Most things in this country are changed on specific dates IE. my wife will now retire at 65 as she missed the the deadline by 4 months as would many other women, she also missed out on her firms redundancy scheme by 1 year and after 17 years service is about to be made redundant as the firm is closing and she will receive a pittance. I am self employed and when I retire no one will be giving me nothing that I have not worked for.
Why is it that you think the Armed Forces should be treated different to others, I feel that governments
of any party only look after the civil sector costing the country billions of pounds every year
I understand Graham's comment and his viewpoint.
But what must be remembered is that these people had their pay abated in reviews in light of the pension they might eventually receive. They never benefitted because they did not serve for 22 years.
Added to this for a few in this position there is a benefit paid. Those who left the services for the Post Office (now BT and Royal Mail) or the Civil Service do in fact receive pensions for these years.
We are talking in some cases about people who served in Korea, Malaya, Kenya and Aden. The country has a resposibility to these people. It has no responsibility to those who's pensions have collapsed in recent years but choses for political reasons to support (it is right to do so) but first it should fulfil its obligations to those who may have risked everything for their country.
Annotations
graham laverick
Posted on 5 Mar 2007 5:57 pm (Report this annotation)
Most things in this country are changed on specific dates IE. my wife will now retire at 65 as she missed the the deadline by 4 months as would many other women, she also missed out on her firms redundancy scheme by 1 year and after 17 years service is about to be made redundant as the firm is closing and she will receive a pittance. I am self employed and when I retire no one will be giving me nothing that I have not worked for. Why is it that you think the Armed Forces should be treated different to others, I feel that governments of any party only look after the civil sector costing the country billions of pounds every year
Ted Pillinger
Posted on 6 Jul 2007 1:04 pm (Report this annotation)
I understand Graham's comment and his viewpoint. But what must be remembered is that these people had their pay abated in reviews in light of the pension they might eventually receive. They never benefitted because they did not serve for 22 years. Added to this for a few in this position there is a benefit paid. Those who left the services for the Post Office (now BT and Royal Mail) or the Civil Service do in fact receive pensions for these years. We are talking in some cases about people who served in Korea, Malaya, Kenya and Aden. The country has a resposibility to these people. It has no responsibility to those who's pensions have collapsed in recent years but choses for political reasons to support (it is right to do so) but first it should fulfil its obligations to those who may have risked everything for their country.