NHS redeployment and pension

hyubh

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

I don't follow your question - but I'm no expert on how pensions are funded!

The NHS scheme is unfunded/'pay as you go'. That said, more pertinently (if not unrelatedly), it's also a multi-employer DB scheme where employer costs are pretty much fully 'grouped'. This isn't really public vs. private sector, since the LGPS is a public sector scheme, yet is both funded and with individualised employer rates. In contrast, there are private sector multi-employer DB schemes that fully group liabilities, leading to employers accounting for pension costs on a cash basis similar to employers in unfunded public sector schemes.

The way I look at it is that if you are in a Special Class you get a much better (and presumably more expensive to fund)

Yes, but if employer costs are fully grouped, that doesn't matter for the individual budget manager. Even in the LGPS, an individual under normal scheme rules retiring without an actuarial reduction at 60 (rather than the regular NPA of 65/SPA) wouldn't lead to an immediate additional employer cost.

In theory you can retire with a full pension at 55 with just 20 years in the scheme (if my recollection is correct). Special Class staff fight tooth and nail to maintain their eligibility.

No doubt! But that's nothing to do with employer costs.

As an aside, my Trust made a lot of staff redundant (or early retired) at enormous cost, but apparently it made sense to do so. (Not sure how costs are apportioned between the employing trust and the "NHS".) Now they can't recruit and have to pay agency rates and overtime..

Again, I very much doubt pension costs came into it, for the reasons I've given.

GunJack wrote: »

Don't ask me the specifics, I am but a humble Engineer, but down/regrading was always done as a cost-saving measure

Moving into management is 'downgrading'...?

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

It is remarkable (and poetically ironic) how dysfunctional MH trusts can be.

Attempting to keep an experienced member of staff with an archaic normal pension age from leaving is 'dysfunctional'...?

Manxman_in_exile

hyubh wrote: »

The NHS scheme is unfunded/'pay as you go'. That said, more pertinently (if not unrelatedly), it's also a multi-employer DB scheme where employer costs are pretty much fully 'grouped'. This isn't really public vs. private sector, since the LGPS is a public sector scheme, yet is both funded and with individualised employer rates. In contrast, there are private sector multi-employer DB schemes that fully group liabilities, leading to employers accounting for pension costs on a cash basis similar to employers in unfunded public sector schemes.

Thank you for this as it does help me understand your earlier posts.

Yes I appreciate that most public sector schemes are "unfunded" but that the various LGPS schemes have some investment funds behind them.

Yes, but if employer costs are fully grouped, that doesn't matter for the individual budget manager. Even in the LGPS, an individual under normal scheme rules retiring without an actuarial reduction at 60 (rather than the regular NPA of 65/SPA) wouldn't lead to an immediate additional employer cost.

OK... Are you saying that within the NHS the extra costs of early retirement and (eg) Special class benefits are spread across the whole of the NHS and not just to individual employer trusts? If that is the case (and I apologise if I've mis-understood your point) doesn't that simply lead to a race to the bottom? Individual trusts can make huge revenue savings now because redundancy/early retirement costs are not charged to them individually but across the NHS as a whole. Everybody else pays for their savings.

No doubt! But that's nothing to do with employer costs.

As above I think?

Again, I very much doubt pension costs came into it, for the reasons I've given.

As above...?

Moving into management is 'downgrading'...?

Many experienced and senior clinical professionals may see a transfer into unqualified management posts as being a retrograde step. (It's often a means of side-lining "problem" staff). Being a "manager" in the NHS does not necessarily mean you are more senior than a clinician. But I think the point the poster was trying to make is that such moves are often to a lower pay band.

Attempting to keep an experienced member of staff with an archaic normal pension age from leaving is 'dysfunctional'...?


Sorry - I've not explained myself properly. The management strategy is usually to get rid of more experienced (thus more expensive) staff, often to the detriment of the service. Presumably because the individual trust does not bear the full cost of the redundancy/retirement but saves on lower salary etc costs? If I've understood you correctly(?)

Allowing senior management staff to retain special class to which their eligibility may be questionable is dysfunctional as they can leave at 55 and their experience is lost to the service. I don't know any MHO who did not retire as soon as they could. Their early departure is a real loss to the service.

Thanks for your post. My comments in bold above. Have I understood you correctly?