Interact
Interact


RISHI SUNAK THEFT ?

Started by: GOLDEN BEAR (4157) 

I would like to draw to your attention the stealing and theft from the N.U.M.'s Pension fund by the Chancellor of the Exchequer , up to press he and his other accomplices have already STOLE £ 4.4. BILLION FROM THE FUND and is seeking to ROB/STEAL/ another £ 1.6 BILLION FROM THE PENSION FUND , whilst also reneging on a promise to let the 124,000 miner's and their families receive an increase of just £ 14.00 per week to their £84 per week they get now ... This is a national disgrace and one that should be talked and discussed about for if you think about it this eventually could apply to all of our older generation who have our savings in other types of pension with various companies . IF he and his theiving allies are allowed to do this ,then i believe it is going to be OPEN season on us all . When you consider only as far back as the 1950/60s when all these miners grafted damned hard for their pay and subscribed to a pension fund did so in the hope that when they retired they would have at the very least a decent monthly income to rely on , NOT down the road to have a bunch of THIEVES AND ROBBER'S DELVE THEIR STICJKY GREEDY FINGERS IN AND TAKE WHAT THEY WANT . WE talk now about the country running a deficit because of CO-VID ok i get that but i ask you to just consider what this lot have done they have already STOLE £4.4 BILLION POUNDS OUT OF A FUND THAT WAS NOT THEIRS IN THE FIRST PALCE ,, NOW BECAUSE THINGS ARE BAD THRO CO0- VID THEY ARE STRUGGLING TO FIND SOME MONEY TO HELP TO BALANCE THEIR FINANCES SO WHAT DO THEY DO ????OH WE WILL JUST DIP INTO TO THE N.U.M. FUND AND STEAL ANOTHER £1.2 BILLION . AND AS FOR THE MINER'S AND THEIR FAMILIES WHO WERE EXPECTING A MODEST £14 PER WEEK RISE , WILL GET SWEET F..A ,, AND THESE ARE THE SORT OF PEOPLE THIS COUNTRY HAS AGIN ELCECTED TO RUN OUR COUNTRY , SO I HAVE GOT THAT OF MY CHEST AND HAD TO DO SO FOR MY LATE FATHER WHO WORKED IN THE MINE AT BLUNDELL'S PEMBERTON AT THE RIPE OLD AGE OF 13 RETIRED ON ILL HEALTH AT 58 AND DIED AT 64 AND DIDNOT SEE ANY PENSION AT ALL ,SO STAY SAFE AND KEEP AN EYE ON YOUR PENSION ,FOR IF NOT THIS FOREIGNER SUNAK WILL ,.........GB

Started: 6th Jul 2021 at 15:40

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

I didn't know the N.U.M. had a pension fund! ?

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 17:23

Posted by: whups (6968) 

and another thing alan is they made the num leave serps & contracted them out of it & now miners who get their state pension are getting a pittance unlike the other nationalised industries who the tories have left alone . they got 5 times the amount of industrial injury payments like vibtation white finger E.T.C. than miners got.also the deal was that the money from the mps shud have gone into a fund set up by john major in case the mps went bust & could,nt pay their members but only when they turned 65 . to date they hav,nt paid a red cent to any miner & that money has gone into the treasury bypassing that so-called fund major set-up.

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 17:23

Posted by: sonlyme (2910)

When i worked for Case tractors in the seventies we was on a pension holiday for years because the fund had generated more money than it should have done.?All goverments have it built in that the treasury took the excess.

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 17:32

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

About the Mineworkers Pension Scheme (MPS)

First introduced in 1952, the Mineworkers’ Pension Scheme was a pension scheme for coal miners, to ensure they received a good pension after years of hard work in the coal mines. The rules of the scheme set out certain benefits payable to the members and prior to April 1975, members paid a flat-rate contribution of up to 20p per week.

After 1975, the contributions paid by the members and the benefits received were both linked to members’ salaries, which resulted in much higher contributions being paid by the members and in turn, higher benefits being received.
The contributions paid by a member did not cover the full cost of providing the benefits, so British Coal paid the remaining balance of the cost of the benefits.

Around the late 1980s and 1990s, many occupational pension schemes like the MPS found that their investments had performed much better than expected and they had surplus amounts of funding. These surpluses were used to give MPS members additional benefits and to reduce the level of contributions paid by British Coal.

At the end of 1994, following privatisation, the Government took over the role as guarantor for the MPS from British Coal. Arrangements were subsequently put in place whereby the Government guaranteed that the members of the MPS would always receive the benefits they had earned up to that date and that, in future, those benefits would rise annually in line with inflation.

In 2017, the surplus fund the MPS had accumulated was valued in excess of £1.2 Billion.

What are the benefits of having a MPS pension?

Most MPS pensions offer the following benefits:

• They promise a guaranteed income on retirement
• They are secure and protected up to 90% of the value by the Pension Protection Fund
• They are indexed linked and increase with inflation
• They pay for the whole of the miner’s retirement
• They offer a Death in Service Benefit to the miner’s spouse
• They can include a Tax-free Draw Down available at a certain age or if suffering ill-health

So considering the generous benefits the MPS provides, securing a private pension that offers similar benefits on today’s market would be - ‘as rare as hen’s teeth’!

Despite the MPS benefits, many ex-miners have transferred out of the MPS to different pension schemes which often have far less benefits, are not as profitable and in many cases are as a result of pension mis-selling.



And WHO persuaded those miners and ex-miners to "opt out"? ....... The N.U.M.!

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 17:57
Last edited by tonker: 6th Jul 2021 at 18:02:03

Posted by: Heatons68 (79)

After the Maxwell pension scandal , did the government at the time , usurp a lot of large company pension schemes , taking charge of it
themselves , i was working for a large bus company at the time and being not that old then didn't take much interest , but vaguely remember something about the interest , not being paid back , was the miners pension caught up in this ?

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 18:20

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

Pension fund surpluses arose in the 1980's when substantial redundancy programmes were followed by low wage inflation and good investment returns. The employers were responsible for making up for investment shortfalls in lean years and made employer contributions which often exceeded what the employees paid in. There was also an Inland Revenue limit on how much surplus was allowed since it attracted substantial tax benefits. it was the employers responsibility to decide how surpluses should be distributed and whether the employer could take a pension holiday covering periods were they would not make any contributions to the pension funds.

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 19:47

Posted by: sonlyme (2910)

correct gaffer.

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 20:33

Posted by: Billinge Biker (918) 

Is old Arthur still drawing a wage?

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 20:41

Posted by: sonlyme (2910)

he's still in his grace and favour apartment.

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 20:54

Posted by: tuddy (1161)

The N.U.M. didn't persuade me to opt out of the pension scheme. When I asked the N.U.M. If I could opt out I was advised to stay in. Turned out to be very good advise.

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 22:30
Last edited by tuddy: 6th Jul 2021 at 23:51:40

Posted by: Pewfall (201) 

There's a lot of passionate opinion here and respectfully bits of confusion. I used to work for the Soce and was a state pensions administrator at that time. Yes Tonker (State related earnings pension scheme) did come in in 1975 but this was the same for everybody with a national insurance number (and paying class 1 category a or d) but the earnings related aspect (known as Additional Pension) only started from 6th April 1978. Stay with the state and you paid class 1 category A national insurance. The more you earned the more Additional pension you got from the state. If you Contracted out to employer's scheme you paid less % NI and were class 1 cat D with similar AP based on earnings subject to the upper earnings limit. The employer's scheme was legally bound to pay at least the state level of AP hence the term GMP (guaranteed minimum pension). I administered on the Maxwell cock up. The contracted out Mirror pension fund was robbed. The government paid to restore folks pension to the level of the GMP. Whups there has respectfully never been a link between contracting in/out and industrial injuries. If individual schemes are offering additional benefits as some here are saying I can't comment as i don't know.

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 23:35

Posted by: whups (6968) 

quite right tuddy . because at the time you could,nt get your pension till you were 65 , if you were under 50 so many under that age opted out because in a private fund you could get it at 50 . no one was told by the NUM to opt out the reason was we were contacted by pension sharks & told a pack of lies & thats why some opted out , but as soon as we got the chance to send it back into the MPF most took the chance to do so .

Replied: 6th Jul 2021 at 23:56

Posted by: Pewfall (201) 

Hi Whups, state pension for males was aged 65 at that time. State related occupational pensions are / were a totally different thing. Contracted out occupational pensions then/now could/can be claimed as young as 55. I'm guessing you too were given the choice to put your contracted out pension into a commercial scheme as i was around 2001 like all the civil service around that time. We were offered Scottish widows i recall. i refused.

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 00:19

Posted by: whups (6968) 

i was offered a legal & general pension around 1989 . you could only access your mineworkers pension @ 65 then . so most off those who may have needed their pension & under 50 had to contract it out as the age limit was far less under a private pension . i,m talking about the MPS & not state pension pewfall & i,m not relating industrial injuries here pewfall i,m just highlighting the diffrent treatment that miners got against the other nationalised industries .we got far less than those industries with any claim we put in .

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 01:45

Posted by: broady (17302) 

So how many years did you work in the Mining Industry?

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 06:17

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

I've been getting my mineworkers pension since I was 28 years old.

Serps (state earnings related pension scheme) is what it says on the tin, 'State Pension', sometimes known as 'old age pension' or just 'pension'.
Not everybody gets it, but most do.
What this thread was started about is called the M.P.S., or the Mineworkers Pension Scheme.
The Mineworkers Pension Scheme is what'scalled a 'workplace pension'.
A 'workplace pension' can be "as well as" or "in place of" state pension.

A 'rule of thumb' can be taken as "you only get back what you've paid into.

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 10:15

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

Broady

If he started from school it would be 19/20 years.

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 11:10

Posted by: whups (6968) 

tonker i can tell you from some of my mates that because of the serps issue they are between £20 - £ 40 quid short every week in their oap pension.

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 11:46
Last edited by whups: 7th Jul 2021 at 11:47:21

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

Whups, like I've already said, you only get what you've paid in. If your mates have paid nothing in, they'll get nothing back. If they've paid a bit in, they'll get a bit back. Simple.
If they'd 'opted out' of serps, and put what they saved into another pension, they'd be getting that back now (that was the idea promoted by the NUM).
If they 'opted out' of serps, they'd get a few extra quid in their pay packet every Friday. If they chose to 'get a new car'or 'have a few more pints' with it, well, they'll get nothing.

I'll only be entitled to pension from 11 years worth of contributions,about a third of the basic payment.
But I'm not complaining about it.
The miners pension I get isn't a lot, but it's better than a kick in the dick.
When I'm 66 (three years off) both my state pension and miners pension, added together, won't be as much as people get if they'd paid the full 30 years in.

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 13:09

Posted by: whups (6968) 

my mates paid a hell of a lot in & carried on working after the pit shut . but because the tory government forced the NUM to "opt out" of serps they now have a defecit in their pension . do you think that overall the miners got a good deal tonker ? . and they were FORCED OUT of serps by the torys & did not promote anything which me & tuddy have already told you .

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 15:25

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

It's nothing to do with "the NUM". Leave them out of it.
If an individual employee paid into the serps scheme, they will get paid accordingly.
30 years worth of payments into the scheme gets you the full basic pension.
It follows that 15 years payments gets you 1/2 of the basic pension.
20years of payments will get you 2/3 of the basic pension.

If an employee "opted out" (ie: stopped paying into the scheme) after 20 years, they'll be getting 2/3 of their basic pension, the amount of which depends on their age and when they claimed pension.

Example:- put £1 a week into your piggy bank for 20 years.When you smash it open you'll have £1040.

However, if you stop putting your £1 a week into it after, say, 10 years, when you smash it open you'll only have £520.

I've no doubt you'd blame that on the tories too!

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 16:34

Posted by: Handsomeminer (1756)

Mum didn't advise me to opt out of the jobseekers pension

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 18:25

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

You should always do what your mum tells you. She always knows best!

Whatever a jobseekers pension may be?

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 18:45

Posted by: whups (6968) 

if someone stopped you putting that £1 in tonker who would you blame ? .

Replied: 7th Jul 2021 at 23:52

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

But, nobody stopped anybody from doing anything.

Do you know what the 'opt' in 'opted out' means?

OPTION. ..... CHOICE ...... to 'opt' means to choose.

An individual's choice to do something.

Some individuals (employees) chose not to pay into the state pension scheme anymore.
On the other hand, many chose to carry on paying into the national state pension scheme.

Nothing to do with the N.U.M.. and nothing to do with Tories.
Very much to do with people, making a choice.


I remember it, vaguely, several Fridays, in the pay-hall at Parkside colliery.
There were tables set out all round. The N.U.M. reps were there, and several agents from private pension companies.
"'ere, these lads'll sort you out", "they'll fill it in for you", "just sign it for 'em", "you'll be better off", "good companies", were the phrases I remember.

It was a big event.

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 00:23

Posted by: whups (6968) 

yes they did tonker.

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 01:43

Posted by: sonlyme (2910)

I contracted out of serps for a good few years and the advice was contract back in for the last few years.If you contracted out the government paid their share into the scheme that you chose.I get 171 quid and a bit state pension plus 126 quid a month off my contracted out one plus i drew down 9500 quid as a lump sum.Nowt wrong with contracting out of serps.

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 07:47

Posted by: Handsomeminer (1756)

Same when golborne was shutting people selling pensions ,insurance policies double glazing anything to get your hard earned the NUM reps where advising us to stay in reminders pension

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 09:31

Posted by: Handsomeminer (1756)

Should read miners pension (Iam sick of this predictive texting does anyone know how to switch it off)

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 09:33

Posted by: PeterP (8834)

Go into settings for your phone should be something in that under text and there will be a on/off slide for predictive textIf all else fails go to your sim card provider ie=)2 shop and they will sort it for you.

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 10:19

Posted by: Tommy Two Stroke (8072)

Ahem .......



On about the N.U.M. how much pension does this mon get LINK

Whupsy, it sounds like yon mon, who is one of your men, is actually one of 'them men' too, you know, the 'we are all in it together' men as per David Cameron and his ilk, red or bloo, they are all the same.

Because when it comes to us all being together, as in being in't 'shit' together, WE are more in it together, than THEY are

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 10:39

Posted by: whups (6968) 

he deserves it 1stroke . he got a 77% majority when he became leader . when you pays your tax then you can say "were all in it together " .

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 14:16

Posted by: Handsomeminer (1756)

Best of luck to arthur bookshelves another 20 years deserves ever y penny

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 14:25

Posted by: Tommy Two Stroke (8072)

Yoo too are delooded

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 14:55

Posted by: whups (6968) 

not like you then a straight thinker . NOT

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 15:07

Posted by: Tommy Two Stroke (8072)

Anyroad, bollocks to that, and what about this.

"Chancellor Rishi Sunak hints at ruling out 8% pension rise"

LINK

It looks like the 'Triple Lock' is being done away with

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 15:12

Posted by: whups (6968) 

great eh 1stroke . that,s wot people voted for . so much for the "new laws" the torys promised when we left europe & it,s protection .

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 15:34

Posted by: Handsomeminer (1756)

No luck with that Peter but thanks for the advise will ask my I T engineer when she gets home from school

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 15:38

Posted by: ena malcup (171)

They are citing 'Fairness to tax payers' in relation to removing the triple lock.

Who could argue with 'Fairness to taxpayers'? But it is only fairness if it applies to ALL the expenditure government pursues with tax payers' money, not a selective tool to quell opposition to a government's action.

There are, of course many affluent pensioners.

Also, there are many impoverished pensioners!

The triple lock has pertained over an extended period of unprecedented ultra-low inflation which it seem is going to end. Even bank of England is acquiescing in allowing inflation to rise consistently above its targets, and refraining from mitigation.

It certainly reminds me of Groucho Marx's dictum:

"A banker is someone who lends you his umbrella, but takes it back when it begins to rain."

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 15:54

Posted by: broady (17302) 

Were pension contributions not exempt from tax at one time?

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 23:23

Posted by: whups (6968) 

it only applies to us not them as theirs is "gold plated" & cannot be touched . one law for them & one for us .

Replied: 8th Jul 2021 at 23:55

Posted by: Pewfall (201) 

Tonker , your posts are confusing folk and totally respectfully totally totally wrong in your opinion of what SERPS is . Serps only started in 1975, the earnings related part of commencing April 1978. Prior to that and still with SERPS from the start of issuing National Insurance numbers in 1948 and always afterwards there was the invented BASIC pension - consummate with the flat rate for no. of years paid in national insurance. If u earned the 'lower earning limit' cat A for an year as an employee, or were self employed and bothered to pay 50 out of 52 of your weekly 'stamp' you got credited for that year's worth of BASIC pension. If you got child benefit you were entitled to home responsibility Protection lowering the amount of years u had to get the basic pension. If you were a student 16 to 19 years old or a male aged 60 to 65 u got auto national insurance credits similar to paying class 3 contributions. U cannot get a pension based on class 3 alone. It's called the 2nd contribution condition to getting benefits / pension. All of this is zero to do with the 1975 / 78 introduced serps. Also if you got invalid care allowance by being aged under state pension age and caring for someone 30 hours a week a more you were uniquely awarded rare class 1 national insurance credits...... Class 1 = work for an employer, class 2 = self employed, class 3 = voluntary stamp, class 4 was a tax from inland revenue if u had a business and did bugger all towards yr pension.

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 02:07
Last edited by Pewfall: 9th Jul 2021 at 02:24:53

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

Broady,
Tax relief on pension contributions in the UK is at the highest rate of tax paid by each employee. Pension contributions are deducted from earnings before Income tax is levied.

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 09:47

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

Pewfall, YOU are confused. Respectfully, of course!

WHERE have I said serps started in any year?
My post, with dates mentioned, was relating to the M.P.S., not serps.
As was Whupsies. And he even told you! (Whups said, " i,m talking about the MPS & not state pension pewfall" )

What I'm trying to point out is, if you 'opt out' of paying into a scheme, you aren't going to get anything from it. But nobody is 'forced' to do anything.
Whups seems to think the NUM was forced to 'opt out' of serps, by the Tories. Of course, that's rubbish. Golden Bear even said the NUM ran a pension scheme.

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 10:59

Posted by: whups (6968) 

it aint rubbish tonker .

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 11:30

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

The NUM didn’t employ the miners working for the NCB therefore had no jurisdiction over the MPS. They could advise but not enforce.

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 12:11

Posted by: whups (6968) 

when you lost a strike after a year i think that the statement "advise but not enforce " is a bit of nonsense particularily when they enforced a bonus scheme on us even tho we voted 2-1 against having it ? .pit closures even tho we struck for it . robbing our pension fund even tho we had no say in it ? .

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 12:22

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

The pension scheme was part of the NCB employees terms of employment. The NCB made contributions in line with the employees contributions. The NCB was the only body authorised to deduct MPS contributions from wages. Who enforced the bonus scheme? The NCB proposed it and negotiated the final details with the NUM. Once agreed the NUM would recommend it to the miners.
If you finished working for the NCB when Golborne was closed and started working for the NCB when you left school you would have had 19 or 20 years service which is nowhere near enough service for a full pension.

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 12:46

Posted by: GOLDEN BEAR (4157) 

WHUPS ';;ALAN here my heart goes out to you mate i hope things work out for you and all your mates in the NUM.....

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 15:48

Posted by: GOLDEN BEAR (4157) 

I have been reading all of your comments and i am pleased it has got people engaging ,i agree with some and differ with some other's but the main item i was trying to get across was the fact that this thieving git of a chancellor is being allowed to dip his nasty sticky fingers into the miners pension fund and when he's done they will have STOLEN £ 6 4 billion imagine that £6.4 BILLION'S !!! And now we are seeing with his attempt at removing the triple lock he is at it again ,and he won't stop there he will be looking into all the other major pension fund's /schemes to STEAL THEIR MONEY THEY HAVE WORKED HARD TO SAVE FOR THEIR RETIREMENT ,,,,,BASTARD'S ,,,STAY SAFE AND BE CARFUL ,,,,GB

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 16:02

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

There are over 120,000 claimants on the MPS payrole.
In another 10 years there's likely to be half that.

Will the remaining members get twice their pension?

Definitely not!

In another 40 years time, there's likely to only be a couple of dozen members left.

Then, all the remaining money might go to Prince Harry's kids. Or the Tories! eh., Whups?

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 16:10

Posted by: broady (17302) 

Are pensions not portable? If you have twenty years in one scheme can it not move to you new employer?

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 16:36

Posted by: PeterP (8834)

Broady yes pensions can be moved from firm to firm

Replied: 9th Jul 2021 at 17:35

Posted by: whups (6968) 

that money they are stealing shud have gone into a special fund for the miners & at 65 the government was suppose to pay out miners from that fund . but the truth is that they hav,nt payed out a red cent to any miner from day 1 & that money goes straight into the treasury & the mps is still picking up the bill . hence forth ROBBERY

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 12:08

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

MPS and SERPS

Serps

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 14:17

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

Whups, for every pension contribution that you ever paid, out of your wage, the government paid the same, for you, on your behalf.

Does it not follow that they are 50% shareholders in the pension fund?
And wouldn't a 50% shareholder be entitled to 50% of any surplus, and 50% of any loss?

In reality, the government have actually paid three times as much, into the Miners Pension Scheme fund, than the miners themselves have.

In fairness, and it might be what is being asked, I don't know, but the miners and the government should share any surplus (known as "bonus payments") at a 50 - 50 rate?

As it stands, the "bonus payments" come from the "surplus", which is money left over when all ex miners have been paid their pensions?
Pensions being a third of the total?
Does it not follow that the government should be getting 50% of the 'third' as well as 50% of the surplus?

Hmmmmmm. You probably won't 'follow' ! One or two will. But not you!

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 14:46
Last edited by tonker: 10th Jul 2021 at 14:48:33

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

Tonker correct it’s the same principle for all company pension schemes. However, the Government have taken over £4 billion out and left the miner’s ‘surplus’ in to maintain investment returns. In exchange the government have agreed to underwrite the fund and to keep payments in line with inflation. Both of these are worth a great deal in difficult investment times. I know from my own experience, as have countless others, fund values invariably go down in difficult times.

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 15:08

Posted by: broady (17302) 

Gaffer,
My company pension is now paid by the PPF . ( Pension Protection Fund) This is a public corporation in the UK but is not financed by the Government. I was employed for 30+ years by Alfred McAlpine who well after I left were taken over by Carillion who assumed my pension payments. As was well documented Carillion went under with mega debts. The responsibility for paying my pension is now with the above.

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 18:57

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

" Pension Protection Fund .... not financed by the Government."

But it is. And it's partly funded by the Miners Pension Scheme, among others.

But don't tell Whups. His head will explode!

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 19:27

Posted by: broady (17302) 

Their website says “ We are a public corporation but not funded by the Government or the taxpayer” I hear what you say regarding who pays me but I am sure my contributions were used to fund other bankrupt funds in the past. It seems to be a bit like ABTA. Not studied it much but it never fails to deposit the money on time and is exchanged for beer tokens as the month progresses.

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 20:01

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

How can it not be funded by the government if it's a government department?
Everything is funded by the government, using somebody elses money!

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 20:37

Posted by: broady (17302) 

It uses a levy taken from members of all pension schemes from way back to pay out to any bankrupt pension schemes. I know you think Government decides how often we pee but I fail to see where Government monies are used. They have the monies which they invest. Why do you have to disagree with what these websites say? As I said I am not bothered where it comes from as long as I can convert it into beer tokens.

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 20:58

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

The government funds 50% of everybody's workplace pension. It follows that half of any workplace pension fund can be used as they direct. It uses the likes of the £4 billion it's taken from the Miners Pension Scheme, along with others, and money from bankrupted/folded companies through the receiver's office.. So the government says.

And I have to disagree with anything I know is wrong.
I'm not bothered whether you're bothered where the money comes from or you're not.
I don't care either!
However, you did state that "the Pension Protection Fund is not financed by the Government.", which is wrong. I know it's wrong, so I told you so!

Replied: 10th Jul 2021 at 21:29

Posted by: whups (6968) 

so why do we have to give away half of our pension tonker when other nationalised industries dont ? .

Replied: 11th Jul 2021 at 11:20

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

Whups

They can’t give anything away because they’re in deficit. British Airways have recently paid £1.3 billion into their pension fund. They have more to pay to bring the fund into balance.
The BT fund is £8 billion in deficit despite them having paid £ billions in over the past few years.
The Coal Board miners pension was unique as funds go. Hundreds of thousands of miners had to leave the industry prematurely. The lower pension cost of the miners leaving plus a resulting bigger investment pot per miner remaining meant there was an actuarial surplus benefit to the fund which built up to £billions over the years.

I should have added that sadly the lower life expectancy of coal miners for most of the latter half of the last century was also a contributory factor to the pension fund surplus. A significant adverse factor on other pension funds is longer life expectancy. That’s why so many company schemes have been closed to new starters.

Replied: 11th Jul 2021 at 11:53
Last edited by gaffer: 11th Jul 2021 at 12:03:15

Posted by: whups (6968) 

gaffer the mps is 1 of the riches funds in the world we did,nt have to go" cap in hand " to the government but the board that sold us down the river was full of tory business men & a corupt offical from the UDM namely neil greatrex who robbed his own union for his own ends. to date the fund set up by john majors government has,nt paid a red cent to any miner that it shud have done once they turned 65 . that fund has been systematicaly syphoned off & put straight into the treasury . is that right ? .

Replied: 11th Jul 2021 at 12:24

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

Whups said, "the mps is 1 of the riches funds in the world we did,nt have to go "cap in hand " to the government" -

In the UK,the Miners Pension fund is 25th in the Top 27.
The MPS wouldn't even feature in the World rankings!

Where do you get your ideas from?

Replied: 11th Jul 2021 at 12:55
Last edited by tonker: 11th Jul 2021 at 12:56:33

Posted by: PeterP (8834)

To sort the wheat from the chaff write to the executors of the miners pension scheme and ask for clarification of how the fund is used and why any excess is not being shared by the members in the scheme. If they thought it was wrong that the government kept the surplus then they would have gone to court to get it for their members. I am in the BCSSS and it could effect my payements also. The firm who run the schemes get paid over £12million to run the schemes

Replied: 11th Jul 2021 at 14:43

Posted by: tonker (24059) 

Peter, the excess IS being shared by the members of the scheme. We're getting 4.3% rise in October!

Replied: 11th Jul 2021 at 14:58

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

Peter
This was your union’s position re surpluses when the industry was nationalised in 1994.

The Coal Industry was privatised in December 1994 and because of this contributing members of the BCSSS became deferred (preserved) members in the BCSSS.
On privatisation, the Government Guarantee was established and the BCSSS was split into four ‘Sub-funds’ as a result:
The Guaranteed Fund, which paid the pensions that members earned when contributing to the Scheme, including all the benefit improvements awarded before privatisation. These pensions, including annual increases, are fully guaranteed (Guaranteed Pensions).
The Bonus Augmentation Fund, made up of the 50% members’ share of surpluses after 1994. Benefits paid from this Sub-fund were usually awarded as bonuses, payable for life. However, they were not guaranteed and, if insufficient funds were available, they could be reduced (known as standstill).
The Guarantor’s Fund, was made up of the Government’s 50% share of the surpluses arising after 1994. These were paid to the Government over a 10 year period.
The Investment Reserve, made up of British Coal’s remaining share of the surplus in 1994. This was due to be repaid to the Government by 2019. The Investment Reserve has acted as a buffer which protects members’ bonuses and provides some protection for the Government having to make new contributions.

Replied: 11th Jul 2021 at 15:04

Posted by: whups (6968) 

it maybe 25th now but before we had to give half of our money away it certainly was 1 of the richest .the reason it has to look elsewhere after privation is because the torys were shutting down pits everywhere .

Replied: 11th Jul 2021 at 16:11

Posted by: broady (17302) 

Did Labour never close a pit? Why didn’t you transfer your pension to your new employer and carry on building up your pension?

Replied: 11th Jul 2021 at 17:46

Posted by: whups (6968) 

i did but under labour i sent it back into the MPS. yes labour did close pits but there was many more then & did,nt shut them in malice or spite like thatcher . did the torys ever shut building sites down .

Replied: 12th Jul 2021 at 01:32

Posted by: broady (17302) 

Shut building sites down? I worked on Pipelines. Never got shut down. Contract awarded, job finished, end of until the next one.Next time you switch you gas fire on just remember how the gas arrived there from the North Sea. If you have a car remember how the oil was sent to Stanlow and Carrington. I seem to remember figures showing Labour shut more pits than the Conservatives.

Replied: 12th Jul 2021 at 05:49

Posted by: gaffer (6862) 

Broady

Harold Wilson closed 253 in his two terms in office between 1964 and 1976; Ted Heath closed 26 between 1970 and 1974; and Margaret Thatcher closed 115 between 1979 and 1991

HW 31 pits per year of office.
TH. 6. “””””””””””””””””””””
MT. 10 “”””””””””””””””””””







Replied: 12th Jul 2021 at 11:24

Posted by: whups (6968) 

like i said labour never closed a pit because of spite & malice , unlike thatcher.

Replied: 12th Jul 2021 at 11:45

Posted by: Handsomeminer (1756)

They did broad y all pits come to the end of their lives Thatcher shut good pits

Replied: 12th Jul 2021 at 15:22

 

Note: You must login to use this feature.

If you haven't registered, why not join now?. Registration is free.