NRA 67

Post by **Aquarius** » 05 Feb 2018, 14:46

heapsy wrote:
fishtank wrote:I think I would rather take my chances with an individual DC even at 10%+6% than get involved in what looks more like a ponzi scheme than anything else.

If I'm going to be poor in retirement I would rather know now when I have an opportunity to do something about it than go to the bank one day and find my pension is £60 for the month because there's not enough full-time staff left in royal mail to support the scheme.
Me too. When you are retired there is nothing you can do if things change suddenly. As you say regarding the number of employees, as they drop, it will be harder to sustain the scheme for the future. Better to have some certainty, as with the DC scheme.

I agree - it's looking like DC scheme is the better option for me

jetblack · Post by **jetblack** » 05 Feb 2018, 18:55

dandydon wrote:
heapsy wrote:
fishtank wrote:I think I would rather take my chances with an individual DC even at 10%+6% than get involved in what looks more like a ponzi scheme than anything else.

If I'm going to be poor in retirement I would rather know now when I have an opportunity to do something about it than go to the bank one day and find my pension is £60 for the month because there's not enough full-time staff left in royal mail to support the scheme.
Me too. When you are retired there is nothing you can do if things change suddenly. As you say regarding the number of employees, as they drop, it will be harder to sustain the scheme for the future. Better to have some certainty, as with the DC scheme.
I agree - it's looking like DC scheme is the better option for me

Agreed from me also.

Isn't it a sad endictment of the months (if not years) of negotiations when they have only served to bring us to a point where many of us are saying we would prefer to be on the original DC scheme ? Not so much 'running to stand still' as running to go backwards.
Its borderline shameful on the unions part (even with the meagre concessions in other parts of the agreement from RMG) - especially given the overwhelming mandate from the membership for potential strike action the CWU exec were given.
As its panned out RMG and the City are laughing all the way to the bank, as shown by the soaring share price.

Will be a definite "No' from me I'm afraid.

Chitchat · Post by **Chitchat** » 06 Feb 2018, 17:33

The pension situation is concerning! The cwu need to get back round the table and get us a pension more suitable. At the moment it's a NO from me. Pensions is something we need to be half decent.

TheTrolleyMan · Post by **TheTrolleyMan** » 07 Feb 2018, 20:36

Shite pension offer and now NRA67 , come on CWU don't sell your members down the river

heapsy · Post by **heapsy** » 08 Feb 2018, 21:13

TheTrolleyMan wrote:Shite pension offer and now NRA67 , come on CWU don't sell your members down the river

I think they've done just that. Our union rep. is completely clueless, when It is explained to him properly, he'll be very disappointed. He thought the wage in retirement was a banker. Oops!

dannyboy · Post by **dannyboy** » 11 Feb 2018, 14:04

Planning on retiring this year will be 64 and knees have had enough. Just asking if now l will have to lose 5 percent each year until I’m 67 instead of the 65 I have a forecast for .

heapsy · Post by **heapsy** » 11 Feb 2018, 14:23

dannyboy wrote:Planning on retiring this year will be 64 and knees have had enough. Just asking if now l will have to lose 5 percent each year until I’m 67 instead of the 65 I have a forecast for .

Not sure when you intend to retire. However, I'm sure I read somewhere on here that when the Cash Balance scheme is introduced, you would be able to take that without loss. Regarding the main pension, only the NRA would be reduced. 5% for a full year early payment. I'm guessing, that if you retired, say six months before 65, it would reduce by 2.5% pro rata.

Post by **RobertT** » 11 Feb 2018, 14:36

dannyboy wrote:Planning on retiring this year will be 64 and knees have had enough. Just asking if now l will have to lose 5 percent each year until I’m 67 instead of the 65 I have a forecast for .

The NRA of 67 only applies to the Collective Defined Contribution(CDC) scheme, when or if the necessary legislation is passed for it to be implemented. The earliest that scheme is going to start is going to be 2019 and may never happen at all, so if you’re planning on retiring this year, you won’t be affected by that at all!

The current NRA60 and NRA65 pensions can still be taken at those ages without reduction.

From April 2018 there will be a transitional Cash Balance scheme introduced which has an aim of providing a lump sum at retirement. That can be taken at either 60 or 65 unreduced along with either your NRA60 or NRA65.

You can download the pension agreement here for more info.

dannyboy · Post by **dannyboy** » 11 Feb 2018, 14:41

Thanks for both replies least I know I won’t lose anymore from my forecast

zz666 · Post by **zz666** » 12 Feb 2018, 22:42

Sold down the river again.

heapsy · Post by **heapsy** » 13 Feb 2018, 05:41

dannyboy wrote:Thanks for both replies least I know I won’t lose anymore from my forecast

Just a thought. There's nothing to stop you from delaying taking your NRA65, until you are 65. Might be a few months, but you wouldn't then be losing anything from it once it was taken. If you can manage financially, that is what I would do if it were me.