NATIONAL PENSIONS BRIEFING REPORT

[lovejoy]

National Pensions Briefing Report
Dear Members
On Thursday of last week we attended the National Pensions briefing in London. The meeting was headed up by Dave Ward DGS (P), Ray Ellis and a leading independent pension’s consultant who were represented at the meeting by Hilary Salt.

Dave Ward opened the briefing by stating that he and all of the national union officials 100% understood the importance of the pension scheme to all members.

He confirmed that the briefing was the first of many that will take place over the coming weeks and months. The aim of the national union is to make sure that this debate over the future of our pensions is the most informed ever.

It was stated that the deficit in the Royal Mail pension’s scheme was one of the biggest in the UK. What makes our challenges so different to other industries is that we face the pension’s crisis at the same time as the business is going through the most difficult period of change in its history.

So far on pensions Dave Ward confirmed that discussions with Royal Mail have been held and consultation has involved Ray Ellis, Hilary Salt and the PEC.

Dave Ward told delegates that no change to pensions is simply not sustainable and it would be wrong for any of us to mislead members.

He also made it very clear that branches and members should not be voting on the pensions issue now. It has been separated from the pay and modernisation agreement for a number of reasons.

The aim of the union is to use the 60 day consultation to involve ALL members, improve the current position and make the Government accountable.

Dave Ward closed his introduction to the meeting by repeating the statement that the CWU wanted a debate with all members and would be writing to every one of us in the next few days. It is vital that all regions, branches and reps take the chance to have a say during the 60 day period.

The Second section of the meeting was headed by Ray Ellis. Royal opened by saying that all of the problems with the pension scheme could be fitted into three categories.
• The Deficit - £3.5billion
• Ongoing cost of Pension - £581million per year
• Risk of leaving scheme open to new members - £1.5 – 2billion over next 10 years.
Why is there a problem?
• Life expectancy has risen by 18% for men and 16% for women since last assessment in 2003
• Low interest rates
• Lower than expected return on investments
Ray Ellis stated that from the start of the discussions the position of the union has been
• To protect all accrued benefits
• Maintain high quality scheme going forward
• Realise that Royal Mail cannot sustain paying 30 pence in every £1 of pensionable pay into the fund

During the informal consultation the union looked at a variety of options
• Increase in contributions - this has been ruled out so far. The cost of this to ALL members would be a rise in pension contributions from 6% to around 10.5%.
• Government funding. There is £850million pound in a Government account that is only available if the company becomes insolvent. The union is arguing that the threat to the pension’s scheme is big enough to warrant the usage of this money.
So what is the current Proposal from Royal Mail?
• Pensionable service before April 2010 will continue to be calculated on a final salary basis – this will be increased by RPI to keep real value at the age of retirement
• Future Scheme - Change to a career average (CARE) scheme based on average salary over entire career.
• Age of retirement would move from 60-65
• Members would still be able to retire at 60 but would suffer a actuary reduction in their pension
• AVCs (additional contributions) would be available to mitigate affects of the above losses.
• Close the scheme to new entrants from January 2008
• Introduce a defined contributions scheme for new entrants from January 2008.
So what have the Union Achieved so far?
The 60 day legal consultation started on November 2nd (more on this later) but the union has already made the following progress from Royal Mails initial position.
• Retained all past benefits – something Royal Mail wanted to attack and would have saved them £1.6billion
• Introduced options that mitigate move to a retirement age of 65
• Retained a high quality pensions scheme
• Royal Mails contributions remain higher than ever – 17.6% of pensionable pay before talks and 21% now
• £100million per year extra paid into the fund
• A full ballot of ALL members in the fund will take place at the end of the 60 day consultation period.
Representatives Questions and Officers answers
• Representatives raised the point that the union MUST press the Government over this and all issues involving Royal Mail. Billy Hayes responded on this stating that work had gone on and that the union would be seeking to meet with the Government ASAP to look at the release of money from the post office account. He also reaffirmed the unions long term ambition to abolish POSTCOMM.
• It was put to the top table that maybe Royal Mails plans to change our pension scheme could be illegal? Sadly Hilary Salt confirmed that it is within the law for an employer to make changes to the pension scheme.
• It was asked whether the changes have already been agreed. Dave Ward said that they had not and after the 60 day consultation a ballot of the whole pension scheme membership would take place.
• It was asked if the union could provide a personal illustration of how these changes would affect every member. Ray Ellis confirmed that these illustrations would be included in a mailshot to member’s home addresses.
• It was put to the officer that if Royal Mail had not taken a pension’s holiday the scheme would not have been in any trouble. Hilary Salt stated that this was not the case and the issue with our pension scheme was about the cost and risk of the scheme going forward.
• A representative raised the issue of communications and urged the union to make sure they were spot on during the consultation period. Ray Ellis stated the members and representatives will have every chance to be involved in the consultation process.

Dave Ward closed the briefing and the key points he made were
• The consultation started on November 2nd so we must move quickly and branches must make every effort to organise ways for members to air their views.
• There has been no agreement given by the union to ANY changes to the scheme
• He reiterated that the pay and modernisation scheme would be voted on separately by members
• He stated that ALL pension scheme members will get a vote on pensions as it is a group wide issue and must be dealt with as such. He urged representatives not to follow Royal Mails lead by misleading members on this point. There are two separate issues and there will be two separate ballots.

As always we will make sure that over the coming days/weeks/months you are kept fully up to date with any developments and we are currently discussing way in which to fully involve all of you in the consultation period. Once we have more information from CWU HQ we will move forward with this process.

For all members who forwarded specific questions to us with reference to the pensions proposals we are awaiting replies in writing from CWU HQ. If you would still like to ask as question please email us at

[freespeech]

How can life expectancy rise by 18% for men and 16% for women since 2003? What wonders of modern science have happened in the past four years that suggests adding around 10 to 15 years of life?

[pcb]

Lovejoy, RM informed us that we were 6.4bn in debt then the trustees said we were 3.4bn in debt. Who's telling the truth. The reasonings about changes to the pension fund have been stated as we are living older, well that's been the trend for the last 50 years,also, that the stock market has fallen and the dividends are not as much as forcasted, again the market goes up as well as down. Look I just a simple working man, I signed up for a final salary pension that would ensure I wouldn't have to ask the government for a handout. They, RM have reneigned on their promise whilst handing out millions in bonsuses. Yet again Labour has allowed the workers to be shafted by management. The world of pensions is circular so will the final salary be restored due to the fact that manual workers die earlier than most and theat the stock market has recovered which it is doing now and that the savings from this would ensure the pension fund would return to the black. This is unbeleivable that we are signalling the end of the final salary pension. Even if Ward went back and told them to close the scheme to new starters and increase contributions from the workers, RM would say it is still not enough!
This leadership and this government have sold us down the river.

[lovejoy]

Lovejoy, RM informed us that we were 6.4bn in debt then the trustees said we were 3.4bn in debt. Who's telling the truth. The reasonings about changes to the pension fund have been stated as we are living older, well that's been the trend for the last 50 years,also, that the stock market has fallen and the dividends are not as much as forcasted, again the market goes up as well as down. Look I just a simple working man, I signed up for a final salary pension that would ensure I wouldn't have to ask the government for a handout. They, RM have reneigned on their promise whilst handing out millions in bonsuses. Yet again Labour has allowed the workers to be shafted by management. The world of pensions is circular so will the final salary be restored due to the fact that manual workers die earlier than most and theat the stock market has recovered which it is doing now and that the savings from this would ensure the pension fund would return to the black. This is unbeleivable that we are signalling the end of the final salary pension. Even if Ward went back and told them to close the scheme to new starters and increase contributions from the workers, RM would say it is still not enough!
This leadership and this government have sold us down the river.

Just posting what i've received from reps mate. Have your reps done a report from the briefing? Maybe you could post it here?

[k979aaa]

How can life expectancy rise by 18% for men and 16% for women since 2003? What wonders of modern science have happened in the past four years that suggests adding around 10 to 15 years of life?

The way these two :cfo & :lfo bast*rd are working us will take 40% off our life expectancy in the summer 16 kilo pouch 34c no shade no water no pi*s stop no hope of any pension even the sh*t one royalmail say's we should have.!

[BB brother]

I dont want to cast aspersions on the veracity of these statements from Mr Ward and his "consultant",

But.

18% rise in the life expectancy of males since 2003, have they cured cancer ??


The 13 year pensions holiday RM took has no significance on the current situation, Id love to see the maths on that one !

[lovejoy]

I dont want to cast aspersions on the veracity of these statements from Mr Ward and his "consultant",

But.

18% rise in the life expectancy of males since 2003, have they cured cancer ??


The 13 year pensions holiday RM took has no significance on the current situation, Id love to see the maths on that one !

The consultant apparently didn't say the holiday wasnt an issue she just said even if they hadn't taken holiday pension would still be in trouble!

[pcb]

Lovejoy. Look I know what is going to happen, this pension scam will happen, to remove the pensions from the pay deal has divided and conquered written all over it. You can get figures and statistics from anywhere to support any stance. Below is a report from the NUM:

MANUAL WORKERS HAVE LOWER LIFE EXPECTANCY - 02 NOVEMBER 2007There is a seven-year gap in life expectancy between manual and professional workers, new figures for England and Wales from the Office of National Statistics show. In the period 2002-05, men in the professional class, such as doctors and chartered accountants, had a life expectancy at birth of 80.0 years compared with 72.7 years for men in the manual unskilled class, such as labourers, and cleaners.

Meanwhile, professional women had a life expectancy at birth of 85.1 years, while expectancy was 78.1 years for their unskilled manual counterparts.

The figures also show that over a 30-year period life expectancy has grown for both manual and non-manual workers, but the gap in 2002-05 period was higher than in 1972-76 period.

In 2002-05, male non-manual workers life expectancy was 79.2 years against 75.9 years for male manual workers — a gap of 3.3 years. Back in 1972-76, the figures were 71.2 years and 69.1 years — a gap of 2.1 years.

For women in 2002-05, non-manual workers life expectancy was 82.9 years against 80.0 years for manual workers — a gap of 2.9 years. Thirty years ago the figures were 77.7 years and 75.2 years respectively — a gap of 2.5 years.

Responding to the figures the GMB general union called on the government to reconsider its plans to increase the state pension age to 68 in 2044.

GMB general secretary Paul Kenny said that raising the pension age meant that the lower earning majority would be subsidising those who are fortunate enough to live longer — mostly higher paid professionals. He said: “Increasing the state pension age is a classic case of the lowest earning many subsidising those fortunate enough, mostly the higher paid professionals, who live longer. A work-life balance where manual workers are made to work longer and non-manuals enjoy a longer life is not the right policy response on pensions. The government needs to think again.â€

[lovejoy]

[quote="pcb"]Lovejoy. Look I know what is going to happen, this pension scam will happen, to remove the pensions from the pay deal has divided and conquered written all over it. You can get figures and statistics from anywhere to support any stance. Below is a report from the NUM:

MANUAL WORKERS HAVE LOWER LIFE EXPECTANCY - 02 NOVEMBER 2007There is a seven-year gap in life expectancy between manual and professional workers, new figures for England and Wales from the Office of National Statistics show. In the period 2002-05, men in the professional class, such as doctors and chartered accountants, had a life expectancy at birth of 80.0 years compared with 72.7 years for men in the manual unskilled class, such as labourers, and cleaners.

Meanwhile, professional women had a life expectancy at birth of 85.1 years, while expectancy was 78.1 years for their unskilled manual counterparts.

The figures also show that over a 30-year period life expectancy has grown for both manual and non-manual workers, but the gap in 2002-05 period was higher than in 1972-76 period.

In 2002-05, male non-manual workers life expectancy was 79.2 years against 75.9 years for male manual workers — a gap of 3.3 years. Back in 1972-76, the figures were 71.2 years and 69.1 years — a gap of 2.1 years.

For women in 2002-05, non-manual workers life expectancy was 82.9 years against 80.0 years for manual workers — a gap of 2.9 years. Thirty years ago the figures were 77.7 years and 75.2 years respectively — a gap of 2.5 years.

Responding to the figures the GMB general union called on the government to reconsider its plans to increase the state pension age to 68 in 2044.

GMB general secretary Paul Kenny said that raising the pension age meant that the lower earning majority would be subsidising those who are fortunate enough to live longer — mostly higher paid professionals. He said: “Increasing the state pension age is a classic case of the lowest earning many subsidising those fortunate enough, mostly the higher paid professionals, who live longer. A work-life balance where manual workers are made to work longer and non-manuals enjoy a longer life is not the right policy response on pensions. The government needs to think again.â€

[BB brother]

I dont want to cast aspersions on the veracity of these statements from Mr Ward and his "consultant",

But.

18% rise in the life expectancy of males since 2003, have they cured cancer ??


The 13 year pensions holiday RM took has no significance on the current situation, Id love to see the maths on that one !

The consultant apparently didn't say the holiday wasnt an issue she just said even if they hadn't taken holiday pension would still be in trouble!

You have my humblest apologies !


Im not shooting the messanger but i would like to say i find the tone of all this very worrying.



.

[lovejoy]

I dont want to cast aspersions on the veracity of these statements from Mr Ward and his "consultant",

But.

18% rise in the life expectancy of males since 2003, have they cured cancer ??


The 13 year pensions holiday RM took has no significance on the current situation, Id love to see the maths on that one !

The consultant apparently didn't say the holiday wasnt an issue she just said even if they hadn't taken holiday pension would still be in trouble!

You have my humblest apologies !


Im not shooting the messanger but i would like to say i find the tone of all this very worrying.



.

I agree mate.

The pensions consultation has started. We only have 60 days. We should be focusing on this rather than fighting over an agreement (that in my opinion we could easily quash by doing our jobs properly).

[pcb]

Lovejoy this is the matterial distributed by my CC which I fully endorse:

The proposed agreement is set out in various sections and phases. Please read the following carefully. The following sets out our reasons for recommending a NO vote :

SECTION 1 – EMPLOYEE PAY & BENEFITS

• There is NO back pay. An amount of £175 will be paid from ESOS (a scheme to capture savings you have already made). There is no new money from Royal Mail.

• 5.4% from 1st Oct, this DOES NOT include Shift Allowances, SA, Driving Allowances, Sunday work or colleagues in Network. Make no mistake, this is a 5.4% pay rise from April 2007 to April 2009 = 2.7% per year only. The 1.5% from April 08 which is only payable when you agree to ALL the flexibility aspects. No further pay deal until April 2009.

• Early shift allowances in Delivery will be given to you on a grandfather rights basis if you were in post on April 2007.

• The current and discredited 50:50 productivity scheme remains, this is payable only on savings over and above your units budget over which you have no input or influence over.

• £400 colleagues share only when you agree to all RM flexibility plans. This £400 is, according to the deal, a “potentialâ€

[lovejoy]

[quote="pcb"]Lovejoy this is the matterial distributed by my CC which I fully endorse:

The proposed agreement is set out in various sections and phases. Please read the following carefully. The following sets out our reasons for recommending a NO vote :

SECTION 1 – EMPLOYEE PAY & BENEFITS

• There is NO back pay. An amount of £175 will be paid from ESOS (a scheme to capture savings you have already made). There is no new money from Royal Mail.

• 5.4% from 1st Oct, this DOES NOT include Shift Allowances, SA, Driving Allowances, Sunday work or colleagues in Network. Make no mistake, this is a 5.4% pay rise from April 2007 to April 2009 = 2.7% per year only. The 1.5% from April 08 which is only payable when you agree to ALL the flexibility aspects. No further pay deal until April 2009.

• Early shift allowances in Delivery will be given to you on a grandfather rights basis if you were in post on April 2007.

• The current and discredited 50:50 productivity scheme remains, this is payable only on savings over and above your units budget over which you have no input or influence over.

• £400 colleagues share only when you agree to all RM flexibility plans. This £400 is, according to the deal, a “potentialâ€

[pcb]

I have not recoeved any paperwork but had telephone conversation straight after the meet.

[lovejoy]

I have not recoeved any paperwork but had telephone conversation straight after the meet.

Ok mate, let us know if you get it! will be interesting to compare. My reps forward me any briefing reports they do. Since i've been posting on here i must have posted 9 or 10 national briefing reports. Never seen one from another branch. Not very good comms!