The exception

Hawkey99 · Post by **Hawkey99** » 05 Jan 2017, 15:20

On the brief it says the exception would be Section C members pre 2008......whose benefits would be linked to RPI.

Can someone please explain this a bit more and how this compares. Also a couple pf examples would be great......

Thank you

Jefferson Starfish · Post by **Jefferson Starfish** » 05 Jan 2017, 15:36

Hawkey99 wrote:On the brief it says the exception would be Section C members pre 2008......whose benefits would be linked to RPI.

Can someone please explain this a bit more and how this compares. Also a couple pf examples would be great......

Thank you

The way I read it is, that at the moment if a section c member reduces their hours their pre 2008 pension would be reduced accordingly. But from 2018 it wouldn't be.

Post by **stephen500** » 05 Jan 2017, 16:11

Hawkey99 wrote:On the brief it says the exception would be Section C members pre 2008......whose benefits would be linked to RPI.

Can someone please explain this a bit more and how this compares. Also a couple pf examples would be great......

Thank you

To me it means that your RMSP (ie the one the gov took over, will continue to be up rated by your final salary (or RPI, whichever is the greatest) IF you are a section B member (however I am unsure whether final salary after 2018 will include your allowances, or is your salary minus allowances).
Section C members will see a change in RMSP to RPI capped at 5% increases rather than final salary linked ones. See page 12.

Martin Walsh · Post by **Martin Walsh** » 06 Jan 2017, 15:37

This is a very concerning and unexpected development. What it states and is being challenged is that anyone who was in the old POPs scheme with the lower earnings deduction and so joined Royal Mail from 1987 will only have RPi up to the cap of 5% and not the final salary.

This was not contained in the closure of the final salary scheme and was not discussed in the setting up of the Care DB scheme.

If this was to be introduced it would impact on thousands of staff who had believed they would have all their pre April 2008 service paid based on a final salary. This states that it will be RPi with a cap of 5%.

Based on Royal Mail's proposal the only staff who will retain their final salary payment for service before 2008 are those in the old POSS section b scheme and were in Royal Mail before 1987 and the remaining handful of staff employed who are in the section A scheme.

Another reason why We have to fight to get a decent pension.

mark.cup · Post by **mark.cup** » 06 Jan 2017, 16:14

Surely this needs to be challenged legally if you have built up final salary years then how the hell can this be taken away!

Personally I can see this only going one way and that's a full on strike in fact I'm going to start putting back a little bit of money each week ready for when it happens.

And for god sake no 1 day make no difference strikes this time. if we are going to do this lets send a clear message at the worst possible time of year Xmas... 2 or 3 days at the beginning of December then a full week starting Monday 18th December plus 25th and 26th being bank holidays the whole place shut down for 9 days and we all get a decent Xmas with our families let's see how the managers would deal with that

vmaxv4 · Post by **vmaxv4** » 06 Jan 2017, 16:17

What does this extract from pension document "certain exceptions" for plan B members mean?

17. Some of my allowances are pensionable – will I still earn pension on them under the Company’s proposal?

After 31 March 2018, allowances would not flow through to the DB benefits you have built up under the Plan (subject to certain exceptions for Section B members). Allowances are not included in DC pensionable pay. Please see the glossary on page 41 of the consultation booklet for the definition of DC pensionable pay.

vmaxv4 · Post by **vmaxv4** » 06 Jan 2017, 16:25

[quote="dingo"]

If this was to be introduced it would impact on thousands of staff who had believed they would have all their pre April 2008 service paid based on a final salary. This states that it will be RPi with a cap of 5%.

Page 10
"Section C members-WHO MAKE UP THE MAJORITY of plan members"...

Post by **RobertT** » 06 Jan 2017, 16:32

vmaxv4 wrote:What does this extract from pension document "certain exceptions" for plan B members mean?

17. Some of my allowances are pensionable – will I still earn pension on them under the Company’s proposal?

After 31 March 2018, allowances would not flow through to the DB benefits you have built up under the Plan (subject to certain exceptions for Section B members). Allowances are not included in DC pensionable pay. Please see the glossary on page 41 of the consultation booklet for the definition of DC pensionable pay.

It means you’ll still get your allowances but they won’t be pensionable. So not only will you be getting less DB pension due to its closure, you’ll also be getting less DC pension than you would have otherwise got had the allowances stayed pensionable.

vmaxv4 · Post by **vmaxv4** » 06 Jan 2017, 16:40

But what are the certain exceptions...
Pan A members who have not opted for plan B options?
Ex Phg, Streamline SL 3-6 protected full night rate allowance..
Hmmm..

Post by **RobertT** » 06 Jan 2017, 16:54

vmaxv4 wrote:But what are the certain exceptions...
Pan A members who have not opted for plan B options? Maybe

Possibly but at first glance(I only got it today), the booklet doesn't seem to say what 'certain exceptions' actually means.

vmaxv4 · Post by **vmaxv4** » 06 Jan 2017, 17:06

RobertT wrote:
vmaxv4 wrote:But what are the certain exceptions...
Pan A members who have not opted for plan B options? Maybe
Possibly but at first glance(I only got it today), the booklet doesn't seem to say what 'certain exceptions' actually means.

Sorry Robert
Edited post with Something I also remembered ie.. Ex PHG's & the old Streamline SL 3-6 employees.
Its not very clear who will be the beneficiaries of "Certain Exceptions" under this idea!!

Post by **RobertT** » 06 Jan 2017, 17:51

No problem mate.

With all the various changes to the different sections, I think it'll be a while before a lot of us get our heads round these proposed changes.

vmaxv4 · Post by **vmaxv4** » 06 Jan 2017, 18:07

RobertT wrote:No problem mate.

With all the various changes to the different sections, I think it'll be a while before a lot of us get our heads round these proposed changes.

I'm not sure whether "we" were expecting such a kicking as this.

Also there's not much wiggle room in this proposal..

I suspect that's why the CWU stance is so assured!
Dam shame it wasn't 8+ years ago.