Matthew Pinkney
@matthewpinkney.bsky.social
Pensions scheme actuary/ Head of Pensions Data Solutions at Aon, based in Leeds/Guiseley. Bradford City fan. Alumnus of Queen's college Oxford.
This is a personal account reflecting my own views.
This is a personal account reflecting my own views.
Under the status quo people get back-payments to 60 (according to the article). Presumably the suggestion is that there would be no back-payments but instead an uplifted annual pension, set in a way that is cost neutral. Member receives same expected benefit but spread rather than a one-off lump sum
April 28, 2025 at 4:57 PM
Under the status quo people get back-payments to 60 (according to the article). Presumably the suggestion is that there would be no back-payments but instead an uplifted annual pension, set in a way that is cost neutral. Member receives same expected benefit but spread rather than a one-off lump sum
That's "long running"
January 19, 2025 at 6:53 PM
That's "long running"
Yes this seems valid. I am doubtful of both the PHSO decision AND the Government decision to ignore it! Not sure if two wrongs make a right...
December 17, 2024 at 8:08 PM
Yes this seems valid. I am doubtful of both the PHSO decision AND the Government decision to ignore it! Not sure if two wrongs make a right...
I want to say something to support my view that the WASPI argument seems wrong to me, but this particular aspect does seem troubling..!
December 17, 2024 at 7:40 PM
I want to say something to support my view that the WASPI argument seems wrong to me, but this particular aspect does seem troubling..!