Post 1995 Supplementary pension query

[Mickey99]

To be clear. It’s not the “dole”, it’s Jobseekers. And in most cases the sign-on is once a year. Hardly a major embarrassment.

I think you've missed the point of the whole discussion here. You are obliged to sign on every week for 9 months. Can only take 2 weeks leave and MUST BE LOOKING FOR WORK....OTHERWISE ITS FRAUD!
So having put people away for fraud, now every class A Garda is now going to commit fraud!.

Only in Ireland would they come up with that idea. How to criminalise retired Garda. That's is why it has now been changed and it's straight onto supplementary. The next trap is if you work you lose the supplementary too! Hence my point of public sector staff now working for cash in hand, not cause they want to but are forced into it, at a time of staff shortages nationally!

 

[Mickey99]

Its irrelevant , as of August the supplementary pension is paid along with the work pension .

That is correct, but originally if you signed on for 9 months you actually got more! Could be over 2 grand more for some!. Also you will need to get the stamps paid every year by the state to ensure you get the correct state pension amount at 66!. So everyone including Garda still have to sign on once a year. Dont miss it!

 

[Conan]

That is correct, but originally if you signed on for 9 months you actually got more! Could be over 2 grand more for some!. Also you will need to get the stamps paid every year by the state to ensure you get the correct state pension amount at 66!. So everyone including Garda still have to sign on once a year. Dont miss it!

But that might only apply to A Class contributors - post 1995 recruits - who have a potential expectation of a State Pension. Those pre1995 B Class contributors do not get a State Pension (unless they accumulate sufficient A Contributions after leaving the force by taking up A class employment ), so “B credits” are worthless, at least in relation to the State Pension.

 

[Mickey99]

But that might only apply to A Class contributors - post 1995 recruits - who have a potential expectation of a State Pension. Those pre1995 B Class contributors do not get a State Pension (unless they accumulate sufficient A Contributions after leaving the force by taking up A class employment ), so “B credits” are worthless, at least in relation to the State Pension.

Tens of thousands of Class A Garda and other public servants will be retiring in the next few years and will be experiencing this chaotic system. FYI pre 95 are Class D most of these have already retired! A friend, who works for the civil service in the UK, advised they are treating our pension as a benefit! i.e. it's means tested it's not an entitlement at the end of your retirement, it should not be called a 'supplementary pension', but a 'supplementary benefit' and be paid by social welfare not by your employers pension department!. I'd love to know who came up with this scheme?, and why our unions agreed to it!

 

[Mickey99]

I think this is a could evolve into a class action against the government, who introduced this scheme to all government departments. Retirees pensions are no longer calculated on your years of service, but on your decision to continue to work after retirement, if this is not an infringement on your civil right I don't know what is. You are penalised by your previous employer should you decided to eventually take up part time employment! How ridiculous is that! So many things can happen, if you take up work to get you out of the house? If you become self employed?, if you move abroad and work does that affect your pension? At the end of your career you pension is your pension, there should be no strings attached! Perhaps our unions should take this case up through the courts on our behalf!

 

[Mickey99]

There are many nurses who have retired early and would like to work part time in care homes and provide home care can't do it. Because they may lose the supplementary pension. The country is crying out for these staff and care homes are shutting down because they can't get staff and the elderly are being left without care and end up in hospital! So the consequences of these rules are far reaching!

 

[DingDing]

I'd love to know who came up with this scheme?, and why our unions agreed to it!

Alas, some unions are happy to sacrifice the benefits and conditions for future members, for a marginal increase in benefit for the current members.

 

[CorkHome2022]

Alas, some unions are happy to sacrifice the benefits and conditions for future members, for a marginal increase in benefit for the current members.

If a bit of common sense prevailed and the retired person did not have the supplementary pension deducted by being employed after they leave public service the taxman would actually be better off as a person would most likely hit the top rate of PAYE , they would also pay USC and contribute back into PRSI also .
Would you got to work if retired from the public sector as under the current rules the first 250 or so as you earn would effectively be working for free as you would get that much by not working in the first place .
Plenty of employers out there would love some of the skills that former public sector workers have to offer.

 

[DingDing]

Indeed @CorkHome2022, particularly in their former occupation/ employer.

 

[S class]

I think this is a could evolve into a class action against the government, who introduced this scheme to all government departments. Retirees pensions are no longer calculated on your years of service, but on your decision to continue to work after retirement, if this is not an infringement on your civil right I don't know what is. You are penalised by your previous employer should you decided to eventually take up part time employment! How ridiculous is that! So many things can happen, if you take up work to get you out of the house? If you become self employed?, if you move abroad and work does that affect your pension? At the end of your career you pension is your pension, there should be no strings attached! Perhaps our unions should take this case up through the courts on our behalf!

You should have been complaining and fighting this when it was introduced.
By continuing to work in the PS you agreed to all this by acquiescence.

Or you could have resigned in protest and taken up employment in the private sector.
Then you would now be complaining that the government raided your pension funds over a five year period.

 

[blanketyblank]

I will be retiring soon enough and find the whole system ridiculous! I feel like after all the years I've worked I'm not entitled to my pension free and clear. I'd love to go working part time or perhaps take up something new but it seems like if you do, the pension you worked for all your life will be reduced. It doesn't seem right to me.

Just curious, I read here somewhere that after you retire with your integrated pension you need to sign on for PRSI credits once a year? I'll be 63 at retirement. How do you go about doing that?

thanks

 

[stoves1]

I will be retiring soon enough and find the whole system ridiculous! I feel like after all the years I've worked I'm not entitled to my pension free and clear. I'd love to go working part time or perhaps take up something new but it seems like if you do, the pension you worked for all your life will be reduced. It doesn't seem right to me.

Just curious, I read here somewhere that after you retire with your integrated pension you need to sign on for PRSI credits once a year? I'll be 63 at retirement. How do you go about doing that?

thanks

Hi i 1st you need to get a public service card - https://www.gov.ie/en/service/make-...-service-number-ppsn-application-appointment/, and yes i am retired post 1995, over 2 yrs & whole system is a farce and could stress you so be careful.
once you have PSC need to go to your local intreo centre to say you wish to sign for jobseekers credits the day before you retire, i am a retired garda and am still signing for jobseekers credits until i reach 66!
You should throw it all back on your HR Dept to explain the process, although i would be suprised if they have any idea, but anyhow get the public service card 1st and bet of luck in retirement

 

[Mickey99]

You should have been complaining and fighting this when it was introduced.
By continuing to work in the PS you agreed to all this by acquiescence.

Or you could have resigned in protest and taken up employment in the private sector.
Then you would now be complaining that the government raided your pension funds over a five year period.

I hear what your saying. The private sector pension is a lot worse! But the case here is that no one explained the strings attached pension arrangements and no one could, even our pension department or unions. It was all very vague! Most are retiring early to escape very difficult circumstances, not for a big pension i.e. Garda and nursing and teaching roles put an awful lot if stress on people with health issues. They're taking a reduced pro rata pension mist have done 30 years never mind 40 years in their job. So can manage on Thier reduced emp. pension and supplementary pension to find if they then want to boost it with a part time job more for their mental health, it will mean they can't.

Meanwhile when ever you phone a GP, a hospital or an office or call into a shop, theres no staff available to deal with your query So many businesses can't grow and expand because they can't get staff to do simple tasks! Only in Ireland that thinking of 20 years ago, affects todays business world. Obviously they thought 20 years ago we would not need experienced people so disencetivise them from working!
No one should be making rules to kick in after 20 years. No one knows whats going to happen in 20 years time!, the world is changing very rapidly!

 

[S class]

Yes the post 95 deal is terrible.

The situation you describe regarding retirees wanting to do much needed work, and the shortage of staff in those needed areas but having to suffer a major financial loss if they take up this employment is a disgrace.

When I said you agreed to the pension by acquiescence, I was not correct.
You would have agreed to the pension deal when you signed your employment contract. So it's a part of your employment contract.

A dirty trick, as no young person eagerly taking up employment is going to see or understand the importance of the small print in the pension section of their employment contract.

My guess is that trying to take a legal case against the government would be a waste of money.

Hopefully a future government might see sense and end the clawback of the supplementary pension if a person re-enters employment.

 

[Mickey99]

Yes the post 95 deal is terrible.

The situation you describe regarding retirees wanting to do much needed work, and the shortage of staff in those needed areas but having to suffer a major financial loss if they take up this employment is a disgrace.

When I said you agreed to the pension by acquiescence, I was not correct.
You would have agreed to the pension deal when you signed your employment contract. So it's a part of your employment contract.

A dirty trick, as no young person eagerly taking up employment is going to see or understand the importance of the small print in the pension section of their employment contract.

My guess is that trying to take a legal case against the government would be a waste of money.

Hopefully a future government might see sense and end the clawback of the supplementary pension if a person re-enters employment.

Hopefully so. The irony is that the state pays job seekers to help them take up employment, if they have been unemployed for over a year they get to keep the job seekers for 6 months while they take up work. But penalise people on supplementary pension who take up work!

There two cases the government needs to answer here.

A pension is a pension and is not a benefit and cannot be withdrawn on taking up work.

There is a fundamental right to work at any age and for people who are NOT on benefits,
there should be no penalty to take up work!

Imagine when there will be a time when over a 100,000 class A people are disincentivised to work and the country with massive staff shortages.

Of course when you get to 66 you lose the supplementary and get the state pension, then you are free to work without loss of income. How ironic is that. No one in government has spoken out about it or sees anything wrong with that!

 

[DingDing]

Also, many of the retirees are very skilled and experienced and in some cases their former employer would like to maintain some employment arrangements to allow access to the skills and experience. There is no way to do this. And worse, as your former employer is Public Sector your pension will be abated as well as losing the supplementary pension. There will also be pension contributions deducted, which probably means you will have to retire a second or third time to get the marginal additional benefits of these contributions. There is probably a case for your pension entitelements to be recalculated every time you work and pay for more service. Its an administrative nightmare for your former employer.

 

[november16]

Yes the post 95 deal is terrible.

The situation you describe regarding retirees wanting to do much needed work, and the shortage of staff in those needed areas but having to suffer a major financial loss if they take up this employment is a disgrace.

When I said you agreed to the pension by acquiescence, I was not correct.
You would have agreed to the pension deal when you signed your employment contract. So it's a part of your employment contract.

A dirty trick, as no young person eagerly taking up employment is going to see or understand the importance of the small print in the pension section of their employment contract.

My guess is that trying to take a legal case against the government would be a waste of money.

Hopefully a future government might see sense and end the clawback of the supplementary pension if a person re-enters employment.

My understanding is that you do not sign a contract in the civil service, you just have terms and conditions.

I am a former Public servant, semi state. I did sign a letter possibly deemed a contract, as a Public Servant, back in 1991, but that’s a different animal. I was then made a civil servant as my organisation was disbanded and the staff were pushed over to civil service.

It is my understanding that You may have a contract, if you are offered a Fixed term temp contract, in Civil service since 2004.

My understanding (and I’ll stand corrected) is that as a civil servant you are deemed to be a servant of the state and therefore not an employee as such. I did not sign a contract, re civil service but there was an insistence on my signing changes to terms in 2022, ref a termination of a secondment, to a not for profit NGO, whereby I advised HR that I had serious reservations re unilateral changes to my terms and conditions. The civil service and contracts Is a bit convoluted to say the least…

 

[sidzer]

It is very wrong that you can be penalised for doing some part time work when you retire. You have paid into your pension so your pension should not be treated as a form of welfare from the state that can be snatched off you if you misbehave - it is yours!!!

There is a teacher shortage in Ireland. Many retired teachers fill in for a few weeks at a time when someone is out sick - or when the school just can't find a replacement for a maternity leave etc. This is a win win for everyone - school can get an experienced teacher and retiree can get some money for a holiday etc. And now that schemes of work are a mandatory part of school administration you can easily slot in and follow the subject plan. You just don't have the young teachers sitting at home anymore waiting for a phone call to take up an offer of a few weeks work. Most will travel to gulf states or Australia where they will have many opportunities if they don't have a decent contract at home - and many who do have permanent posts are heading off for a few years.

This stupid rule will inevitably add more problems for finding sub teachers as the post 1995 workers begin to retire - who in their right mind would take up a job offer for a few weeks if they are going to get a good chunk of their pension taken off them.

I'm sure it will have an negative effect in other sectors too.

Why did unions agree to this?

 

[DingDing]

As a retiree, the big winner is the state. I lose Supplementary pension, have the pension abated and pay tax, prsi, usc and pension contributions on my pay.

 

[Mickey99]

As a retiree, the big winner is the state. I lose Supplementary pension, have the pension abated and pay tax, prsi, usc and pension contributions on my pay.

Yes experienced teachers are needed, retired Garda are needed and can be employed in many jobs. I know some Garda who retired early (on class D) and work as drivers, deliver medicines, store security, helping out with the census, all part time and less well paid jobs just to keep doing something. Nursing shortages are leading to Care Home closures, again nurses will be prepared to work part time for less money to help.

In a country where were spending billions on mental health services. We tell stressed-out early retirees, you will be penalised if you go back to work! Stay at home alone until you need phyciatric help!
Many will be willing to work in a less stressful job, for another 10 years easily.

Was reading about the carry on with the new children's hospital and how BAM are screwing the country! The government seem to have no, this has been going on for 7 years. This is down to mismanagement. If they can't build a children hospital how can they run an economy?

Unfortunately these are the same people who come up with silly rules on how to stop people working and penalise the economy to boot.
Some one thought, you know what would be a good idea, let's penalise 100,000 very experienced workers and stop them from working! That will save us a fortune!

They can over spend by billions on what is really a politicians vanity project when a simpler straight forward building would do and then ignore what is best for the country i.e. more people in work, paying taxes and staying healthy.

I'm sure over 100,000 early retirees will be leaving public sector or semi state in the next 10 years, so the number of class A will rise dramatically, it will be interesting to see what happens.

I predict there will be a crisis in Ireland due to huge labour shortages, business will be closing services closing, everyone in government will be scratching their heads because they can't figure out what has happened!

In another generation they will be discussing it in sociology classes, Irelands lost generational knowledge and the impact on the economy.

Only in Ireland!

Fianna Fail and Fine Gael claim to be the party of business!