Train Drivers retirement age?

[Kev.]

Ok folks I have had a quick look through the forum and I can't find a answer to my query.

At what age do trian drivers have to retire. I have looked on the internet and found differing answers, with some say 60 and others saying 65.

Also, could the driver choose to carry on driving if he passed a medical to driver standards when he reaches the retirement age?

 

[Andy-mc]

depends on the company but it is usually between 60-65 but you don't have to take retirement and can keep going until you fail your medical if you wanted to, although some companies are starting to discuss having people retire at 65 to help open up more jobs for the younger generations.

 

[Bromley boy]

depends on the company but it is usually between 60-65 but you don't have to take retirement and can keep going until you fail your medical if you wanted to, although some companies are starting to discuss having people retire at 65 to help open up more jobs for the younger generations.

There's no longer a mandatory retirement age. Forcing people to retire at a particular age is unlawful in the U.K. as direct discrimination based on age, and rightly so in my view.

I'm aware of someone still driving in his 70s. The medical is the only limiting factor.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

In practice of course most drivers these days are more than happy to retire as soon as they are allowed to by whatever pension scheme they are in. Rates of pay having reached comfortable levels in recent years means pensions are generally comfortable too and after so many years of the variable, and sometimes extreme, shifts drivers are also more than ready to "put their feet up". There will always be exceptions but they tend to prove the rule.

 

[eriks]

depends on the company but it is usually between 60-65 but you don't have to take retirement and can keep going until you fail your medical if you wanted to, although some companies are starting to discuss having people retire at 65 to help open up more jobs for the younger generations.

They can discuss it as much as they want. However they would require the law to be changed to implement it.

 

[ComUtoR]

There will always be exceptions but they tend to prove the rule.

I have found at my TOC that it indeed more exception than rule. Many of our recent retirees have been the ex BR guys. Their pensions are quite a fair bit behind due to what happened during restructuring and their pensions have been a little lighter than expected. Especially if they didn't go into Brass or use the Brass matching scheme. You would need a BR Driver to confirm why and how their pensions are worse than expected.

My problem with retirement will be that I just won't get the 40yrs in. The penalty when you don't get the required number of years can be quite punitive.

 

[Greenback]

My problem with retirement will be that I just won't get the 40yrs in. The penalty when you don't get the required number of years can be quite punitive.

I think that is probably the bottom line for most people, train drivers or not. If they think they can't afford to retire, then they will carry on for as long as they can.

Having said that, the people that I know personally in the railway industry are all hoping that they can get out at their earliest chance, and that they will have enough of a pension to get by.

 

[ComUtoR]

I think that is probably the bottom line for most people, train drivers or not. If they think they can't afford to retire, then they will carry on for as long as they can.

Your're right about working past pension age. Those that can afford it make different decisions. My long term goal is early retirement. The second my mortgage is paid I'm out the door. I don't have debt and only have the mundane monthly bills. I'm more fortunate than some but less than others.

My plan is very different but still relies on the basic caveat of affordability. I'm also in Brass and I plan to restart my personal pension soon. (probably at the next pay deal) I'm a terrible saver and need to kick that part of the plan off at some point.

Its also worth noting that retirement age changes. Mine is XX but new starters have different ages on their plans. The state pension age is also slowly increasing so will also have an affect on whatever decision you make.

No mandatory retirement has been a blessing and a curse.

 

[Nuttytoffee]

Ours has gone from 60 to 62 but it varies with people. At my last depot one driver retired at 55 whilst recently two left when they hit 68.

 

[boom boom]

For existing staff it all depends when you joined your current pension scheme. If you joined before April 2006,you can retire anytime after 50.You take a hit from the years up to age 60 or 62.After that date it's 55.. For new starters now I think you can still retire at 55,but your retirement age is 65.So you take a ten year hit on your pension.
As regards working past 65 it all depends on the Employer Justified Retirement Age. At VTEC we are having a vote on this . If the employees vote that 65 is the retiral age,then that is it. VWC had their vote and 65 was voted. Several drivers over 65 had to come off the footplate. It is Aslef policy to have these votes in all TOCS

 

[greatkingrat]

Why would anyone vote in favour of such an age? I personally don't want to be working when I am 65, but equally I don't want to stop any of my colleagues doing so if they so wish.

 

[ComUtoR]

Why would anyone vote in favour of such an age? I personally don't want to be working when I am 65, but equally I don't want to stop any of my colleagues doing so if they so wish.

Why would ASLEF even support it.

Disgraceful.

 

[DarloRich]

For existing staff it all depends when you joined your current pension scheme. If you joined before April 2006,you can retire anytime after 50.You take a hit from the years up to age 60 or 62.After that date it's 55.. For new starters now I think you can still retire at 55,but your retirement age is 65.So you take a ten year hit on your pension.
As regards working past 65 it all depends on the Employer Justified Retirement Age. At VTEC we are having a vote on this . If the employees vote that 65 is the retiral age,then that is it. VWC had their vote and 65 was voted. Several drivers over 65 had to come off the footplate. It is Aslef policy to have these votes in all TOCS

I am not sure that would stand up in court if challenged - what are the legitimate aims the company is seeking to reach by imposing the ejrc?

I don't want to work till I am 90 but if I am fit and want to work beyond a certain age why not? I assume these guys were not made redundant but we're redeployed

 

[theironroad]

EJRA are certainly controversial.

I believe at the heart of the aslef position is a desire to open up jobs at the other end of the pipeline. Driver depot establishments are pretty fixed, so it needs someone to leave before a new recruit can enter the pipeline.

However I'm not sure aslef are acting in the interests of all their members here.

If a driver reaches 65 and has done 40 years and will get a full pension then there is an good argument to allow someone else a chance. However many drivers will never get 40 years or a full pension. They may have entered the job in their 40s coming from a job with no pension and they need to carrying on past 65 in order to get a decent pension to live on in retirement.

 

[Economist]

Given that the state pension age is going up to 67, I imagine mandatory retirement at 65 would be harsh unless the pension was very good. Out of interest, with regard to the 40 years, are those counted from when you joined the railway or when you pass out of training?

I do wonder if TOCs would take a qualified driver with a good safety record as a new entrant at 65. Funnily enough, BA used to have a mandatory retirement age of 55, which meant that Easyjet et al used to get loads of 55 year old direct entry captains!

 

[Bromley boy]

EJRA are certainly controversial.

I believe at the heart of the aslef position is a desire to open up jobs at the other end of the pipeline. Driver depot establishments are pretty fixed, so it needs someone to leave before a new recruit can enter the pipeline.

However I'm not sure aslef are acting in the interests of all their members here.

If a driver reaches 65 and has done 40 years and will get a full pension then there is an good argument to allow someone else a chance. However many drivers will never get 40 years or a full pension. They may have entered the job in their 40s coming from a job with no pension and they need to carrying on past 65 in order to get a decent pension to live on in retirement.

Yep I'm amazed and disappointed that ASLEF would support such a policy.

They're shafting the very members who've belonged to the union the longest and therefore contributed the most.

 

[455driver]

Yep I'm amazed and disappointed that ASLEF would support such a policy.

They're shafting the very members who've belonged to the union the longest and therefore contributed the most.

I am not really surprised, ASLEF has been working for ASLEF for years whether that is with or against its members wishes.

 

[GadgetMan]

The only slight issue I have is that some Drivers are taking their railway pension but continuing to work. This means that it's one less Driver paying into the scheme, multiply that by however many there are nationwide and it soon adds up to a fair chunk not going back into the pot.

 

[Bromley boy]

The only slight issue I have is that some Drivers are taking their railway pension but continuing to work. This means that it's one less Driver paying into the scheme, multiply that by however many there are nationwide and it soon adds up to a fair chunk not going back into the pot.

I don't really see how that's taking skin off anyone's nose. After all, it makes no difference to the scheme if they continue to work or not.

They're only receiving the pension they're entitled to, based on their historical contributions.

 

[GadgetMan]

I don't really see how that's taking skin off anyone's nose. After all, it makes no difference to the scheme if they continue to work or not.

They're only receiving the pension they're entitled to, based on their historical contributions.

I think you've misunderstood the point I was making. The money retiring Drivers put in isn't held for them, they are paid from the contributions currently being made by working staff in the scheme. So when they take their pension but continue to hold that Driving position then its one less member of staff contributing (admittedly its a tiny sum) into the grand cashpot, therefore less staff financially sustaining the scheme. The TOC also then don't have to contribute their 60% share for those staff.

One or two Drivers nationally makes no difference, but if the number opting to do the above continues to increase then it will hurt the scheme.

It wasn't a dig at Drivers taking advantage of the options available to them.

 

[Bromley boy]

I think you've misunderstood the point I was making. The money retiring Drivers put in isn't held for them, they are paid from the contributions currently being made by working staff in the scheme. So when they take their pension but continue to hold that Driving position then its one less member of staff contributing (admittedly its a tiny sum) into the grand cashpot, therefore less staff financially sustaining the scheme. The TOC also then don't have to contribute their 60% share for those staff.

One or two Drivers nationally makes no difference, but if the number opting to do the above continues to increase then it will hurt the scheme.

It wasn't a dig at Drivers taking advantage of the options available to them.

On the basis they're taking up a job whilst no longer contributing to the scheme, I can see your point.

 

[SkinnyDave]

Just a quick?
Would I be able to go down to part time hours or job share at say 60 (if available) and defer my pension at that point or would my pension then be based on the part time salary when I decided to draw it?
I know guys that take part time and enjoy a good salary and their pension but their tax bill is through the roof!

 

[greatkingrat]

Pension calculations always use the full-time salary, it is just that you accrue pension slower if you are part-time. So someone who worked a year doing 17.5 hours (instead of 35), would accrue 6 months of pension, because they are only working half the normal hours.

So while you could opt out, you would probably be better off continuing to contribute, even if you were working part time.