Military pensions

[Ken L]

Precisely, it is a mis selling, if it does come into force of course.

 

It already has for most public employees - myself included.

I eagerly await the test cases in court.

[barry luxton]

However you view the current economic realities, people in employment that included a pension at a defined rate and with specified entitlement criteria (starting age, onset of disability etc) when they signed up should receive that pension.

The pension and it's conditions are part and part of the salary contract between employer and employee even if that salary is deferred as pension.

In effect, to change those pension provisions retrospectively (Which is what's happened to almost all public servants, not just the military) is to have mis sold a financial product.

 

Appears to be a bit ripe where brown and co reduced the value of the private sector pensions by five bill per year, then the subsequent admin introduce new rules and regs to enforce us ordinaries to work extra years with a reduced pension at the end of it, if you survive.

 

 

A bloke who i actually worked with on the building industry definatly won't be collecting his reduced pension, buried alive he was. Left a young family btw.

 

 

Were all in it together.

[barry luxton]

Most of the above is a word salad, stuff flung together (in terrible English) making little of no sense.

 

It may appear to you that I am an expert in all things (you probably secretly imagine that most people know more than you do) however what is sognificant is that I only speakabout things which I do know about, avaoding , and there are hundreds, the subjects of which I know little or nothing. Some on the other hand open up and waffle about matters which everyone can see (oh yes they can) that they know little or nothing about. So despite it narrowing your options down consederably, you might like to stick to what you know about?

 

Your breaking up, salad spelling. (stuff flung together). entertaining though.

[Ken L]

Your breaking up, salad spelling. (stuff flung together). entertaining though.

 

Spell checkers don't work for punctuation though, do they ?

[barry luxton]

or sarcasm

[Ken L]

or sarcasm

 

It's just a bit rich for me seeing a bloke with appalling spelling, grammar and punctuation skills attacking another forum member about their spelling when his own lack of skills in that area is plastered over with an electronic Band Aid - a spellchecker.

This goes double coming from someone who was so quick to cry wolf when he thought (wrongly) that I was having a go at him about his spelling.

[medwaygreen]

As with most threads of this type,it does appear to degenerate into the black and white corners.

 

My observation is that, we all undertake our careers as young people with a small understanding of what may be expected of us. That is with the exception of let me use the word essential services, our young and middle aged men and women that joined the military or other services knew what they signed up for and yes they did expect a pension superia to others, however that is not the case across the broad spectrum of the British and more importantly the ENGLISH working class( that used in it,s literal sense), therefore I can only decline to support the initiative for more benefits for the military, unless it encompasses all of us.

 

Richard.

[medwaygreen]

It's just a bit rich for me seeing a bloke with appalling spelling, grammar and punctuation skills attacking another forum member about their spelling when his own lack of skills in that area is plastered over with an electronic Band Aid - a spellchecker.

This goes double coming from someone who was so quick to cry wolf when he thought (wrongly) that I was having a go at him about his spelling.

 

Ken you love to aggravate the situation and sometime you are like a dog with a bone, let it go and be objective as I know you most often are.

 

Richard.

[Andrew]

It's just a bit rich for me seeing a bloke with appalling spelling, grammar and punctuation skills attacking another forum member about their spelling when his own lack of skills in that area is plastered over with an electronic Band Aid - a spellchecker.

This goes double coming from someone who was so quick to cry wolf when he thought (wrongly) that I was having a go at him about his spelling.

 

 

Thanks for reminding me Kenneth

 

We all make mistakes in our life time, i admit to them, others dont and try and wash them away, brush them under the carpet. No names will not be mentioned, discretion is the key. Maybe some of the posters should use that rule oh thought also.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Andrew

[Emma two]

As with most threads of this type,it does appear to degenerate into the black and white corners.

therefore I can only decline to support the initiative for more benefits for the military, unless it encompasses all of us.

 

Richard.

 

 

It isn't an initiative to get more 'benefits' (?) for service people, but one to try and get the MOD to keep to their part in an already excisting a contract.

 

If they want to save money well onto the future then they could do away with the preserved pension deal, for service people signing on after a given date. However to take that away from those who have already signed into the contract is wrong.

 

A feature of this whole debate is the one of age. Imagine yourself in a forward area on operations, it's time for the sub unit to get it's collective head down, can you imagine a 60 plus year old soldier taking turn on sentry keeping alert and significantly awake, and not as a one off, but regularly over months? I wouldn't want to be in that position in my 50s. it wouldn't be fair to either the subject nor the group.

 

A unit can only move as fast as it's slowest individuals, the British army would become an international laughing stock with 50 and 60 year olds in it's teeth arms.

 

There are simply not enough desk/stores (REMF) jobs to justify keeping people on well into middle age.

 

Under what is proposed the 22 year service person will get their pay off and pension upon discharge anyway (it's not a benefit), however the person with a preserved pension would have to wait more years for theirs if the goalposts are moved by the MOD. Thats what the petition seeks to oppose, thats what it's all about. I can't make it clearer than that. The thread seems to be used by some to have an argument about what they imagine this is about, rather than what it is about.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Emma two