FBU win return to pre 2012 pension

[fredtheegg]

Hi guys.

I’ve been trying to find an answer to this one for quite a while now.

The Fire Brigade Union recently won a case to return members to the pre 2012 pension. Basically staff employed in the fire service before 2012 are entitled to return to the old scheme

https://www.fbu.org.uk/news/2019/12/18/ ... government

My question is.. why haven’t the CWU jumped on this and taken up a fight to return members to the final salary scheme that ended in 2008? Have they missed something here?

I joined in 1980 and was told by pension experts at the time that the RM pension was unbeatable. But in 2008 all this crashed and burned and a possible decent pension upon retirement went with it. I keep trying to get an answer from the CWU regarding this with no luck so far.

I also understand from a friend with many years in the civil service that they could be getting the final salary pension back

I wonder if anyone has thoughts on this

[RobertT]

The RM final salary scheme closed in 2008 and the decision to do that was agreed at the time and after we took industrial action, by the CWU.

If they campaigned for a return to the final salary scheme now, in my opinion they wouldn't have a leg to stand on!

[fredtheegg]

To be fair in my opinion the CWU do have a leg to stand on. If other unions can win pensions back than so can the CWU.

A lot of pre 2008 employees have lost access to a decent living when they retire.

The new CDC scheme is good for people who still have 20 years or more left to pay into it. Someone over the age of 60 continuing to contribute it’s not going to pay much at all

[Woody Guthrie]

Unfortunately both civil servants and FBU members are public service employees, we are not.

Our pre-2012 pension does not even really exist anymore other than in a data base somewhere in some government basement.

The government has the liability for it but has long since disposed of the assets.

Royal Mail has no liability for it and certainly wouldn't as a private company be interested in taking on more.

[RobertT]

To be fair in my opinion the CWU do have a leg to stand on. If other unions can win pensions back than so can the CWU.

It's not quite the same though is it, as Woody has said.

A lot of pre 2008 employees have lost access to a decent living when they retire.

What about those who've had no access to a decent living when they retire and have only ever been in a DC scheme? Or even no scheme at all!
A phased legal obligation for every employer in the UK to provide a pension took place between 2012-2018. Before 2012 no company had to offer a pension at all!

The new CDC scheme is good for people who still have 20 years or more left to pay into it. Someone over the age of 60 continuing to contribute it’s not going to pay much at all

Assuming CDC does what it aims to do, it should provide similar benefits to the CARE scheme(section B) that ran from 20008-2018.
In practice, only time will tell!

I've always looked at my pension as being 'it is what it is'.
There's nothing wrong with campaigning to get a better deal. But ultimately we get what we get, and if that's not enough, then it falls on the individual to do something about it.

[Schiff]

As I understood this it was an age discrimination thing. Older members, approaching retirement, were allowed to stay in the old scheme and continued to contribute. Others were moved to the new scheme in tranches over a period of years dependent upon their age, not length of service. Younger members were discriminated against based upon their age and no other criteria. There is absolutely no parallel with RM.

[heapsy]

Some interesting point made here. I think the biggest issue are around discrimination against delivery staff who wont get to 67, unlike their mail centre counterparts who have got it easy. And also whether its right to move the age goal posts for people who might have reached middle age when the changes happened. A better solution would have been for those already in the pension to have been able to retain the right to an NRA at 60, as with their previous schemes. But the CWU don't seem to get it, as most of us know.

[mags999]

the union do nothing for the older delivery staff they dont encourage job shares or easier walks due to age and capabilities or even early pay offs when you think most posties retired at 60 20 year ago its a disgrace

[deltaforce]

the union do nothing for the older delivery staff they dont encourage job shares or easier walks due to age and capabilities or even early pay offs when you think most posties retired at 60 20 year ago its a disgrace

Most posties never retired at 60 20 years ago. A lot of them went on nights but in delivery that’s quite rare nowadays

[mags999]

yes lack of options these days

[freespeech]

Some interesting point made here. I think the biggest issue are around discrimination against delivery staff who wont get to 67, unlike their mail centre counterparts who have got it easy. And also whether its right to move the age goal posts for people who might have reached middle age when the changes happened. A better solution would have been for those already in the pension to have been able to retain the right to an NRA at 60, as with their previous schemes. But the CWU don't seem to get it, as most of us know.

There is no legal standing re this as "delivery staff" aren't a protected characteristic in themselves. I suppose someone would have to win an argument that deliveries don't allow you to get to aged 60 (ie NRA60) but I suspect there are a number of 60 year old posties so it would be a hard one to win in my view. The reference to 67 is moot as the original scheme had a retiring age (or age the pension is paid) of 60.

[fredtheegg]

As I understood this it was an age discrimination thing. Older members, approaching retirement, were allowed to stay in the old scheme and continued to contribute. Others were moved to the new scheme in tranches over a period of years dependent upon their age, not length of service. Younger members were discriminated against based upon their age and no other criteria. There is absolutely no parallel with RM.

I was 47 in 2008 and had paid in for 28 years at that point. Planning to hopefully retire at 60 on a maximum 40 years pension. Maybe it was an age discrimination thing at RM as well

[fredtheegg]

Some interesting point made here. I think the biggest issue are around discrimination against delivery staff who wont get to 67, unlike their mail centre counterparts who have got it easy. And also whether its right to move the age goal posts for people who might have reached middle age when the changes happened. A better solution would have been for those already in the pension to have been able to retain the right to an NRA at 60, as with their previous schemes. But the CWU don't seem to get it, as most of us know.

With respect you’d be amazed how many MC staff die within 12 months of leaving after retirement.

[Jefferson Starfish]

As I understood this it was an age discrimination thing. Older members, approaching retirement, were allowed to stay in the old scheme and continued to contribute. Others were moved to the new scheme in tranches over a period of years dependent upon their age, not length of service. Younger members were discriminated against based upon their age and no other criteria. There is absolutely no parallel with RM.

I was 47 in 2008 and had paid in for 28 years at that point. Planning to hopefully retire at 60 on a maximum 40 years pension. Maybe it was an age discrimination thing at RM as well

So did you do anything in 2008 to counteract the closure of the final salary scheme, or did you just wait 14 years to moan about it?

[fredtheegg]

As I understood this it was an age discrimination thing. Older members, approaching retirement, were allowed to stay in the old scheme and continued to contribute. Others were moved to the new scheme in tranches over a period of years dependent upon their age, not length of service. Younger members were discriminated against based upon their age and no other criteria. There is absolutely no parallel with RM.

I was 47 in 2008 and had paid in for 28 years at that point. Planning to hopefully retire at 60 on a maximum 40 years pension. Maybe it was an age discrimination thing at RM as well

So did you do anything in 2008 to counteract the closure of the final salary scheme, or did you just wait 14 years to moan about it?

I’m certainly not moaning. I’m just asking questions as it also relates to members future pensions.


14 years later I get to retirement age and realise it could have been better. Maybe in 2008 after I took industrial action with everyone else, I decided the new scheme was better for the CWU members younger than me. So I took a hit and voted yes without realising my future pension would be so much less. Nobody could have predicted the outcome some 14 years later, not even my crystal balls