Post 1995 Supplementary pension query

[DingDing]

Just thought about something else. I had a post looking at returning to work part time post retirement and I was approached informally about this. From an abatement point of view it is not really financially worth doing, but there are other benefits for mental health. I was coming round to the idea of a contract for service which would lend itself to the sort of tasks. IT projects where I would have a lot of knowledge. Also the scope of the work is ring fenced. When I read the new document, if you are self employed it is deemed full time employment, which in my case it won’t be. Or I can work pro rata for a pro rata reduction in supplementary pension.

 

[S class]

I will be getting a supplementary pension and also my actual pension. Surely I am paying A stamps on this payment and this negates the need to sign for credits for the same period

The Prsi on Occupational pensions is class M.
This is not reckonable for the Contributory pension.

 

[DingDing]

Today is another learning day. I have 42 years stamps so I have loads. Working since I was 17.

 

[stoves1]

Many thanks for your congratulations, i am a member of the GSRMA and i know im blown my own trumpet I & one other retired post 1995 retired member drove this by producing the evidence to Killareny Garda Pensions ( a lot of it accrued on this forum), kept annoying them emailed politicians etc.
I too am working since aged 12 have 40yrs prsi retired at 60, best thing ever, your going to have to face it sometime and if budgets etc are ok prepare your exit, arrange to keep contact with who you want, take up one or 2 hobbies (classes) and be thankful your healthy and go for it

 

[PatMu]

Thank you for your hard work and persistence on these issues. It appears to me in reading this that there is still an unjust anomaly whereby in order to qualify for a Supplementary Pension any employment or part time employment impacts your eligibility as a post 95 whereas pre 95 have no such restriction.

Perhaps this is the next issue for someone to raise. I'm not at that stage yet but would like to have the option to do some part time work when the time comes and I imagine others will too.

 

[POC]

Thanks stoves1. Delighted to see this update (I expect to retire in 2 years).

 

[DingDing]

@stoves1 thanks again and it was a concern about retiring, that my ability to travel would be hampered for the 9 months on JB. And also having to go through the charade of looking for work, and signing to that effect when I wasn't. @PatMu I am interested in the issues of working as well. I will be retiring in a couple of months, one month into the 3 month notice period. I have already been sounded out about returning on a part time basis, I discusses this in another thread, sorting out the anomoly about working would be great, however not to have to apply for JB is a huge result for me.

Again shows the collaborative value of askaboutmoney and @stoves1 delighted the forum was some help.

The mixed classes of PRSI, M for Pension and A for work, is probably yet another complication.

Thansk @S class for the advice on PRSI, something I had missed till you mentioned it.

The whole area really is a minefield.

 

[Blythe Spirit]

Well done @stoves1. Great to see this update. As you say, the circular addresses a number of the issues with the previous supplementary pension arrangements.
While not immediately relevant to me, I have been watching this and other related threads with interest (had to reregister to reply). A number of years ago, I had identified some of the issues with the pension arrangements for post-95 civil and public servants as problematic, as regards the supplementary pension, claiming jobseekers, uncertainty as to actual income in retirement, etc. Some of the wording of the requirements for the supplementary pension was particularly concerning. I raised it with my union reps and followed up for a time, also raised with NSSO but gave up in the face of responses which clearly failed to appreciate the issues, and put it on the long finger till it would be more relevant to me.

It's been interesting to see the issue gather momentum in recent times, as it began to impact on more people - only a matter of time till most if not all post 95 civil/public servants are impacted. Thanks for your perseverance @stoves1 - this will be a big help to many of us.

While there are still some anomalies, this is a big improvement!

 

[CorkHome2022]

Great work and credit to all involved in this , one thing stands out to me .
In the Superannuation handbook the supplementary pension should give the post95 pension the same money as if it had been pre95 calculations .
In such cases, the supplementary pension payable comprises the difference (if
any) between
(a) the amount of the actual pension awarded to the employee plus the
amount (if any) of the personal rate of social insurance benefit or
pension payable to him/her; and
(b) the amount of the pension which would have been awarded to the
employee if that pension had been calculated by reference to the
calculation method for pre-6 April 1995 Established Civil Servants
i.e. 1/80th of pensionable remuneration per year of reckonable
service, subject to a maximum of 40 years.
However reading from the new circular it seems to be the case that this will be the fixed income going forward , a much simpler system for both the pensioner and administration to follow . If this is delivered upon then alot of people will be happy.

 

[DingDing]

It looks like the situation for working post-retirement is less certain / advantageous.

From reading the recent circular, it looks like if you are self-employes ow working permanently you are not entitled to the payment.

The only option which maintains some supplementary payment is to work on a pro-rata part time basis, losing the supplementary pension for the days you work and having your pension abated like the previous scheme.

 

[CorkHome2022]

It looks like the situation for working post-retirement is less certain / advantageous.

From reading the recent circular, it looks like if you are self-employes ow working permanently you are not entitled to the payment.

The only option which maintains some supplementary payment is to work on a pro-rata part time basis, losing the supplementary pension for the days you work and having your pension abated like the previous scheme.

A thing I "heard" in work , so dont take this as Gospel ..... If you work 1 day then there is a 20% deduction from the Supplementary Part , 2 then 40% etc upto 5 days .
If you plan on working then you need to be cute and work 2 12 hour days not 3 8 hours etc .
If your planning to retire then this does not affect you other than not having to suffer the indignity of a Garda or Prison Officer standing in the same queue in a Dole Office for 9 months with the same people you have spent 30 years locking up .
This was a real sore point for those particular Fast Accrual Grades .

 

[DingDing]

Thanks @CorkHome2022 In addition to this your pension is abated on a daily basis.

There is little or no incentive to work with both the supplementary pension reduces and your pay abated, or if you are on a contract for service having your entire supplementary pension lost as you are deemed to be self-employed.

What you heard in work is true based on the previous and this circular. A day can be anything from a couple of hours to a "long" day.

The incentive to work has been completely removed, as with the abatement, 40% tax, PRSI and Pension and Pension Levy, this takes up most ot the difference between your retired salary and returning salary.

The solution is probably to work part time for a company that provides services to my organisation. This would mean that I would not be full time, and I would not be self-employed, and as it was not a PS employment, it would not be abated.

 

[S class]

If your planning to retire then this does not affect you other than not having to suffer the indignity of a Garda or Prison Officer standing in the same queue in a Dole Office for 9 months with the same people you have spent 30 years locking up .

This statement is inaccurate and unfair.

People claiming Jobseekers Benefit do not queue in a dole office for 9 months.
They sign on once in an Intreo office and are treated politely by the Intreo staff.

They then, if aged under 62, collect their payment at their local post office on Wednesdays alongside their fellow citizens who have paid Prsi and have sufficient contributions to qualify for their entitlement.

Jobseekers benefit is only paid to citizens who have recently ceased employment and who have worked in legitimate employment and have paid their Prsi contributions.

Any suggestion that these DSP customers are more likely, than any other random citizen, to be involved in criminality is wrong.

The ex Garda or Prison Officer is just as likely to meet one of their previous prisoners in the queue to purchase a postage stamp as they are to meet them in the Jobseekers Benefit payment queue.

 

[CorkHome2022]

This statement is inaccurate and unfair.

People claiming Jobseekers Benefit do not queue in a dole office for 9 months.
They sign on once in an Intreo office and are treated politely by the Intreo staff.

They then, if aged under 62, collect their payment at their local post office on Wednesdays alongside their fellow citizens who have paid Prsi and have sufficient contributions to qualify for their entitlement.

Jobseekers benefit is only paid to citizens who have recently ceased employment and who have worked in legitimate employment and have paid their Prsi contributions.

Any suggestion that these DSP customers are more likely, than any other random citizen, to be involved in criminality is wrong.

The ex Garda or Prison Officer is just as likely to meet one of their previous prisoners in the queue to purchase a postage stamp as they are to meet them in the Jobseekers Benefit payment queue.

Its true that people on Jobseekers are not criminals but you dont understand the point 99% of those getting locked up are and never will do an honest days work and as such to have to stand in line with the same people for a former Garda or Prison Officer having served their time is an insult to their dignity . The new arrangement will put an end to that .

 

[S class]

Its true that people on Jobseekers are not criminals but you dont understand the point 99% of those getting locked up are and never will do an honest days work and as such to have to stand in line with the same people for a former Garda or Prison Officer having served their time is an insult to their dignity . The new arrangement will put an end to that .

Jobseekers Allowance is paid on Tuesdays.
The queue the ex Garda and Prison Officer would be in, is for Jobseekers Benefit and is on Wednesdays. This queue consists of people who have worked all their lives.
Your comment is totally incorrect.

 

[stoves1]

Lads, i am happy tht the issue of Supplementary pension post 1995 has now an official up to date document, so can we please leave any prejudicises or unhelpful comments aside and if possible focus on the positives and if there are outstanding/negative issues not addressed in the document discuss them here please.

 

[CorkHome2022]

Jobseekers Allowance is paid on Tuesdays.
The queue the ex Garda and Prison Officer would be in, is for Jobseekers Benefit and is on Wednesdays. This queue consists of people who have worked all their lives.
Your comment is totally incorrect.

They wont be in any queue anymore thanks to the hard work of those who got it changed , I am aware of a few retired Gardai and Prison Officers who have had not very pleasant experiences in the recent past once they retired and have no reason to doubt them.

 

[DingDing]

Met my pensions administrator today, and it looks like the previous system of claiming jobseekers is beneficial in my case as I purchased some of my service. The purchased service does not count for supplementary pension.

As an example, assume I have 100,000 salary 30 years earned service and 10 years purchased service as an extreme example.
And the state pension is €14,469

So my pension is 40/80 * 100,000 - (14469*2) = 35,531 with the state pension of 14,469 bring my co-ordinated pension to 50,000 (Class D equivalent)

The shortfall is partially in this case made up by the supplementary pension.


So the supplementary pension is based on 30 years service, the earned service.

So its 100,000/80*30 = 37,500 less the pension of 35,531, so in this case the supplementary pension is 1,969.

Because the supplementary pension is calculated on the earned (30 Years salary), it is 1,969 instead of 14,469 if it was calculated on the 40 years service.

When I reach retirement age, assuming a full PRSI record, I will get the full state pension, bring my total pension up to 50,000

In the years between retirement and state pension age, there will be a significant reduction in the coordinated pension.


Just wondering if my thinking is correct. When I reviewed the new procedure with our HR administrator, there are a number of points of clarification they are seeking on the document. It is contradractory in parts.

Also if working, any change of circumstances has to be notified within 2 weeks. Any change to work patterns, additional work etc... has to be notified to the PPA (Pension Paying Authority) and they will deduct the next pension payment accordingly. It is a huge workload if you have an inconsistent working pattern.

Also the period that is used for calculating the pro-rata period is not clear, and seems up to the PPA.

I would be interested in thoughts and comments. It is also a potential disadvantage to purchasing notional service as well. If you purchase an AVC, the return does not vary on future work and you have it availabe before pension age. In my case it makes the purchased service less valuable before state pension age than I would have expected.

 

[stoves1]

Met my pensions administrator today, and it looks like the previous system of claiming jobseekers is beneficial in my case as I purchased some of my service. The purchased service does not count for supplementary pension.

As an example, assume I have 100,000 salary 30 years earned service and 10 years purchased service as an extreme example.
And the state pension is €14,469

So my pension is 40/80 * 100,000 - (14469*2) = 35,531 with the state pension of 14,469 bring my co-ordinated pension to 50,000 (Class D equivalent)

The shortfall is partially in this case made up by the supplementary pension.


So the supplementary pension is based on 30 years service, the earned service.

So its 100,000/80*30 = 37,500 less the pension of 35,531, so in this case the supplementary pension is 1,969.

Because the supplementary pension is calculated on the earned (30 Years salary), it is 1,969 instead of 14,469 if it was calculated on the 40 years service.

When I reach retirement age, assuming a full PRSI record, I will get the full state pension, bring my total pension up to 50,000

In the years between retirement and state pension age, there will be a significant reduction in the coordinated pension.


Just wondering if my thinking is correct. When I reviewed the new procedure with our HR administrator, there are a number of points of clarification they are seeking on the document. It is contradractory in parts.

Also if working, any change of circumstances has to be notified within 2 weeks. Any change to work patterns, additional work etc... has to be notified to the PPA (Pension Paying Authority) and they will deduct the next pension payment accordingly. It is a huge workload if you have an inconsistent working pattern.

Also the period that is used for calculating the pro-rata period is not clear, and seems up to the PPA.

I would be interested in thoughts and comments. It is also a potential disadvantage to purchasing notional service as well. If you purchase an AVC, the return does not vary on future work and you have it availabe before pension age. In my case it makes the purchased service less valuable before state pension age than I would have expected.

Ding Dong, just a quick reply, as to purchased service does not count for Supplementary, i would not take that as a given,
were you told when you purchased years that you were only purchasing 75% of pension discrepency, if not you were mis-sold a product by your public service employer, which is akin to insurance companies mis selling ie the employer did not furnish you with the facts of what you were purchasing and in my own case probably the same, i just applied to purchase circa 4yrs service by periodic contributions circa 25yrs ago as i would not have enough years to have a full pension and the money was deducted but i recieved no information to say that when i retire the Supplementary element of my pension is not counted.
In the document i posted it says it is assumed people buying service would retire having reached contributory pension age, so in effect you/I were sold a pig in a poke, so definitely worth challenging and if necessary bring a case to the Pensions ombudsman Commission, regards

 

[Pension 2022]

Have you any further update DingDong? When are you due to retire?