Royal Mail pensions in deficit – again

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b753bdb8-c485 ... z2UNgUPcjj" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Royal Mail, the UK postal service operator, has been criticised for running the risk of building up a fresh pension deficit after its previous black hole was “magicked away” by the government.

Last year the UK government relieved Royal Mail of £38bn of pension liabilities and a £10bn deficit in preparation for its privatisation, scheduled to occur within the next 12 months.

However, the postal operator will still start life as a private company with pension liabilities of £2.5bn, similar to its mooted market capitalisation of £2bn- £3bn. With 112,000 active scheme members, these liabilities rose by £434m in the past year.

Royal Mail’s preliminary results, released last week, show the scheme has an accounting surplus of £825m. This has lead John Ralfe, an independent pension consultant, to argue that it should invest purely in assets such as index-linked gilts and long-dated corporate bonds, which should move in line with its liabilities.

Royal Mail Pensions Trustees Limited declined to reveal its asset allocation, but told FTfm: “Since the pension transfer, we are following a more diversified investment strategy than we have in the past.”

As a result, Mr Ralfe criticised Royal Mail for not “battening down the hatches”.

“They don’t seem to have learnt their lesson,” he said.

[heapsy]

Don't know why they don't invest in property, including buy to let. Just about everyone is doing it, and no wonder. Massive housing shortage and no chance of ever solving the problem while all the younger ones are just scared to get their hands dirty. They would rather sit at a desk all day and play on a computer.

[RobertT]

Interesting that the link to ft.com doesn't seem to work anymore and a quick search on their website suggests it's been removed altogether.

[macphee1]

Maybe it's been removed because it's badly written nonsense, full of unrelated assertions/assumptions. A complete non story.

"Royal Mail pensions in deficit – again", followed by "the scheme has an accounting surplus of £825m."

Stating that a Pension Scheme has liabilities is akin to stating a bear sh***s in the woods

[heapsy]

Maybe it's been removed because it's badly written nonsense, full of unrelated assertions/assumptions. A complete non story.

"Royal Mail pensions in deficit – again", followed by "the scheme has an accounting surplus of £825m."

Stating that a Pension Scheme has liabilities is akin to stating a bear sh***s in the woods

Quite right. This argument has been used time and time again to undermine schemes and create panic. This has been used to facilitate the closure / change to schemes for virtually no reason except to make life easier for the scheme administrator. Every scheme has liabilities. As long as the scheme keeps running there is little justification for the major changes that most companies have carried out. As the trustees are liable for the scheme, it is their responsibility to ensure it runs at a profit so to speak, in order to cover those liabilities. Something that they fail to do.

[RobertT]

Maybe it's been removed because it's badly written nonsense, full of unrelated assertions/assumptions. A complete non story. "Royal Mail pensions in deficit – again", followed by "the scheme has an accounting surplus of £825m."
Stating that a Pension Scheme has liabilities is akin to stating a bear sh***s in the woods

I agree that’s it’s not well written, but I thought the fact that it disappeared was interesting due to the rumoured news concerning the RM pension scheme.

EDIT: It seems that the article hasn't been deleted after all, just moved over to their subscriber only content.

[RobertT]

Quite right. This argument has been used time and time again to undermine schemes and create panic. This has been used to facilitate the closure / change to schemes for virtually no reason except to make life easier for the scheme administrator.

So affordability or increased life expectancy have got nothing to do with it then?

Every scheme has liabilities. As long as the scheme keeps running there is little justification for the major changes that most companies have carried out.

Obviously every scheme has liabilities, but it’s their ability to pay those liabilities that matters. RM had a huge deficit (not entirely of their own making) which they realistically could never have paid, so it was obvious that something had to change, and will almost certainly change again!
The same applies to all those other companies who’ve closed their defined benefit pension schemes over the last 10-15 years.

As the trustees are liable for the scheme, it is their responsibility to ensure it runs at a profit so to speak, in order to cover those liabilities. Something that they fail to do.

I agree that the trustees have been culpable, a good example being a few years ago (2007/2008 I think) when they totally dis-regarded basic principles of share ownership. That being: buy low, sell high.
The RM scheme was heavily invested in equities, something like 80-90% and the stock market crashed, so the total scheme value went down big time and instead of taking the medium to long term view and riding out the storm, they cashed in many of those equities and bought gilts and bonds. Therefore those loses were crystalised and would never be regained.

Ultimately though, it’s the individual company or RM in this case, that chooses what type of pension scheme to offer it’s workers and how much they want to pay into it and if that isn’t enough to pay it’s liabilities there’s not a huge amount the trustees can do.
As I understand it, RM currently pay around 20% of our salaries into the pension which is a lot more than our competitors. With ever increasing competition and privatisation around the corner, it’s fairly obvious that changes are going to happen.

[heapsy]

Yes. Would it not, as I posted earlier, have been better to branch out into property? Buy to let, commercial, etc? A well structured portfolio of the right mix, would surely only grow. More property would mean even more income. Coupled with the fact that generally speaking, property increases in value. Look at the national lottery. It is now owned by the Ontario State Teachers Pension Fund no less. The Meadowhall shopping centre, Sheffield, for example, is 50% owned by the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund. Clearly some very poor decisions have been made.

[Martin Walsh]

All Royal Mail and Pol members will recieve a letter from Royal Mail on Wednesday 29th explaining the postion on pensions and it is expected that the 60 day legal consultation will begin in mid June.

[heapsy]

All Royal Mail and Pol members will recieve a letter from Royal Mail on Wednesday 29th explaining the postion on pensions and it is expected that the 60 day legal consultation will begin in mid June.

Cheers for that. Can't really see the point in it tho myself. Like the last consultation, it was a done deal. Especially as managers didn't enter the argument. Will never understand that. Anybody would think they are somehow going to avoid the problems of low income and standard of living that will follow a major change in their pension set up. Then again, maybe they are already on such a good screw that they don't need to worry. Who knows?

[Stormproof]

28 May 2013
LTB 371/13 Pensions - Urgent Information

No: 371/13


28th May 2013


To: All Branches with Postal Members




Dear Colleague


PENSIONS - URGENT INFORMATION


The purpose of this LTB is to advise Branches of imminent developments on pensions. It was reported to both the Liverpool Policy Forum and Annual Conference that the Royal Mail Group and Post Office Limited had advised the Union that a further pension problem was looming.


The Union has today received formal proposals for Pension Changes from the Royal Mail Group and Post Office Limited. The proposals relate to the ongoing funding of accrued and future benefits within the Royal Mail Pension Plan. It does not affect pensions covered by the Government scheme.


We have been advised that all Royal Mail Group and Post Office Limited employees will receive a letter on Wednesday 29th May explaining the position of both companies. At this stage neither company has triggered the 60 day legal consultation, although we understand this will happen around the middle of June. Both companies have indicated that they are now seeking formal negotiations with the Union.


The Postal Executive will consider the formal proposals and its implications on privatisation when we meet next week.


As reported previously, it remains our position that if either Company trigger the 60 day legal consultation then the Union will call a Special Postal Group Conference or Policy Forum. Any attempt by either Company to introduce further pension changes by executive action will be opposed by all means necessary. This latest development has also been raised directly with the Government in our ongoing discussions with the Minister.








A more detailed LTB will be issued tomorrow which will include a letter to members to be handed out in the workplace. In the meantime, the content of this LTB should be immediately distributed to all representatives and workplaces.


This latest pension development is another reason why our members should vote yes in the consultative ballot. For our members in Post Office Limited it will only strengthen their resolve in our current dispute.


Any enquiries on the content of this LTB should be addressed to the DGS (P) Department.


Yours sincerely





Dave Ward
Deputy General Secretary (P)

[RobertT]

Yes. Would it not, as I posted earlier, have been better to branch out into property? Buy to let, commercial, etc?

They already do! According to the accounts from last year, the pension scheme had 4.5% of their investments in property which came to a value of £1,394 Million.

A well structured portfolio of the right mix, would surely only grow. More property would mean even more income. Coupled with the fact that generally speaking, property increases in value.

Property is just another asset class the same as shares, gold, gilts, etc. Sometimes those investments will do well and sometimes they won’t.
It may have been a good investment in the past and it may be again in the future, but generally speaking, I don’t think it is at the moment. There’s always going to be exceptions but you’ve only got to see the number of empty shops and industrial units to know that it’s not necessarily a good business to be in now.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

LTB 374/13 Pension Developments

No. 374/13


Date: 29th May 2013


To: All Branches with Postal Members




Dear Colleague


PENSION DEVELOPMENTS


Further to LTB 371/13, the following will update Branches and Representatives on the pension developments reported yesterday.


Given the overall significance of pensions, their recent history and the direct involvement of Government and the European Parliament, CWU members are entitled to be confused, disappointed and angry at this latest announcement by the Royal Mail Group and Post Office Limited.


The fact that this pension situation has developed at the same time as the company is being prepared for privatisation and despite the recent Government pension settlement, will raise huge question marks over its legitimacy and legality. It is inevitable this will become not just a serious industrial matter but also a major political issue. Whilst the Union has a responsibility to consider these pension proposals, we also believe that the question of affordability of future pension entitlements is directly linked to privatisation.


The Postal Executive will meet next week to consider both the proposals and their implications on privatisation. Further information will follow in due course. In the meantime, the priority for all CWU representatives is to convey the Union’s position to our members in the workplace. As such we have attached to this LTB an initial letter to members which should be copied by Branches and distributed immediately in the workplace. We have also attached a CWU Representatives’ Brief which explains the situation in more detail.


This latest pension development is another reason why our members must vote yes in the consultative ballot. For our members in Post Office Limited it will only strengthen our resolve in the current dispute.


Any enquiries on the content of this LTB should be addressed to the DGS (P) Dept.


Yours sincerely

Dave Ward
Deputy General Secretary (P)


29th May 2013


Dear Colleague


Important Pension Developments


The Union has received formal proposals from both the Royal Mail Group and Post Office Limited to make further pension changes relating to the cost of funding accrued and future benefits within the remaining Royal Mail Pension Plan. This is separate from the Government Scheme.


The fact that this pension situation has developed at the same time as the company is being prepared for privatisation and despite the recent Government pension settlement, will raise huge question marks over its legitimacy and legality. It is inevitable this will become not just a serious industrial matter but also a major political issue.


The CWU has responded as follows:-


· The CWU has told the Royal Mail Group, Post Office Limited, the Trustee Board and Government, that any attempt to introduce further pension changes by executive action will be opposed by all means necessary.


· The CWU has raised questions over the legitimacy and legality of these proposals in light of the previous Government pension settlement and European State Aid. We are seeking further advice from our lawyers and external pension experts.


· The Union will engage both companies and the Government directly on this matter.


Whilst the Union has a responsibility to consider these pension proposals, we also believe that the question of affordability of future pension entitlements is directly linked to privatisation.


This latest pension development is another reason why our members must vote yes in the consultative ballot. For our members in Post Office Limited it will only strengthen our resolve in the current dispute. We will write to members home addresses with more detailed information if and when the 60 day legal consultation process is triggered by either company.


Yours sincerely

Dave Ward
Deputy General Secretary (P)



CWU REPRESENTATIVES’ BRIEF – PENSIONS


Introduction


· It was reported to the Liverpool Policy Forum and Annual Conference that both the Royal Mail Group and Post Office Limited had advised the Union that a further pension problem was looming.


· The Union has now received formal proposals from both companies to make further pension changes relating to the ongoing funding of accrued and future benefits within the Royal Mail Pension Plan. This is separate from the Government Scheme.


· The purpose of this brief is to explain what we understand to be the company’s position, what the CWU is doing about it and the key messages we want our representatives to convey to our members in the workplace.


· In addition to this brief we have also attached a letter to be copied by Branches and handed to CWU members. It is essential that the distribution of this Communication is immediately prioritised.


What the Companies are saying about further Pension changes


· Both the Royal Mail Group and Post Office Limited initiated informal dialogue with the Union and explained that despite state aid clearance and the subsequent Government pension settlement, the ongoing funding of accrued and future benefits within the Royal Mail Pension Plan has become a major issue for both companies and the Trustee Board.


· The Union has been told that the assumptions the Trustees are using to finalise the current scheme valuation will mean that Royal Mail’s contribution rate is likely to rise from 17.1% to around 30%. Royal Mail state that this would cost an additional £300 million per year and that this will become unaffordable. Post Office Limited has set out the same position, albeit their numbers are proportionate to the smaller size of that company.


· Both companies say this problem is due to the performance of guilt yield investments being at an historic low and the assumptions being used by the Trustee Board to finalise the latest scheme valuation. Both state this could not have been foreseen at the time of the Government settlement. Furthermore, if it had, the Government would still only have been allowed to deal with the historic pension deficit. The company and the Trustee Board have both confirmed that the scheme is not in deficit at this stage.













What the Companies are proposing


· Both companies considered a number of ways to approach this but discarded options to close the scheme, increase members’ contributions, or introduce a further increase to retirement age. Instead, they propose to cap future increases to the pensionable elements of pay to RPI (with a maximum of 5% per annum).


· What this means is the companies want to use the £2 billion of assets left in the plan following the Government settlement, to now offset their future contribution rate. This money was originally set aside to pay for the final salary link that was maintained following the 2008 pension changes.


· The companies’ proposal offers some protection for those members in receipt of pensionable allowances still being linked to final salary.


· Royal Mail want to reach a legally binding agreement, which they say will offer protection for five years against any further pension changes in the event of privatisation. At this stage Post Office Limited are not offering any further protection because of the Government’s role in subsiding the Post Office Network.


· As part of these proposals the company state they will make improvements for members within the defined contribution scheme.


What is the likely impact on members?


· For members of the Royal Mail Pension Plan, our initial assessment is that this change will have a detrimental impact if basic pensionable pay increases are higher than RPI inflation over a sustained period. It will also impact on members who may be promoted in the last three years of their service. This is an initial assessment and the Union will need to undertake further work with our professional advisors before we can quantify the full impact of this proposal on CWU members.


· For CWU members in the defined contribution scheme there is no detrimental impact and the company are proposing improvements to this scheme.



CWU Response – Key Messages for members


We want all representatives to convey the following key message to our members in the workplace.


· The CWU questions the legitimacy of these proposals in light of the recent Government pension settlement and the granting of European State Aid. We will be seeking further advice from our lawyers and pension advisors as to the legality of the actions proposed.


· The CWU has told the Royal Mail Group, Post Office Limited, the Trustee Board and Government that any attempt to introduce further pension changes by executive action will be opposed by all means necessary.


· The CWU believe the question of affordability of future pensions is directly linked to the proposed privatisation of the company.


· The CWU has a responsibility to engage both companies on this matter and it has also been raised as a major issue in our ongoing discussions with Government.


· On the advice of our professional advisors the CWU will be further challenging the Trustee Board over the assumptions they are using for the valuation of the scheme and their investment strategy. We will hold the Trustee Board to account by calling for them to organise an extraordinary meeting for scheme members at an appropriate point.


· In the event of either company triggering the 60 day legal consultation process, a further letter will be sent to members’ home addresses explaining the Unions position.


· This latest pension development is another reason why our members must vote yes in the consultative ballot.


· For our members in Post Office Limited it will only strengthen our resolve in the current dispute.
More info +

[mandelsons_toenail]

My entire office got letters today from rm.

I didn't.

Is it cause I'm union

[heapsy]

Yes. Would it not, as I posted earlier, have been better to branch out into property? Buy to let, commercial, etc?

They already do! According to the accounts from last year, the pension scheme had 4.5% of their investments in property which came to a value of £1,394 Million.

A well structured portfolio of the right mix, would surely only grow. More property would mean even more income. Coupled with the fact that generally speaking, property increases in value.

Property is just another asset class the same as shares, gold, gilts, etc. Sometimes those investments will do well and sometimes they won’t.
It may have been a good investment in the past and it may be again in the future, but generally speaking, I don’t think it is at the moment. There’s always going to be exceptions but you’ve only got to see the number of empty shops and industrial units to know that it’s not necessarily a good business to be in now.

You made a good point. What I was thinking of really was buy to let property. There is a real need for housing and it isn't going away. Buying new property, direct from builders would also have given the opportunity to buy at a discount. Nothing is absolutely guaranteed but I can that as a steady income stream for years to come. Only wish I could do it myself.