Member Satisfaction Survey Results - Home page DB Plan

REXAM PENSION PLAN
Analysis of Member Satisfaction Questionnaire
issued with Report to Members 2012
21,160 Member Satisfaction Questionnaires were issued to home addresses with Report to
Members in September 2012. Separate section for each category of membership and 2 month
return end date. Pre-paid return envelope enclosed and also option to submit online available.
An initial Section for completion by ALL members obtained general information; age; gender;
overseas resident; employment history with the group, use of internet and Plan website. This Section
also enquired about the experience encountered upon initial and last contact with the Pensions
Department via all communication methods and whether any had ever had cause to complain.
The member was then directed to the relevant section for their membership category. These sections
concentrated on the communication documents received from the Pensions Department, as well as
the information gathering and pension payment experience for pensioners.
Feedback was welcomed with space for comments or suggestions. The questionnaire retained
anonymity.
Not all sections were completed by everyone and approx 20 returned were partially completed
and did not have sufficient information for the analysis (generally due to the recipient being a
widow(er) and so feeling the Questionnaire was not relevant). This is
reflected in the analysis numbers.
OVERALL RETURNS 2,362 (2,346 postal, 16 online)
An encouraging return rate of 11.1%
(0.2% employee members, 9.2% pensioners, 1.7% deferred members)
SUMMARY of responses for combined membership
• Feedback from all categories of membership was extremely positive.
• The Rexam Pension Plan service and communications is rated highly in comparison to other
schemes our members are associated with.
• Over 90% provided ratings for the service received upon Contact (initial and last contact
with Department).
o Less than 2% of these rated Poor on the Contact they had received.
o These mainly referred to Speed and Quality of response, rather than Politeness.
o 4 Deferred members referred to impolite personnel on first contact (all of which reported
to be more than 5 years ago)
• Complaints to the Pensions Department are few (28 noted, which included several
pensioners complaints to the lack of discretionary pension increase).
• Employee members
o Value face to face and onsite contact and think this is important when coming up for
retirement.
o Over 20% of respondees do not read Pension Noticeboard Announcements.
Member Q Analysis – Summary 1 16 May 2013

• Deferred members
o Would value a regular statement providing an update of their pension (regularity varied
between yearly, every 2 years and every year within 5 years of retirement.) This appears
to be something received from other Pension schemes. Should contain projections, an
idea of spouse’s benefit upon death and transfer values.
o Whilst the deferred letter upon ceasing employment was well received, a number
provided suggestions to what they thought was missing.
o Main reasons for contact was for change of address
o Electronic communication is becoming a wider acceptance, particularly for Deferreds.
• Pensioners
o 16.6% of returned their questionnaires, more than doubling the response to the 2007
communication questionnaire.
o Many expressed their disappointment to the lack of increases and related communication
– asking why and whether there will be any future increases
o A high proportion still do not have internet access
o Would benefit from receiving a statement providing spouse’s benefits.
o Wish to see news in Orbiter relating to their previous companies
o Main reasons for contact were unsurprisingly for Tax queries, change of address, bank
details or upon the death of a spouse.
o Responses to the Information gathering upon attaining retirement age was also positive,
with just a handful feeling the information wasn’t all gathered at the same time or feeling
their first instalment wasn’t paid in an acceptable time
• Plan website is a useful reference tool, but could be made more engaging/interactive and
provide individual forecast information in line with other pension websites.
• Regular Communications
o The overall opinion is that continued informative communication is important, but to be
mindful of the impression numerous communication and production of publications can
give as a message to the receiver in today’s economic climate.
o Important to provide, what can be a difficult subject involving technical jargon, in clear
and simple layman terms
Recommended actions from the Questionnaire results
General Communications
o Alternative communication method to Employee members in addition to Noticeboard
Announcements
o Consider the retirement process for actives including site pre-retirement clinic or face to face
meetings at retirement.
o Retain paper based communication, although look to develop website and additional wider
electronic communication so more engaging, particularly for Deferreds
o Important to avoid technical jargon when drafting communications
o Revise publications and reformat following suggestions in the Questionnaire (ie Orbiter/
Report to Members - articles based on requested features/more white space for clearer text)
More Personal Communication
o Deferred statements providing update of pension, projections, spouse’s benefit and transfer
values.
o Consider providing spouse’s benefit information to pensioners.
o Although a minority response in negative terms, Speed and Quality on Telephone and Letter
responses could be improved.
A more detailed analysis of the responses received, broken down by each
category of membership, follows:
Member Q Analysis – Summary 2 16 May 2013

ACTIVE EMPLOYEE MEMBERS - 538
Returned 48 (47 postal, 1 online)
• 1 overseas member
• 33 Males and 15 Females responded
• Age ranges = 1 in 20s, 4 in 30s, 18 in 40s, 15 in 50s, 4 in 60s and 1 aged in their 70s
First Contact with Pensions Department
• Initial contact was made by members going as far back as 1973, 31 throughout the 80s and
90s with 22 during the 2000s.
• Of the Initial Contact Telephone responses (22), Letter (18) and Email (8), regarding Speed,
Quality and Politeness. All positive V Good to Good with a couple of Oks for each, apart
from 1 Telephone Quality rated as Poor*.
• *The 1 Poor entry related to Telephone Quality, when asking about AVCs, all they received
was a brochure.
Last Contact
• Only 32 added the date they last contacted the Pensions Department. 1 active member’s last
contact made was in 1984, 3 were during the 1990s, the rest were during 2000s, with the
majority of those last being in contact in 2011 (8) and 2012 (13)
• Of the Last Contact Telephone responses (22), Letter (14) and Email (18), regarding Speed,
Quality and Politeness. Telephone mainly Very Good, then Good, 2 Oks in each and 1 Poor
rating for both Speed and Quality. Letters were positive V Good, Good with 2 Oks in all
areas; Emails were predominately V Good, then Good with 1 OK in each area.
Complaints
• 1 had had cause to complain in the last 12 months regarding AVC change. They expected
better support and advice and felt the Department does not recognise that people do not have
good understanding of pensions.
Internet
• 6 employees do not have internet access
• 33 have not visited Plan website
• Of the 14 that said they had visited the Plan website, 1 felt it wasn’t clear and didn’t provide
the information they were looking for, (ie clarity on the retirement process, what they will
receive and when entitled to a pension).
• 14 confirmed they use social media
• 2 believe the frequency of our communications is Too Much, whereas the rest Enough.
Booklet/Benefit Statement/Noticeboard Announcements
• 6 indicated they do not have access to the Employee Booklet. All those that do say it is Clear
and Understandable.
• 1 employee (aged 39) does not read their benefit statement
• 3 do not feel the benefit statement is clear enough
• 1 does not think the Noticeboard Announcements are clear and 10 do not read the
Noticeboard Announcements at all
Report to Members
• 5 do not read the Report to Members
• 4 do not think the Report to Members is clear
• 1 feels the Report to Members is missing details on the retirement process
Other comments
• 4 general comments
o More of a personal touch for individuals coming up for retirement
o More clarity on the retirement process, amount received and when.
o Concern over health of the Plan so this shown clear and simply would be good
o 1 added how they really liked the annual benefit statement and format
Member Q Analysis – Active Employee members 3 16 May 2013

DEFERREDS 8,893
Returned 361 (355 postal, 6 online)
• 16 overseas
• Of the members who entered their Gender, 266 were Male, 91 Female
• Age ranges, 13 were in their 30s, 37 in 40s, 158 in 50s and 264 were in their 60s
• Business categories – 119 as former Paper employees, 50 Plastic, 29 Packaging, 30
Glass/Redfearn 22 PLC/Corporate and 20 from Cans/ANC, the remainder identified
themselves in the OTHER category.
First Contact with Pensions Department
• Earliest initial contact was made by 2 members in 1972. 8 others made contact in 1970s, 27
during 1980s and 66 during the 90s. Majority (141) have made contact during the 2000s,
with 105 of those being since 2006.
• Over 96% positively rated the responses for the Initial Telephone and Letter Contact, and over
95% for Email. The Poor ratings related mainly to Speed and Quality rather than Politeness.
• 85 additional comments received relating to First Contact:
o Over 80% of these remarked on the reason for the contact (ie address change) and also
the efficiency of the response/staff.
o 10% contact was made via a financial manager/Company on their behalf
o 4 referred to impolite personnel. These were noted in 1984, 1990, 2001 and 2006
o The remainder expressed their dissatisfaction with the response given
Last Contact
• 1 deferred last made contact in 1982, the rest were during 90s (21) and 2000 (222). The
majority of these were in the last five years (2008 =16, 2009 =24, 2010 =29, 2011=37
with 70 last contacting the Pensions Department in 2012).
• Over 97% positively rated the responses for their Last Telephone Contact with the Department.
• Over 95% were more than happy with their Letter and Email Contact. The Poor ratings
related mainly to Speed of response for all categories and Quality and Politeness for
Telephone and Letter contact.
Complaints
• 9 deferred members had cause to complain (2 within last 12 months, 5 within the last 5
years), additional comments received on the complaints covered
o Negative comments towards staff attitude
o Incorrect figures
o Unsatisfactory response or having to chase
o Pension not paid into bank caused overdrawn charge
Internet
• 282 said they have internet access, whereas 6 do not
• 50 had visited our Plan and all but 3 thought it was clear and understandable and provided
the information they were seeking
• Just 3 comments were received under information missing on the website and these related to
availability of individual forecast information online and exclusion data and policy
• 78 confirmed they use social media, 232 do not
• 283 feel the frequency of our communications is Enough, 4 believe it is Too Little whilst
another 4 feel it’s Too Much.
Member Q Analysis – Deferred 4 16 May 2013

Ceasing employment
• 50% of all who responded to the date their employment ceased, became deferred members
in the 1990s with the other half ceasing in 2000s
• 38 members did not think the deferred benefit letter received at the time of ceasing
employment was clear, 33 provided comments to what was missing. 80% commented on
either not receiving a letter or can’t remember receiving one, the remainder felt the following
was missing
o Accurate projection
o Size of widow’s pension as a %
o Details of why it was transferred to us.
o Rights, future planning, transfer data
o Clear indication of options available
o More detail on deferred status
• 32 of our deferred members who responded do not read Report to Members
• 26 who do read Report to Members do not understand it and 18 of those provided comments
to what they thought was missing
o Over half of them related to personal impact. ie what does it mean to the individual
member.
o Additional requests to receive personal statements
o Remainder related to more clarity, there is too much legal type/more layman’s terms
Other comments from Deferred members
Many used this section to reiterate their satisfaction with the service and communications they
received and hoping it continues. Of the 65 general comments received;
o Several requested the deferred pension letter they never received
o Over a third asked for either a yearly, 2 yearly (or every year within 5 years of
retirement) statement of pension benefits and transfer value.
o A number wanted clarity on when they can take their pension or had questions relating
to their personal circumstances
o Request for log on details to access pension online
o Request for more background information on Company/Trustees
o Compliment that each section of the questionnaire is a different colour as member
Dyslexic.
o 2 requests for a more personal and consultative approach
o And one stating it ‘would be nice if active contributors were actually on this planet’!
Member Q Analysis – Deferred 5 16 May 2013

PENSIONERS - 11,729 Returned 1,953 (1,934 post, 19 online)
• 16.6% of pensioners returned their questionnaires. More than doubling the response to the
2007 communication questionnaire.
• 117 from overseas
• Ages 29 aged below 50, 547 in their 60s, 634 in 70s, 477 in 80s and 64 are in their 90s.
Eldest to submit is 101yo
• Gender responses 1364 Male, 532 Female
• From a mixture of previous business categories, but the majority having worked for
Print/Paper Group with high responses from former employees of Plastics, Packaging, ANC,
Glass and Corporate.
First Contact with Pensions Department
• Initial contact was made by members going as early as 1948. Steady contact throughout the
70s and 80s with majority’s first contact was made late 90s and early 2000s.
• Over 99% positively rated their responses for Speed, Quality and Politeness for all 3 means of
contact. The Poor ratings related mainly to Speed and Quality for Telephone and Letter
contact with a couple rating Politeness in all categories as Poor.
• 354 pensioners added general comments on the first contact. Over 94% were highly
complementary of the service. Several expressed their gratefulness for the sensitivity received
at the time of being widow(er)ed. A few mentioned contact was via the Company and the
only 3 negative comments related to incorrect information being provided leading to ‘wrong’
decision on acceptance of redundancy, 2 month delay receiving first payment and no
consideration given to enhancement for impaired life.
Last Contact
• 1 pensioner last contacted the Pensions Department in 1944, 3 during the 60s, 33 in the 80s,
27 in the 90s and 968 during 2000s, with the majority being over the last 3 years.
• Over 99% positively rated the responses for their Last Telephone, Letter and Email Contact
with the Department. The few Poor ratings related mainly to Telephone and Letter Speed and
Quality of responses.
• Over 98% of the additional comments received regarding last contact were complimentary on
the efficiency of the service received. Tax queries, change of address, bank details or upon
the death of a spouse appears to be the main reason for contact. A couple referred to lack of
response or action.
Complaints
• 18 pensioners had cause to complain (6 in last 12 months, 5 within the last 5 years and 7
had a complaint more than 5 years ago)
o Several regarding the lack of increases in the last few years and reference to other
pension schemes providing increases.
o Lack of communication provided regarding there being no Discretionary payments
o Incorrect figures advised
o Delay (2 months) receiving first payment
o Underpayment – subsequently received apology and back payment
o Payslip error – promptly put right
o
o
Not meeting Trustee criteria for ill health pension
Department’s refusal to provide information of a pensioner’s colleague (later
discovered to have died)
Member Q Analysis – Pensioners 6 16 May 2013

Internet
• 803 said they have internet access, whereas 971 do not
• 143 had visited our Plan and all said it was clear and understandable. 1521 had not visited
• 4 comments were received under information missing on the website
o Any listing of additional benefits
o Just a marketing website
o Payslip
o Site was ‘down’
• 139 confirmed they use social media, 1422 do not
• 1467 feel the frequency of our communications is Enough, 32 believe it is Too Little whilst 9
feel it’s Too Much.
Information gathering (certificates, etc)
• 5 Pensioners who responded have been receiving their pensions since 1950s, 13 since the
60s, 26 since the 70s, 184 since 80s, 626 received their pension in 1990s and 856 in
2000s. 79 of those were new pensioners last year
• 1564 thought the request for information gathering was clear, 10 did not
• 1554 thought forms for gathering information were clear, 14 did not
• 1485 confirmed all the information was gathered at the same time, 19 felt it was not of which
the 18 comments received on this related to
o AVCs
o Lost paperwork
o Information from ex-spouse
o Additional Medical information
o Documentary evidence of DOB & employment location
o Confusion to the pension payable/not being paid in full
First pension instalment
• 11 did not feel the first payment was made in an acceptable time
• 11 (not all the same as above) also felt it wasn’t clear when pension payments are made
Report to Members
• 128 pensioners do not read the Report to Members
• 39 that do read the Report to Members do not think it is clear
• 109 feels the Report to Members is missing details and 13 comments received on details
thought to be missing from the Report
o If funds available will allow discretionary pension increases
o Information about former Companies (Bowater Scott)
o Actual rate of increase
o Pension increases affected by State benefit
o Benefits upon death/spouse pension
o Web address!
o Easier to understand/less jargon
o AVCs
o Would like updating on Government change in pension term etc
Member Q Analysis – Pensioners 7 16 May 2013

Orbiter
• 219 do not read Orbiter and of those that do, 71 do not think it is Clear and Understandable
• 406 pensioner do not feel Orbiter is relevant. Judging by several comments on the
questionnaire this high number may relate to the individual being the spouse of former
member and so no direct association with the Company
• 78 feel information is missing from Orbiter and the following are from 28 additional comments
provided relating to Orbiter
o Over half wish to see their old company mentioned/ information about their former
company ie what happened to it/ news of former colleagues
o Website for past employees
o Actual rate of increase at time known
o Assurance pension is safe
o Profile in each issue of a main board member
o Request for larger publication
o Information re current products/where we are now/performance
o Publish notice of deaths of pensioners
o certain colours on certain backgrounds are difficult to read with poor eyesight.
Payslips
• 12 do not think their payslips are Clear and Understandable
• 67 feel their last payslip was missing certain details. 14 comments received to this effect
relating to
o Detailed build-up of pension increases
o Several regarding not received a payslip recently
o No information regarding the freezing of April 2012 pension
o Had to obtain P60 information by phone
o US taxes need a calendar year statement
o Web address
o Why deduct small amount of tax, but HM then send a refund cheque year’s full amount
o Payslip more often or access to payslip information online.
General comments from Pensioners
478 added comments within this section. 390 used this section to express their satisfaction for the
service received.
• A number were appreciative of the fact the Department tracked them down from unknown
addresses to receive their pension.
• Those comparing Rexam to their other associated pension schemes rated Rexam higher
• 4 indicated they were registered blind and had our communications read to them.
• Several requests for an idea of spouse’s benefits on death /calculation method’s
• A number referred to the Equitable Life AVC compensation scheme requesting more updates
• Suggestions towards our communications/publications or requested information/clarification
for their individual circumstance.
Other comments from pensioners
Within this additional section, as well as pensioners reiterating their entries within the Questionnaire
and requesting information/explanations to their own personal circumstances, 6 Negative
comments were added; 2 relating to the lack of discretionary increases, the other 4 relating to this
Questionnaire/our printed publications.
Member Q Analysis – Pensioners 8 16 May 2013