Public Sector Pension Class A

I

IanC12

Registered User
Messages
14
I'm looking for legal advice here please.

I took early retirement and as a Class A , have a public sector pension of about 10k and a Supplementary Pension abou another 8k

Me employer advised as I retired early before 65, if I work even part time hours I will lose the 8k.

Can I sue them as it's clearly discriminatory?
 
There are no other pension scheme that have these strings attached, your pension is your pension, it's not a job seekers allowance.

How can a pension prohibit people from taking up employment?

Also your employer has the final say and can if they so wish still pay the Supplementary, it's at their discretion!

How is that not age discrimination.

Did they not pass laws to ban age discrimination?
 
Last edited:
You were a member of an occupational pension scheme with a normal retirement age of 60 (optional, not compulsory). You are now retired and have been awarded your occupational pension (10k, you indicate). This is your Occupational Pension. Unconditional.
In the event that your are not eligible for a contributory Social Welfare payment you can also claim a Supplementary Pension from your employer. For almost everyone this will cease, in any event, once they reach State Pension age (except in the unlikely event that the State Pension in payment is less than the Supplementary amount). It is not guaranteed. It is conditional. It is not payable to anyone in insurable employment.
Members of the Pension Scheme do not make any contribution towards Supplementary Pension benefits.Few, if any, other schemes make provision for a Supplementary Pension in addition to the Occupational Pension, never mind putting conditions on it.
I fail to see the age discrimination.
 
No Class A paid more than class D. So how can you say we didn't contribute to the Supplementary pension!

Class A paid more class A and we get a much reduced pension. So how can it be we didn't contribute to the Supplementary, why if we didn't contribute are we getting a pension.

This was just some crazy scheme to avoid public sector getting the state pension. On top of their public sector pension and I can understand that, but the bit between retiring and getting the state pension.
 
IanC12 said:
No Class A paid more than class D. So how can you say we didn't contribute to the Supplementary pension!
Click to expand...
All employees pay Class A PRSI. That does not make them eligible for the State pension at 60 - or a Supplementary Pension in lieu of it.
 
Class A pay a higher rate than Class B/D (typically Civil and Public Servants pre 1995). Therefore Class A get the State SW Pension from age 66. Class B/D don’t generally qualify for a State Pension (they get their occupational pension).
Employees who take early retirement in the Private Sector very rarely get a Supplementary Pension (as part of their Occupational Pension) to bridge the gap to age 66. The Supplementary Pension in the Public/Civil Service Scheme is designed to bridge that gap up to age 66. But such members are required to exhaust any SW benefits first before claiming the Supplementary Pension. Equally if the member works, they don’t get the Supplementary Pension (since they don’t have a loss of income between retiring and age 66).
So I don’t see any discrimination.
 
Class A pay more PRSI than Class D. But as far as I recall, Class D pay more superannuation than Class A. Although the pension payments are calculated differently, they are similar in the end.
Newer entrants are on a different less favourable scheme. I'm delighted to be on the older scheme and know what to expect when I retire!
While it's unfortunate that you're unhappy and had poor understanding of the scheme, I think your anger is misplaced. The opportunity for Early Retirement with a pension is a great perk to being a public sector worker.
 
IanC12 said:
How can a pension prohibit people from taking up employment?
Click to expand...
Because it's not an unconditional payment. It's a payment conditional on you not taking employment between retirement and before 65.

These rules were clear to you when you voluntarily opted to take early retirement. It's laid out in circulars if not in primary legislation as well.

You would need to take a High Court action and constitutional grounds to challenge this - good luck and I hope you have deep pockets!
 
IanC12 said:
No Class A paid more than class D. So how can you say we didn't contribute to the Supplementary pension!

Class A paid more class A and we get a much reduced pension. So how can it be we didn't contribute to the Supplementary, why if we didn't contribute are we getting a pension.

This was just some crazy scheme to avoid public sector getting the state pension. On top of their public sector pension and I can understand that, but the bit between retiring and getting the state pension.
Click to expand...

There are limited circumstances where you can work and receive benefits, subsidiary employment.

How can I get my Supplementary pension without having to pretend I'm looking for a job

To claim the Benefit Payment for 65 year olds (between 65 and 66) you need to have retired and not be working.
www.askaboutmoney.com
 
I thought if you were class A you first of all claim jab for 9 months then supplementary pension till 65 after 65 you can work if you want to is this correct???
 
blanketyblank said:
I thought if you were class A you first of all claim jab for 9 months then supplementary pension till 65 after 65 you can work if you want to is this correct???
Click to expand...

Supplementary until 65 - that is if you then qualify for the new over-65 Benefit Payment. If you don't qualify for it you are eligible to keep the Supplementary until the State Pension becomes payable. So no insurable employment until then.
 
I actually think it is a bit discriminatory. .My friend _ same age as me but class D could retire now and claim!their pension and work another job whereas I've to wait till 65. I dont know why these rules were brought in!
 
becky said:
The rules were brought in because employees on PRSI D etc and a defined benefit pension scheme was unstainable.
Click to expand...
It also made mobility in and out of public service much more difficult.

Multiple classes of PRSI are not a good idea if they can be avoided.
 
blanketyblank said:
I actually think it is a bit discriminatory. .My friend _ same age as me but class D could retire now and claim!their pension and work another job whereas I've to wait till 65. I dont know why these rules were brought in!
Click to expand...

Why not ask your union? They'll explain it to you.
 
The issue is relevant to those who joined the public sector between 1995-2004 and were put on A1 PRSI and pensions were integrated with social welfare pension. To my knowledge agreements via unions were made to ensure those on A1 were to receive the same pension as colleagues on the older class D PRSI stamp on the principal of equalisation. However the issue of working and receiving same pension benefits as class D only arises when one retires between age 60 and 66 years. If you are over 66 years on class A1 you can work a certain amount with no pension penalties. If you retire at age 61on the A1 integrated pension however you must declare you are not working in order to receive the balance of your pension aka the supplementary pension (which brings your pension to the same as person on Class D pension). So yes it appears to be discriminatory as persons on class D pension age 60 onwards can work and receive their full pension. Also it's depriving class A1 people from doing a small bit of work which is psychologically beneficial and keeps some experience in the wider system and no doubt could benefit revenue? Seems ageist and against the principals of the agreement as above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top