Royal Mail Pensions To Change In 7 Days

[BELIAL]

I can see where Night Tonic is coming from but I think it is as extreme a view as those who think taking industrial action is the answer. The fact is the pension scheme IS going to change. That fact has been known since mid 2007 but was largely sidelined because of the furore over the pay and modernisation agreement. Both unions agreed that change was necessary and in law RM doesn't need acceptance of either the unions or the individual to promulgate change, it only needs the agreement of the Trustees, who with the tacit agreement of the unions will undoubtedly go along with it even though there are union Trustee members.

The only real change is the retiring age going up to 65 from 2010. For some that will be a stumbling block but others will have time to increase their contribution to enable them to retire earlier. From my own perspective I have already turned 60 but I haven't retired even though I have taken buy down and so only work part time and that in itself is a good thing to prepare for full retirement.

If you buy a packet of crisps now the price hasn't changed BUT you don't get as many crisps, or smarties in a packet and a mars bar is smaller and like the pension you aren't being asked to pay more you just get less - not ideal I would agree, but better than no pension at all.

There are many things that the union CAN fight for to lower the impact of a longer working life. More holidays, fewer hours worked without prejudice, extra days off for over 60s, work share for over 60s, paid sabbaticals for a period of time, increased paternity rights, inclusion for future bonus payments into pension contributions, shareholder payments paid directly into each individuals pension - it takes imagination BUT most of all it takes commitment and that is something the union need to take on board.

Think you may have overlooked a few things- end of final salary scheme: increases at RPI so less than wage increases and capped at 5%: early retirement penalty 4.5% pa now but subject to change nearer the time( what price 10%+)
Pipe and slippers time for you grandad,don't spill your crisps

[Tman]

There was a LARGE amount of contributions which RM FAILED to pay. That is where the idea of Pensions being stolen came from.

Personally, I'm not in the Pension scheme. But I know a lot of people who are. And they have been paying into it for many years, under the impression that they would be looked after in their retirement. Now that is being taken away from them, because of the greed of a few people at the "top".

Decisions taken so long ago, but taken by the Trustees for the right reasons. Had the trustees said nothing, and the fund reached the tax thresh-hold above which taxation was due, worker's contributions would have effectively been paid straight to the Treasury. Wouldn't that have been wrong also?
Hardly "greed" when the decisions were taken to minimise tax losses by the pension fund. Those same people at the "top" didn't benefit in any shape or form from that pensions holiday.

If they were to replace the missing contributions (taking inflation into account), then the situation wouldn't be anywhere near as bad. Obviously, there would still be a need for change, but it wouldn't hit people as hard, as the deficit would be much smaller!
Where would this money come from?
Extra contributions (say 50%) of ANYONE'S bonus, until all the money is replaced. Admittedly, it would cost us all money. But with 6 figure bonuses being given to some, it wouldn't take many years for it to get sorted out.

Think you're underestimating the sheer scale of this deficit, as do the pro-strike element. There is NO magic cupboard full of cash which the Pension fund trustees or RM management can access to fill the void, whatever the depth of feeling shown here, or whatever results strike ballots throw up.

[BELIAL]

Whats the tax rate on shortfalls up to £3.6 billion

[BELIAL]

There is NO magic cupboard full of cash which the Pension fund trustees or RM management can access to fill the void, whatever the depth of feeling shown here, or whatever results strike ballots throw up.

Oh yes there is, it's called the magic Profit cupboard,first it's empty then it's full all with the shake of the magic bookeepers pen. For an encore they turn lots of the magic profits into really magic bonuses(opg's never see these)

[dvbuk55]

Think you may have overlooked a few things- end of final salary scheme: increases at RPI so less than wage increases and capped at 5%: early retirement penalty 4.5% pa now but subject to change nearer the time( what price 10%+)
Pipe and slippers time for you grandad,don't spill your crisps

Nothing remains the same! Get used to the new regime, think of ways to improve your lot for the future - it's no good harping on about whats been lost. Increases at RPI? when was the last time you had a pay rise above RPI.

[Tman]

Oh yes there is, it's called the magic Profit cupboard,first it's empty then it's full all with the shake of the magic bookeepers pen. For an encore they turn lots of the magic profits into really magic bonuses(opg's never see these

Sounds like somewhere in that wittily cynical reply, you're confusing a company's worth with it's turnover. Meanwhile, back in the real world, how is the pension fund's deficit to be funded? Any ideas, or is it still to be decided while we shiver on the picket line?

[BELIAL]

Humm, got it : 2007 ,5.4%. Your an educated man you must know that the groat in your pocket is worth more now than on your first day of work.(do you still have it?)

Must dash,I'm off to improve my remarkably changing future ,gonna donate my pension to the benevolent fund for greedy CEO's

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I find myself caught in the middle on pensions. I accept Royal Mails position that the Pension fund has to change. What I don't agree with is the figures they use and the fact that we seemingly have to pay for their pension holiday.

But the main thing I do not like is the way Royal Mail have handled it. They have handled it in the usual "We know what's best so we are going to change it the way we want come hell or high water". I mean even the Managers Union has rejected the new pension out of hand so there is a lot of disquiet about it,

I think a strike is a long way off and only a distant possibility, however what about refusing to work on non pensionable paying tasks - which means refusing overtime. If the management can also refuse overtime then everything will grind to a halt eventually.

[BELIAL]

Oh yes there is, it's called the magic Profit cupboard,first it's empty then it's full all with the shake of the magic bookeepers pen. For an encore they turn lots of the magic profits into really magic bonuses(opg's never see these

Sounds like somewhere in that wittily cynical reply, you're confusing a company's worth with it's turnover. Meanwhile, back in the real world, how is the pension fund's deficit to be funded? Any ideas, or is it still to be decided while we shiver on the picket line?

No confusion here. Worth is subjective ,turnover is usually considered a component of worth,profit is extracted from turnover and often from assets.
Maybe you should help RM with their real world accountancy confusion, you know the two sets of books ,Regulatory, Statutory, and the poor old auditors Ernst and Young doing all that work and having to put that big fat disclaimer in so they could stay legal?

Meanwhile back in the real real world most people pay off their debts before they count the profits.So RM can fund their self made deficit from the profits we make them just as is happening now and they still make a profit. This is not a complicated point, do persevere.
"shiver" you wag ,soon be summer anyhow.

[Tman]

Sadly, I see things haven't improved.
Sneering condescension doesn't make for clever debate, although it obviously is of major importance to some, and apparently helpful when a point is lost.
Now, are you going to explain how you think a strike would help the pension fund's problems? Do you have anything realistic or helpful to add, or is name-calling and general playground tactics a real alternative to saying anything worth-while?

[BELIAL]

Oh to see ourselves as others see us
Yes SIR ,straight away sir!
Pension fund deficit = £3.4 or maybe £4.6 or was it £6.2 not too precise these real RM figures, anyway take your pick.All are based on arbitrary calculations all are produced by applying theoretical statistical calculations to a hypothetical ( not real world) scenario. The scenario being that the pension fund ceases this instant; there are no further contributions made ,employer or employee, and that all liabilities are immediately payable. It would seem reasonable to assume given the frozen nature of the scenario that an assumption is also made discounting any future earned income on existing investments.

Agreement reached with regulator and shareholder to fund said fluctuating deficit over a period of 17years at £850 m pa.
2007 RM figures show deficit funded £850m net profit still £230m.


Now are you going to explain why I should hand over part of the wages RM agreed to pay me in order to further increase their profits?

Also if you let me know which point was lost; worth /turnover;dodgy book keeping;paying people the pensions promised before taking profit, I'd be only too pleased to pick up the baton.

Hope you find this helpful and worthwhile. Do try not to have one of your paddy's again ,you know what happened last time, I said WAG for goodness sakes

[Tman]

Oh to see ourselves as others see us
Yes SIR ,straight away sir!
Pension fund deficit = £3.4 or maybe £4.6 or was it £6.2 not too precise these real RM figures, anyway take your pick.All are based on arbitrary calculations all are produced by applying theoretical statistical calculations to a hypothetical ( not real world) scenario. The scenario being that the pension fund ceases this instant; there are no further contributions made ,employer or employee, and that all liabilities are immediately payable. It would seem reasonable to assume given the frozen nature of the scenario that an assumption is also made discounting any future earned income on existing investments.

Agreement reached with regulator and shareholder to fund said fluctuating deficit over a period of 17years at £850 m pa.
2007 RM figures show deficit funded £850m net profit still £230m.

Yes, yes, yes, paraphrasing others points re funding and shortfalls is all well and good, but I'll ask again; how does striking improve/nullify/counter-act/whatever the pension shortfall?

Now are you going to explain why I should hand over part of the wages RM agreed to pay me in order to further increase their profits?

What are you on about?

Hope you find this helpful and worthwhile. Do try not to have one of your paddy's again ,you know what happened last time, I said WAG for goodness sakes

"You know what happened last time, I said WAG for goodness sake". Eh? Slow down, you'll possibly make more sense.
Incidentally, as a peruse of past posts will show, the "last time" actually involved you having one of your "paddy's" [paddies] and apparently squinnying about my posts to the mods. Please stick to the facts.

[Night Tonic]

Oh yes there is, it's called the magic Profit cupboard,first it's empty then it's full all with the shake of the magic bookeepers pen. For an encore they turn lots of the magic profits into really magic bonuses(opg's never see these

Sounds like somewhere in that wittily cynical reply, you're confusing a company's worth with it's turnover. Meanwhile, back in the real world, how is the pension fund's deficit to be funded? Any ideas, or is it still to be decided while we shiver on the picket line?

Belly laugh!

"Right lads, thats shown em. Now, any ideas as to what we do next. Sid, you've got the ouiji board....."

[Nazgul]

Belly laugh!

"Right lads, thats shown em. Now, any ideas as to what we do next. Sid, you've got the ouiji board....."

No that sounds more like the devils work, i think we'll leave that sort of stuff to the numpties at Hellmail!!

[DGP1]

Meanwhile, back in the real world, how is the pension fund's deficit to be funded?

Royal Mail should fund it from the profits it makes, remember that RM's only shareholder is the government so the only one to lose out are Gordon Brown and his cronies.