updates on FBU, Civil service pensions

Trying_to_be_good

The Employment Tribunal have only stated what’s to happen for ill-health retirees at the moment, the rest is subject to discussion.

Ill-health retirees who didn’t have protection have already “crystallised” their benefits and are therefore already receiving less than they (we) should,

It’ll be complex enough sorting that out, it’s then looking at those who didn’t have protection but want to go back to old schemes, those who did have protection and wanted to but weren’t allowed to switch to new schemes, and those who don’t want to change between schemes.

Minefield.

Dazed_and_confused

It’ll be complex enough sorting that out, it’s then looking at those who didn’t have protection but want to go back to old schemes, those who did have protection and wanted to but weren’t allowed to switch to new schemes, and those who don’t want to change between schemes.

Minefield

No doubt swiftly followed by either a reduction in the pension that can be accrued moving forward or an increase in the contribution rates.

That £4 billion has to come from somewhere

mapleoak

Don’t forget austerity is over, the Tories said so during the election campaign and they found the forest where the magic money tree is - so it’s all good ;-)

hyubh

bioboybill wrote: »

I'm in the LGPS. I have been in the scheme since October 1985 and I am 57 years old. If I have understood this right I am one of those who has been discriminated against

Yes

, since I was moved to the CARE scheme in 2014 with no protection.

'since I was moved into the CARE scheme' - no; 'with no protection' - yes. The LGPS didn't keep protected individuals in a final salary scheme, it had (has) an 'underpin'.

Am I right in thinking that I would be offered a move back to the 1/60 scheme until 2022

No.

, or at least told which scheme would be better for me?

The underpin gave/gives the better pension amount of both, at the point of drawing benefits.

And would my service up to 2022 have a NRA of 65?

The underpin hits when benefits become payable under the member's pre-14 terms. So saying service up to 2022 would have an NRA of 65 is a way of putting that across, if not a fully precise way.

Also, would the 85 year rule now apply to service beyond 2008?

No, the 85 year rule is unaffected by the underpin since it was removed (to avoid age discrimination!) earlier.

It currently only applies to my service up to 2008.

That was determined prior to the CARE scheme coming in.

BobQ

m_c_s wrote: »

I cannot see any basis for those that left the old scheme voluntarily being able to claim compensation unless a separate ruling is made or they are moved back to the same position before they made the decision.

If they did this after they were told that they moving to Alpha that might form a basis as the illegal move to Alpha influenced the decision.

chubsta

although i and most others where i work left the classic, thereby locking it in for the best of our last three years at that point, we were only out for a month and then rejoined it befor the forced move into Alpha, therefore we were members of classic who were subject to the discrimination. also, as has been mentioned above, this was only done because of the imposition of the new terms and should be easily argued as an effect of the discriminatory changes that wouldn’t have taken place otherwise.

m_c_s

BobQ wrote: »

If they did this after they were told that they moving to Alpha that might form a basis as the illegal move to Alpha influenced the decision.

The point I am making is that legally the Government may insist that they are not part of the judgment since they were not transitioned over as normal. They moved out volentarily and then rejoined a new pension scheme as per the pension rules at the time. It could be argued that anyone could have done that for any number of reasons.
If the Government is not feeling generous to consider them with everyone else then they may have to build up their own case or in the extreme get a separate legal judgment made which could take a long time as per the original rulings.

m_c_s

chubsta wrote: »

although i and most others where i work left the classic, thereby locking it in for the best of our last three years at that point, we were only out for a month and then rejoined it befor the forced move into Alpha, therefore we were members of classic who were subject to the discrimination. also, as has been mentioned above, this was only done because of the imposition of the new terms and should be easily argued as an effect of the discriminatory changes that wouldn’t have taken place otherwise.

I understand your reasoning for doing this and I am not saying it is right or wrong. A few of my colleagues did this because they did not think they would get promotion in the last 15 years of their career. They have spoken to our Union rep and have been told that many details are still being worked through but there is a possibility that they would have to be considered as a special case under the existing discrimination ruling.
There are many individual circumstances that will need to be covered off so you may want to seek clarification on the legal ruling with regards to your particular circumstances. It maybe financially better off for you anyway to stay as you are in Alpha but hopefully you and me like many others can get this resolved quickly so we can plan our retirements properly!

chubsta

m_c_s wrote: »

The point I am making is that legally the Government may insist that they are not part of the judgment since they were not transitioned over as normal. They moved out volentarily and then rejoined a new pension scheme as per the pension rules at the time. It could be argued that anyone could have done that for any number of reasons.
If the Government is not feeling generous to consider them with everyone else then they will have to build up their own case and get a separate legal judgment made which could take a long time as per the original rulings.

whilst i see where you are coming from, we rejoined the pension scheme under Classic and we’re then transferred over when alpha came into effect so strictly speaking we were members of the legacy scheme, albeit for only a short period in this case.

one thing though, i am glad i’m not the one trying to sort this mess out!

m_c_s

chubsta wrote: »

whilst i see where you are coming from, we rejoined the pension scheme under Classic and we’re then transferred over when alpha came into effect so strictly speaking we were members of the legacy scheme, albeit for only a short period in this case.

one thing though, i am glad i’m not the one trying to sort this mess out!

Ok I misunderstood, I think you will be fine in that case. But you will still need your calculator or spreadsheet to work out which option is best for you. Good luck!