Reserve Pension- Merged

[kratz]

I learned my SHO is taking a proactive answer to provide assistance to Command by bringing in a SME to train all the clerks at once on the basics of completing the application process. The aim, is to better assist those members who qualify to elect buyback to make an informed decision if they want to or not.

As I understand it, it will NOT be our role to complete the application process for members, but to equip the SHO clerks with the ability to answer questions about the pension and buyback forms.

 

[AC 011]

It took about 23 months for me to get confirmation of the buyback amount, and 29 months to sort out all the details.  Depending on the complexity of your case, pension office workload, and the number of releases (as they get bumped to the top of the pile) your results may vary.

Well, it looks like I've got a good long wait in front of me.  Brings "working at the speed of government" to a whole new level.  They're taking the $5/month from me now as well, even though I indicated (and told them over the phone) that I want to do a lump sum RRSP transfer.  I notice that despite their assurances that this is an option, it's not listed (yet anyway) as an option on the method of payment form.

Isn't it a little late to be "streamlining" the process?  They should have done that a couple of years ago.

 

[dapaterson]

Remember:  For those eligible as of 01 Mar 07 (the date the new regulations came in force) the deadline to elect is 01 Mar 2010.

I say again:  Apply by 01 March 2010 to buy back or you lose the ability to do so.

If your information is incomplete apply anyways with the information you have.  That the online resources were unavailable for several months earlier this year is irrelevant.  Get your information as soon as possible and apply.

 

[Rifleman62]

And all the time you are waiting to be informed of how much you owe after you have elected, you are paying additional interest at an exorbitant rate.

Again I ask, if the CDS and other general officers know personally there are huge problems with the Reserve Pension, Why have they done nothing? I do know that the CDS and a couple of Reserve generals know the details.

The drop dead date of 1 Mar 10 can be extend if they really wanted to. After all how long did it take to CIF??

 

[dapaterson]

The challenge is that the deadline is embodied in the regulations, and regulatory amendments take a considerable length of time... as there is no hurry in government unless it's a political imperative, and has been clearly demonstrated in the past, there is no political imperative-  otherwise the two decades of pay records in RDS would not have been lost, the CIF would have taken less than 7 1/2 years, the interest rate would have been the 4% spelled out in the statute, the CF would obey the Privacy Act and not transfer files between directorates then claim the law does not apply...

In short, to be blunt, outside the Reserves no one cares - not politicians or senior military leadership.  Apparently, completing 2.7% of files in 13 months is an acceptable standard - as I don't know of anyone fired over it...

 

[Future Pensioner]

From the LFCA Comd's O Grp - 27 Sep 09:

To date 3600 applications to buy back former service for Reserve pensions have been received in Ottawa, of which 80 have been approved and processed. 

Is this a joke????  2 1/2 years since coming into force and only 80 applications have been processed????  How many people work there???  Can someone please provide me with any understanding as to why it takes so long and why they do not increase the staffing of the office???? 

 

[dapaterson]

I feel privileged, as one of the eighty.  I suspect this number is low, as thy were at 66 on 31 Mar 08.

However, their problem is not so much staffing as office space- they've maxxed out the capacity of their facilities, even runnning two shifts in the offices now.  But they aren't on the radar for more office space until mid-to-late 2010 - and thus cannot expand any further right now.

To say that this farce was poorly planned would be an understatement:

* Despite 1999 Royal Assent, no effort to preserve the RDS pay records until 2005;
* Despite 1999 Royal Assent, no benefits for soldiers killed prior to the Coming-Into-Force (look at the list of casualties in Afghanistan, and consider that the spouses of all Reservists killed prior to 01 Mar 07 receive no survivor's beenfits)
* Despite 1999 Royal Assent (more than a decade ago) staff are still not in place to handle this

 

[CountDC]

* Despite 1999 Royal Assent, no benefits for soldiers killed prior to the Coming-Into-Force (look at the list of casualties in Afghanistan, and consider that the spouses of all Reservists killed prior to 01 Mar 07 receive no survivor's beenfits)

No benefits?!?? Wow - I was in the dark on that one.  just did the dreaded and assumed they did.

I worked with a Col in the 90's that had worked on a reserve pension plan in the 70's so no surprise that things are taking so long.

 

[dapaterson]

To be eligible to elect, you must have been serving on the date of coming into force (CIF).  There were additional complications for soldiers who died after the CIF date but who had not yet elected - could their estate elect on their behalf?  Basic questions that had not been considered in the regulations.

For an idea of how many families may have been impacted by this, look at the list at http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/casualties/list.html and note any Reservists killed prior to 01 Mar 07.

Not a resounding success of staff planning on this one; add to that a generous dollop of moral failing on the part of the institution.

 

[CountDC]

To be eligible for the reserve pension plan but while serving in Afghan they would be on Class C with the same pay and benefits as regular force.  I would have thought that meant they paid into the same plans that I do and were entitled to the same benefits, including survivor.  I really have to read up more on the pension plan and Class C policies.

 

[dapaterson]

Unfortunately, the wording of the CFSA and its related regulations mean that Reservists on class C are not contributors to the CFSA part I by dint of being on class C service.

Pension plan eligibility for Reservists (in brief):

Part time plan (part I.1):  For two consecutive twelve month periods, have pensionable earnings equal to or greater than the Yearly Maximum Pensionable Earnings established for the CPP.  Once eligible, you may buy back your prior service

Full time plan (part I): have paid full-time service for 55 months in a 60 month period.  Once eligible, your prior service under part I.1 is transferred over.  You may elect to "top-up" your part I.1 election, paying the difference between the part I.1 constributions and those that would have been required under part I.1.  Once you are in Part I, you remain there; you cannot return to part I.1.

There are additional rules governing those with prior Regular Force service, particularly those in receipt of an annuity under part I of the Act.

(Note that I am writing this from memory.  Do not rely on postings on the internet.  Confirm details with reputable sources.)

 

[CountDC]

Wow - what a mess.  Did some searches and read through some stuff and found a mess under the old and new rules.  The reservist and regular force members going to Afghan really have to look close at the policy in effect.  A lot of the policies I thought would have covered the reservist prior to 97 actually use the term regular force and the argument would be they weren't regular force, they were Class C Reserves - screwed.

I did find one policy that hopefully the survivors were made aware of in CFAO 212-1 so that they could hopefully get some form of survivor benefit:

PENSION ACT

21.    The Pension Act should not be confused with the CFSA; they are not
related to each other and serve different purposes. The Pension Act is
non-contributory, and length of service is in no way a factor in
determining the amount of pension which may be awarded.

22.    The Pension Act, which is administered by the Canadian Pension
Commission, provides for the payment of pensions in respect of disability
or death.
23.    There are two distinct principles under which pensions may be granted:

    a.  The so-called "Insurance Principle" applies to members of the
          forces who served in time of war, or during service within a
          Special Duty Area (not in transit to or from), or in a theatre of
          operations. Awards of pension under the principle may be
          authorized not only for any disability or death "attributable to
          service" but also for any disability or death "incurred during
          service". Applications for pensions coming within this category
          may be made at any time.

    b.  The "Due to Service Principle" applies to members of the forces
          who served in peace time. Pensions under this principle may be
          awarded only for disability or death which arose out of or was
          directly connected with such service. It follows that a
          disability or death resulting from natural or accidental causes,
          which in no way arose out of or was connected with the
          individual's military service, would not be pensionable.
          Applications for pension entitlement under the "Due to Service
          Principle" can be entertained by the Commission only after the
          individual's release from the CF.

24.    The Act provides for the payment of compensation by way of pension in
accordance with the extent of the disability as found on medical
examination from time to time; additional pension is payable for
dependants. Provision is also made for the payment of pensions, at a fixed
rate, to the widows and dependant children of members of the CF who are
killed or who die while on service, if such death is related to service. In
certain instances, pensions may be awarded to the parents of a deceased
member of the CF and the amount awarded is discretionary, being governed by
statutory limitation and the degree of dependency. In exceptional cases, a
claim for pension may be considered for a dependent brother or sister.

25.    Pensions granted under this Act are not subject to income tax.

 

[Long in the tooth]

I have sympathy for all those waiting.  This pension was poorly thought out, badly conceived and oversold.  Mind you, expectations are way out of whack.  Noticed that someone is paying $5 a month (albeit expects to top up....).  This pension must be self funded as the reg F pension is.  After 25 years found out I had contributed over $140,000 for my princely sum of $2000 per month.  So if you're expecting anything near that, be prepared for the sticker shock.

 

[dapaterson]

Otto:

The Reg F pension isn't self-funded; the member contributions pay less than 40% of the amount required.

Think about your case: if you could earn 6% (a safe assumption), your $140K would generate $8400 per year - $15600 less than you're getting.

With another $210K from the Gov't of Canada, that's $350K - at 6%, that's $21000 per year - draw down the capital a bit as well, and you've got your $24000 per year.

 

[Long in the tooth]

Wrong!!! My contributions will be over 55%.  I have the printout.

 

[dapaterson]

Otto:

The math doesn't work for $140K to be 55% of the total.  That would suggest a total of $255K; at 6% that would pay out just under $24K per year for 16 years, then leave you with nothing.

(Admittedly, at age 65 there is the elimination of the top-up, but that should not have a huge impact).

I'm not certain where the 55% comes from, but it does not represent the proportion of your annuity that your $140K paid for.

 

[CountDC]

Just in case someone may be interested in doing it and has not been made aware.

CANFORGEN 180/09 211636Z OCT 09
INFORMATION REGARDING THE CANADIAN FORCES MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS MESSAGE IS TO INFORM EMPLOYEES THAT EFFECTIVE 1 MARCH 2007, EMPLOYEES CAN CONTRIBUTE TO BOTH THE PUBLIC SERVICE PENSION FUND (PSPF) AND THE CANADIAN FORCE PENSION FUNDS (CFPF) SIMULTANEOUSLY, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY ARE CONTRIBUTING UNDER PART I.1 OR UNDER PART I OF THE CANADIAN FORCES SUPERANNUATION ACT (CFSA).

6. RESPONSIBILITY OF EMPLOYEES: TO BECOME A CONTRIBUTOR OF THE PSSA AND A MEMBER OF THE DCP, EMPLOYEES MUST COMMUNICATE WITH THEIR COMPENSATION ADVISOR BEFORE 16 NOVEMBER 2009.

 

[J.J]

Count DC,
Thanks for the info. I may be having a blonde moment, but can you specify which Compensation Advisor one would speak to? The DND type or as in my case the CBSA employer type?

 

[begbie]

Just in case someone may be interested in doing it and has not been made aware.

CANFORGEN 180/09 211636Z OCT 09
INFORMATION REGARDING THE CANADIAN FORCES MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS MESSAGE IS TO INFORM EMPLOYEES THAT EFFECTIVE 1 MARCH 2007, EMPLOYEES CAN CONTRIBUTE TO BOTH THE PUBLIC SERVICE PENSION FUND (PSPF) AND THE CANADIAN FORCE PENSION FUNDS (CFPF) SIMULTANEOUSLY, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY ARE CONTRIBUTING UNDER PART I.1 OR UNDER PART I OF THE CANADIAN FORCES SUPERANNUATION ACT (CFSA).

6. RESPONSIBILITY OF EMPLOYEES: TO BECOME A CONTRIBUTOR OF THE PSSA AND A MEMBER OF THE DCP, EMPLOYEES MUST COMMUNICATE WITH THEIR COMPENSATION ADVISOR BEFORE 16 NOVEMBER 2009.

CountDC,

Unless the CANFORGEN is too long, can you post it in its entirety for us?  I'm out now and won't be able to access it the old fashioned way.  I'd like to see the whole document before I contact my compensation adviser. 

 

[CountDC]

not too long but I found this after I posted that bit.  Entire message posted on its own

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/89985.0.html