- Reaction score
- 1,359
- Points
- 1,160
I would like to keep the Reserve Pension somewhat in the forefront. With all that is going on, especially the casualties, the opposition parties trying to make points, etc the subject is small potatoes. My son-in-law is in the sandbox for 9 months, possibly 12. He will be back in Nov or plus 3 months. He is in a FOB with the Romanians. I worry about him every day. His children are vacationing with us now, to give their Mum a break. Anyway.
As stated in a Jun post - "The buy back will be restricted to 35 years of Pensionable Service, which means from the date enrolled to the CIF date of the CFPMP. I always thought if would be calculated by adding up all your
Cl A, B, B"A", and C service and converting this into years of Paid CF Service as it is done now to a max of 35 years of Paid CF Service. The Pensionable Service formula means, for example, is that you take your best 5 years of salary, times 2%, times the number of days you were paid in one year, divided by 365 days. That would be your pension entitlement for that year. Add all your years of pension entitlement up (max 35 calender years) and that's your annual pension. For myself, the formula means a reduction of $8/9,000 per year of what I estimated all my service would equal as Paid CF Service. Do not forget, as a Cl A reserve the number of days you could parade have always been restricted, thus so has future pension contributions."
"Using the formula of CF Pensionable Service ( vice Paid CF Service as it is now) , 7% compound interest ( vice 4% simple interest as it is now), is really shoveling this at us. Add the adjustment to actual earnings by a WAGE ADJUSTMENTS to reflect increases in pay over the years, the increased contribution rates this year, and next year, buy back will be very expensive and the continued delay of CIF plus the 7% compound interest is just plain screwing us."
Even the civil servants in Ottawa currently doing buyback calculations are not aware of these changes. They are still quoting 4% simple interest, and adding all your time ( Cl A @ 1/4 time), divide by 365, equals years of Paid CF Service. Of course, this is the current regs. To me this proves the new buy back scheme is not to our advantage. If you are considering a CT to the Reg F, or have previous military, RCMP, or public service to buy back do it now or before Mar 07, other wise it will cost you.
To further indicate how much more it will cost you, consider the new WAGE ADJUSTMENT which is correctly called WAGE MEASURE on the CFPMP website. For an example as to how this works, see Q 11b, and Q 11c, including example 2 & 3 ( Here's how this might look) at the FAQ's on the website http://www.forces.gc.ca/hr/dgcb/cfpmp/engraph/faq_e.asp?sidesection=5&sidecat=17,and the CF Personnel Newsletter, Issue 5/06 at http://www.forces.gc.ca/hr/cfpn/engraph/5_06/5_06_e.asp. As a personal example, using the year 1989 which is shown in their examples, this is how it works (rounding off): Take the 5 most recent wage measures (2007-2003 ), add them up ($528) , times actual earnings ($43,000), equals $212784, then divide by 5 times the wage measure for 1989 ($254) equals $ 83770. Therefore instead of buying back $40300, I will be buying back $83770. That's at the increased contribution rates (for 2007) of 4.6% for everything under YMPE and 8.1% for everything over YMPE. Plus add 7% compound interest from 1989 to 2007. What I receive in a pension for 1989 is 2% of the best 5 years, divided by 365, times the number of paid days of service. So the contribution rate is greatly increased, but the pension received apparently is not.
The wage measure is based on the most populace rank in the CF: Cpl. But is this at Reg F pay scale or P Res? It was not until 1999 that our pay became 85% of Reg F, plus all the same pay incentives vice two incentives. If the formula is based on a Reg F Cpl, I think it is a disadvantage to a P Res buy back.
For P Res mbrs who have been KIA, if the Reserve Pension had CIF, and they had bought it back on the installment plan, on their death their beneficiary would have received a survivor pension of 50%. As they were killed on duty, the pension would have been considered paid up, with no further payments required. A great benefit, especially if there were children, which increases the benefit.
As stated in a Jun post - "The buy back will be restricted to 35 years of Pensionable Service, which means from the date enrolled to the CIF date of the CFPMP. I always thought if would be calculated by adding up all your
Cl A, B, B"A", and C service and converting this into years of Paid CF Service as it is done now to a max of 35 years of Paid CF Service. The Pensionable Service formula means, for example, is that you take your best 5 years of salary, times 2%, times the number of days you were paid in one year, divided by 365 days. That would be your pension entitlement for that year. Add all your years of pension entitlement up (max 35 calender years) and that's your annual pension. For myself, the formula means a reduction of $8/9,000 per year of what I estimated all my service would equal as Paid CF Service. Do not forget, as a Cl A reserve the number of days you could parade have always been restricted, thus so has future pension contributions."
"Using the formula of CF Pensionable Service ( vice Paid CF Service as it is now) , 7% compound interest ( vice 4% simple interest as it is now), is really shoveling this at us. Add the adjustment to actual earnings by a WAGE ADJUSTMENTS to reflect increases in pay over the years, the increased contribution rates this year, and next year, buy back will be very expensive and the continued delay of CIF plus the 7% compound interest is just plain screwing us."
Even the civil servants in Ottawa currently doing buyback calculations are not aware of these changes. They are still quoting 4% simple interest, and adding all your time ( Cl A @ 1/4 time), divide by 365, equals years of Paid CF Service. Of course, this is the current regs. To me this proves the new buy back scheme is not to our advantage. If you are considering a CT to the Reg F, or have previous military, RCMP, or public service to buy back do it now or before Mar 07, other wise it will cost you.
To further indicate how much more it will cost you, consider the new WAGE ADJUSTMENT which is correctly called WAGE MEASURE on the CFPMP website. For an example as to how this works, see Q 11b, and Q 11c, including example 2 & 3 ( Here's how this might look) at the FAQ's on the website http://www.forces.gc.ca/hr/dgcb/cfpmp/engraph/faq_e.asp?sidesection=5&sidecat=17,and the CF Personnel Newsletter, Issue 5/06 at http://www.forces.gc.ca/hr/cfpn/engraph/5_06/5_06_e.asp. As a personal example, using the year 1989 which is shown in their examples, this is how it works (rounding off): Take the 5 most recent wage measures (2007-2003 ), add them up ($528) , times actual earnings ($43,000), equals $212784, then divide by 5 times the wage measure for 1989 ($254) equals $ 83770. Therefore instead of buying back $40300, I will be buying back $83770. That's at the increased contribution rates (for 2007) of 4.6% for everything under YMPE and 8.1% for everything over YMPE. Plus add 7% compound interest from 1989 to 2007. What I receive in a pension for 1989 is 2% of the best 5 years, divided by 365, times the number of paid days of service. So the contribution rate is greatly increased, but the pension received apparently is not.
The wage measure is based on the most populace rank in the CF: Cpl. But is this at Reg F pay scale or P Res? It was not until 1999 that our pay became 85% of Reg F, plus all the same pay incentives vice two incentives. If the formula is based on a Reg F Cpl, I think it is a disadvantage to a P Res buy back.
For P Res mbrs who have been KIA, if the Reserve Pension had CIF, and they had bought it back on the installment plan, on their death their beneficiary would have received a survivor pension of 50%. As they were killed on duty, the pension would have been considered paid up, with no further payments required. A great benefit, especially if there were children, which increases the benefit.
