knew of warnings regarding the profitability of the company and at a time when they refused to fund the pension scheme of their employees despite actuarial valuations of the scheme recommending further investment into the pension funds. These directors will be held to account for their mis management of this company.
There is nothing in your statement that allows for a reduction in accrued benefits. See below statement

Key points
• The closure will happen at the end of March 2018.
• The benefits you have built up already, and which are protected by law,
are secure and are not being reduced.
• The Trustee’s decision was not taken lightly and rigorous independent advice
was taken throughout the process of considering the proposal.
• The Trustee concluded that agreeing to Royal Mail’s proposal to close Sections
B and C of the Plan was the best outcome for the membership as a whole.

let's hope you are right!

[POSTMAN]

Pension split from agreement.pdf