Public Sector Pension Reform In Trouble?

CruisingSaver

nigelbb wrote: »

I joined the NHS pension scheme in 2014 & despite being within five years of retirement did not qualify for full or tapered protection so was transferred from the 2008 scheme with 1/60 accrual to the 2015 scheme at 1/54 accrual so I'm actually better off with the newer scheme & intend to work for a few more years yet.

I don't intend on working until my SPA and as the 2008 section had a retirement age of 65 the actuarial reduction fits better with my retirement plans as I'll be able to retire earlier.

Oliver1191

I'm in the teachers' pension. Have been for about 11 years.

I purchased some faster accrural and additional pension benefit...i wonder how that will be affected...

sammyjammy

Oliver1191 wrote: »

I'm in the teachers' pension. Have been for about 11 years.

I purchased some faster accrural and additional pension benefit...i wonder how that will be affected...

Don't know if its the same but for anyone that joined Civil Service post 2007 this will have no impact at all as they were never on the old pension scheme that enabled staff to retire at 60 on a Final salary pension. I would imagine its similar with Teachers.

hugheskevi

Don't know if its the same but for anyone that joined Civil Service post 2007 this will have no impact at all as they were never on the old pension scheme that enabled staff to retire at 60 on a Final salary pension. I would imagine its similar with Teachers.

That is not correct.

Those joining between 2007 and 2015 joined the nuvos pension scheme, a career average scheme with a normal pension age of 65.

This group have experienced unlawful age discrimination in exactly the same way as members of final salary schemes with normal pension age of 60. They should therefore be entitled to a similar adjustment as members of those other schemes - it is the act of unlawful discrimination in offering transitional protection to older workers which is the issue, not final salary or normal pension age 60 scheme membership.

Other public service pension schemes did not introduce career average schemes until 2015 (aside from LGPS in England and Wales which introduced the 2015 reforms slightly earlier in 2014) although many schemes had normal pension age of 65.

nash0819

Is the "rule of 85" (as per LGPS page here) involved in the court's decision?

Westertonbilly

Would think the transitional R85 arrangements will be considered age discriminatory in the same manner as other court decisions. Interesting thing is obviously what happens now.

Golactico

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/27/public-sector-pensions-mess-could-lead-to-bigger-payouts-for-some

BobQ

JoeCrystal wrote: »

Besides, the average salary is a pretty lousy measure. I would be more interested in the median full-time salary. : According to one report I read, in April 2017, median weekly earnings for full-time employees in the public sector were £599 in the public sector compared to £532 in the private sector although I am not sure they took pension benefits into account in this case.

Agreed but the fundamental flaw in his argument is that the types of job in the public and private sectors are different.

Average pay in DWP compared to MOD is different because MOD employs more highly qualified or skilled staff. Equally the CS average pay is higher that McDonalds and lower than Price Water house Cooper.

Tiggy777

Hi all

I have been paying into the LGPS since 1980...at the time my retirement age was set at 60 and since that its's changed to 65 and then 67 on elements of my 'pot'.

If I take my pension at 58 each element is reduced by a % based the number of years to pension date. So 2 years main on main sum (1/80) / 7 years and the next element (1/60) and then finally 9 years (CARE) .

My question is there a ' chance' under new rules that my pension age will remain at 60 for all my elements ?

Hope this makes sense.

Many thanks for your help and time.

Regards

Tiggy

JoeCrystal

To be frank, Tiggy777, no one really knows yet!