Has BTT improved your life in the Office?
Dear colleagues,
The so-called Bringing Teams Together (BTT) project is already showing its negative effects on many staff. Flexibility with regards to working mainly at home and/or abroad, as desired by a significant number of colleagues, should have allowed a reasonable reduction in office space without interfering in our daily work. However, the haste with which BTT has been implemented, and the excessive reduction in office space (through the closure in Munich of Pschorr Bauteile V-VII and floors 6 to 8 of Bauteile I-IV) which has been pushed through by the administration, are already causing significant problems to many colleagues, in particular those who have not been allocated a permanent office despite working in the Office premises three (or even four!) days per week. Many of these colleagues now feel like second-class employees who feel that their connection to their team, close colleagues and the Office in general will be negatively impacted.
In order to produce a more complete picture of what is happening, we kindly ask you to spend a couple of minutes of your time to answer (at least some of) the following questions – [redacted]:
How much time have you lost because you had to empty your permanent office (and set up a new one, if relevant)?
On a weekly basis, how much time do you lose with booking, finding and setting up an office for the day?
Which problems do you encounter when using an office for the day?
Has BTT improved or degraded your team dynamics?
Are you happy that BTT is being implemented?
Do you have any other problems to report? Or any other comments?
Thank you for your help!
Inward transfer of pension rights from the United Kingdom
Dear colleagues,
According to Article 12 Pension Regulations, an employee who enters the service of the Office may arrange for payment to the Office, in accordance with the Implementing Rules hereto, of any amounts corresponding to the retirement pension rights accrued under his previous pension schemes, provided that those schemes allow such transfers to be made.
In this letter, we seek the administration’s assistance in clarifying the status of the possibility of transferring pension rights from the United Kingdom, by asking them some questions.
In our view, it is in the best interest of the EPO and of staff to allow as many inward transfers of pensions as possible. Indeed, we can be proud of the work of, and the trust given by staff to its pension and fund management teams.
If your request for inward transfer from the UK has been rejected / was not possible, please get in touch with us at [redacted]
Reference: sc23062cl Date: 25/05/2023
Mr Jan Boulanger Director HR Essential Services
By email OPEN LETTER
Inward transfer of pension rights from the United Kingdom
Dear Mr Boulanger,
According to Article 12 Pension Regs, an employee who enters the service of the Office may arrange for payment to the Office, in accordance with the Implementing Rules hereto, of any amounts corresponding to the retirement pension rights accrued under his previous pension schemes, provided that those schemes allow such transfers to be made.
We would like to seek your assistance in clarifying the status of the possibility of transferring pension rights from the UK. Indeed, for a certain period, HR seemed to have informed new colleagues that a transfer of pension rights from the UK was not possible, and requests for transfer from the UK national pension system, HMRC, were not accepted. However, according to the EPO Intranet (dated 9 September 2022), transfers from the UK are now possible:
In the following our questions on this topic:
1. It seems that the EPO's new pension scheme appeared for some time on the list of Recognised Overseas Pension Schemes (ROPS) of HMRC. Apparently, the EPO’s new pension scheme does not appear in the current list available online today. At least until 2015, the pension fund of the EPO was a ROPS. Apparently, the EPO’s new pension scheme has been classified again as a ROPS, allegedly in or around 2019, and still holds this status. Can you confirm this information?
2. What was the reason why transfers of pension rights from the UK were not possible for some time? Do the reasons concern the severance grant and the fact that funds transferred from the UK to the EPO can theoretically be paid out to EPO staff in the first 10 years of service and aged below 55? (This would collide, in our understanding, with some UK regulations.)
3. What types of pension rights (e.g., 1st or 2nd pillar) can be transferred today from the UK?
4. For what periods since 2012 has a transfer of pension rights from the UK not been possible, and for what reasons?
5. Because of the re-classification mentioned above, transfers of pension rights from the UK have been theoretically possible since around 2019. Has this been announced on the EPO Intranet? Can colleagues request a retroactive transfer of pension rights from the UK in case their time limit for application (Rule 12.1/1 (vi) (a)) fell in the period when a transfer was not possible? (Rule 12.1/1 (vi) (b))
6. Since 2019, have there been any transfers of pension rights from the UK?
7. Will it be possible for future newcomers to transfer pension rights from the UK?
8. Is there any written agreement on pension transfers between the EPO and HMRC? If yes – has it been made public?
We assume that we can all agree that it is in the best interest of the EPO and of staff to allow as many inward transfers of pensions as possible. Indeed, we can be proud of the work of, and the trust given by staff to its pension and fund management teams.
We remain available for any clarification on the questions. Thank you very much for your assistance.
Yours sincerely,
Alain Dumont Chairman of the Central Staff Committee
"The whole scenario was never pretty and it has taken an ugly turn given the degree/extent of facilitation elsewhere in the British system."As one who had several ordeals with pension fraud (and my colleagues also, including my wife) we're going to cover pension issues for months to come; the corruption goes all the way up to the top. Politicians are now looking into our cases. It's not just money at stake (civil aspect) but also jailing of management (crimes were committed). The system is awfully slow, but the slowness too won't deter us and that too is an aspect worth exposing. Why has it taken 6 months already despite us going (almost) as fast as feasible? Anyway, we have a detailed list of steps to come. If some culprits end up hanging themselves before they're jailed, they only have themselves to blame. The whole scenario was never pretty and it has taken an ugly turn given the degree/extent of facilitation elsewhere in the British system. I lost all confidence in it (at every legal level). As I said repeatedly months ago, the British pension schemes are somewhat of a scam and I strongly urge people to verify, not trust anything. That's based on months of investigations I did, including lengthy phone inquiries with high-level managers at large pension funds. I repeat: trust nothing (even on paper) and constantly verify the facts. It's possible that scams had gone on for decades before you even found out about it, with constant evasions used to reinforce a false sense of security/assurance.
"They're playing with people's money -- money that they do not have themselves. It's all speculative."This is no laughing matter; amid war in Europe (yes, Ukraine is part of Europe) and collapsing financial systems (yes, it's worse than the media admits) one must not assume that the pension is "still there" -- regardless of any likely-empty assurances given by those who gamble with this money ("investing" in companies with fictional valuation -- a Ponzi scheme of sorts). EPO workers must never forget what EPOTIF is about and, given the growing connection/s to the ECB and EU (e.g. the UPC and EUIPO), questions must be asked. Answers are needed too; non-answers are smoke if not fire. If thousands of EPO workers (past and present) take out hundreds of millions in UK pensions (perhaps over a billion) it can break entire companies. They're playing with people's money -- money that they do not have themselves. It's all speculative. ⬆