Archive 6 of IBM UK's radical downgrade :  AMIPP Forums (Message Boards) The fastest message board... ever.
of its pension provision. YOU CAN NO LONGER POST HERE! This is now an archive 
Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement.
Posted by: Mad Dog (IP Logged)
Date: 16 February 2014 09:30AM

dave - the statement on the Pensions Trust website deals with the matter of ERDFs and Statutory Revaluation in the case where active members wish to take early retirement between the ages of 60 and 62.

However the statement does not address the absence of Statutory Revaluation of "leaving service benefits". This matter would affect any currently active member who leaves IBM before the age of 60 and whose DB pension would then go into deferred status. For the years between 2012 and date of leaving IBM, it appears that no Statutory Revaluation would be applied to the DB pension.

My feeling is that this would constitute an irregularity worth bringing to the attention of the Ombudsman and/or Pensions Regulator. The DB plan for Hybrid Deferred members is being effectively frozen in time and devalued by the lack of Statutory Revaluation on an annual basis. This would not be the case for deferred members, so why is it that IBM can penalise Hybrid Deferred members in this way?

I'd welcome your opinion (and the opinion of other members) on this matter.

dave Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In my view there's absolutely no mileage in going
> to the Ombudsman or Regulator about the
> composition of the board unless you have strong
> evidence of irregularities. Reading the Trustee's
> post about the issue at hand, I see nothing wrong
> in what they are doing. They have registered that
> they don't agree with IBM's opinion and that the
> matter will be properly resolved by the outcome of
> the court case.



Subject Views Written By Posted
  Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 3307 Eddy 07 February 2014 10:39PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1535 ImGone 08 February 2014 11:35AM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1425 Mad Dog 09 February 2014 05:52PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1688 Eddy 09 February 2014 08:26PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1313 Mad Dog 10 February 2014 12:07AM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1398 Eddy 10 February 2014 07:47AM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1962 CeeGee 11 February 2014 04:13PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1317 Eddy 10 February 2014 04:16PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1324 Mad Dog 10 February 2014 05:44PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1300 Eddy 11 February 2014 08:43AM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1221 Mad Dog 11 February 2014 06:52PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1196 Eddy 11 February 2014 05:57PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1163 Mad Dog 11 February 2014 06:44PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1184 Ace Buzz 11 February 2014 07:14PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1293 Mad Dog 11 February 2014 07:34PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1255 CeeGee 11 February 2014 09:49PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1382 Ace Buzz 12 February 2014 06:21AM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1360 CeeGee 12 February 2014 03:06PM
  Re: Pension Statements - A strange CPI Issue 1233 CeeGee 24 February 2014 08:05AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM sidesteps first court judgement. 1495 Eddy 11 February 2014 10:15PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM sidesteps first court judgement. 1440 thoms 12 February 2014 07:22AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM sidesteps first court judgement. 1270 ImGone 12 February 2014 05:01PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM sidesteps first court judgement. 1285 Mad Dog 12 February 2014 05:21PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1315 Eddy 12 February 2014 05:40PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1246 Mad Dog 12 February 2014 05:48PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1247 Eddy 12 February 2014 05:59PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1225 jerry 12 February 2014 08:56PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1268 Slide Rule 12 February 2014 09:13PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1237 Mad Dog 12 February 2014 09:47PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1478 Anonymous User 13 February 2014 09:21AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1223 Slide Rule 13 February 2014 10:32AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1265 scunnered 13 February 2014 10:40AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1283 Anonymous User 13 February 2014 11:11AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1219 Mad Dog 14 February 2014 04:09PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1323 GrumpyGuts 13 February 2014 08:15AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1503 Mad Dog 13 February 2014 09:33AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1263 GrumpyGuts 13 February 2014 09:39AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1474 Mad Dog 13 February 2014 10:53AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1331 blaster 14 February 2014 03:19PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1313 CeeGee 14 February 2014 07:23PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1197 scunnered 17 February 2014 03:08PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1224 growingold 14 February 2014 08:57PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1295 Eddy 15 February 2014 07:51AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1275 Ace Buzz 15 February 2014 08:51AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1244 ImGone 15 February 2014 12:07PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1204 Mike Eacott 15 February 2014 11:44AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1239 dave 16 February 2014 08:54AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1280 Mad Dog 16 February 2014 09:30AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1271 dave 16 February 2014 10:55AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1219 goner 16 February 2014 06:59PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1318 dave 16 February 2014 10:45PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1296 Ace Buzz 17 February 2014 07:21AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1222 goner 17 February 2014 05:10PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1309 dave 17 February 2014 09:54PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1311 ImGone 18 February 2014 11:34AM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1286 itsnotthe companyIjoined 18 February 2014 12:14PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1326 Mike Eacott 18 February 2014 12:55PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1294 JACK05 18 February 2014 02:55PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1341 Anonymous User 18 February 2014 05:14PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1415 ImGone 19 February 2014 02:05PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1348 dave 18 February 2014 03:32PM
  Re: Pension Statements - IBM interpretation of first court judgement. 1334 Eddy 24 February 2014 10:55AM


Sorry, you do not have permission to post/reply in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.