Posted by Peter Osina on 17 October 2000 at 17:38:53:

We I believe were badley advised to join the 'C' plan as there is a significant differance now in my final pension that I would have recieved.

Posted by Roger Burtenshaw on 17 October 2000 at 19:40:06:

In Reply to: n plan posted by Peter Osina on 17 October 2000 at 17:38:53:

Peter, two questions?

1. How are you able to calculate what the N Plan equivalent would have been?

2. I don't remember IBM ever ADVISING us on whether to convert from N to C or not. I suspect that they gave us the basic information, and recomended that we get 'financial advice'. Does anyone have PROOF that we were advised to change from N to C plan by IBM? If so, and if it is true that we are now worse off, the FSA could be interested!

Posted by Pete Warren on 17 October 2000 at 22:18:14:

In Reply to: Re: n plan posted by Roger Burtenshaw on 17 October 2000 at 19:40:06:

My recollection was that it was suggested that we would lose out by staying in the N plan because 'N' benefits would freeze and the "C" plan would be better. No doubt someone has saved the paperwork!

Posted by Alan Murphy on 17 October 2000 at 23:37:15:

In Reply to: Re: n plan posted by Roger Burtenshaw on 17 October 2000 at 19:40:06:

I have an IBM document which states:

for the N Plan; "but the benefits are lower than those of the C Plan"

and:

"N Plan pension is based on pensionable earnings and length of pensionable service but at a lower rate than C Plan."

It would seem that a close analysis of the benefits of the N and C Plans might be well worth while. Who has the data to provide a useful comparison? Do we have anyone skilled in actuarial technques?

Posted by Tally_ho_us on 20 October 2000 at 02:18:43:

In Reply to: Re: n plan posted by Alan Murphy on 17 October 2000 at 23:37:15:

There is a guy helping us who is an actuarial person in the US that has been helping us. You could ask him questions on his board at http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/andylang. We did do the math and found that the older plan was better for us. Sounds like the N-plan is like our older plan in the sense that it is based on years of service and age - like our old plan. We also developed a spreadsheet that is on www.cashpensions.com. You might want to develop a spreadsheet for your N plan vs the c plan and compare. I don't think actuarial science is very different between the US and UK but Andy could answer that question for you. Andy is retired and did actuarial stuff for 40 years for large companies. Look at the board and see what you think. It is somewhere to at least start looking and investigating the answer anyway.

Posted by A Palmer on 21 October 2000 at 17:29:20:

In Reply to: Re: n plan posted by Roger Burtenshaw on 17 October 2000 at 19:40:06:

As I recall it, IBM give people an option to talk to a financial advisor. Mine said " a close call". Then really left me to choose!