Merging Local Government and NHS Pensions

Burnley_Lad

I am now working for the NHS, following several years of working for Local Government.

This means that I know have two separate pensions.

Is it possible to merge the two pensions into one? If so, are there any penalties/anything else I should look out for?

Thanks!

xylophone

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4594081 might be worth a look?

jem16

Burnley_Lad wrote: »

Is it possible to merge the two pensions into one?

Yes it is. Both are Public Sector pensions so can be transferred under the Public Sector Transfer Club. More about this here.

http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/pensions/transfer-club

If so, are there any penalties/anything else I should look out for?

There are no specific penalties but there are things to look out for.

1. Salary - are you now on a greater or smaller salary? Are your prospects, salary wise, better?

2. Retirement age - is it the same or different?

3. Benefits in general - are they the same or any major differences with the 2 schemes?

Basically you need to weigh up what you get with both schemes and then look to see if it's better just leaving the LGPS as a deferred pension or transferring it. Having 2 pensions isn't a huge problem.

Teaandscones

There is a new factor to take into account as of today!

This is that the government has announced that the next NHS pay award will NOT be pensionable. This is a further reason to leave your LGPS fund where it is as it will get CPI inflation.

hyubh

Teaandscones wrote: »

This is that the government has announced that the next NHS pay award will NOT be pensionable.

Reference...?

greenglide

hyubh wrote: »

Reference...?

Here on BBC http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-26556047

Andy_L

greenglide wrote: »

Here on BBC http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-26556047

Only the 1% pay rise for those who aren't getting a pay-progression rise (ie those at the top of the scale) is non-pensionable

greenglide

Andy_L wrote: »

Only the 1% pay rise for those who aren't getting a pay-progression rise (ie those at the top of the scale) is non-pensionable

True but you would hope that the majority of staff would be at or near the top of their scale. In the real world (which this is nowhere) pay progression should be when people are making true progression, mainly at the bottom?

Where I work we have a large number of ex Civil Servants (they were outsourced and still have TUPE rights) and they keep on complaining that they are all at or over the maximum and the pay progression has been stopped by the employer anyway!

Flugelhorn

those of us who are due to get the 1% can see that in a few years time it will be more and more of our pay that is non pensionable..

hyubh

Andy_L wrote: »

Only the 1% pay rise for those who aren't getting a pay-progression rise (ie those at the top of the scale) is non-pensionable

Genuine question - how could this be done within the scheme rules?

2.A.8 Meaning of “pensionable pay”

(1) In this Part, subject to the following provisions of this regulation, “pensionable pay” means all salary, wages, fees and other regular payments made to a person in respect of employment in which the person is an active member of the Scheme.

[...]

(3) “Pensionable pay” does not include—
(a) bonuses,
(b) payments made to cover expenses, or
(c) payments for overtime.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/653/pdfs/uksi_20080653_en.pdf

kidmugsy

Burnley_Lad wrote: »

I am now working for the NHS, following several years of working for Local Government.

This means that I know have two separate pensions.

The public finances are in ruins: the Coalition may have stopped matters getting a lot worse but they've not reversed them. So unless the day is saved by, for instance, antibiotic-resistant bacteria culling the old, pensioners of all sorts can expect to come under considerable fiscal pressure. It's just about conceivable that penalties will be exacted from those with a pension or prospective pension above £x p.a. There might then be an advantage in having two pensions rather than one. It's a long shot, but on the other hand it's just a special case of a (potential) advantage of diversification. In other words, if there is a clear advantage at the moment in moving your pension, go ahead. But if it looks finely balanced, hesitate.