Met police firearms

[Fedster + 1,307]

Judiciary and firefighters challenges to alterations for younger personnel move forward, with implications for police.

The government has lost the latest round of an employment tribunal battle with more than 200 judges over a "highly disadvantageous" pension scheme.

A year ago, members of the judiciary - including six High Court judges in their 50s - brought a successful action at the Central London Employment Tribunal.

Their case was linked to a firefighters' challenge on similar grounds, which has now been allowed to proceed.

The decisions have been welcomed by police officers who brought a similar challenge over the CARE scheme changes.

In the judicial case, age discrimination claims were brought by a total of 210 serving judges against the Justice Secretary and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).

After a ruling in the judges' favour, the Justice Secretary and MoJ brought a challenge at the Employment Appeal Tribunal.

In a decision announced on Monday, Sir Alan Wilkie dismissed their appeals.

The employment tribunal action centred on a new judicial pension scheme that came into force in April 2015, which provides judges with significantly less valuable retirement benefits than their former pension scheme.

Transitional provisions protect older judges, but the claimants, who are younger judges, claimed discrimination because they have been treated less favourably on the ground of their age.

In the latest decision, Sir Alan said the employment tribunal was "entitled to conclude" that the Justice Secretary and MoJ "had failed to justify the discriminatory effect of the transitional provisions".

Shubha Banerjee of Leigh Day solicitors said: "Following the report of Lord Hutton in 2011 into ways of reducing the costs of public sector pensions, the government sought to make changes across the public sector including to the pensions of police, firefighters, teachers, prison officers and others.

"For most public sector groups, changes to pension were made according to age - younger members of schemes were required to leave their very beneficial schemes and instead offered membership of less valuable schemes whilst older scheme members were allowed to remain in their very beneficial schemes.”

Leigh Day is also representing police officers who are challenging the CARE scheme.

A similar challenge by firefighters which was unsuccessful last year, was overturned at the same time.

The case will now return to court in the coming months after the Fire Brigades’ Union was allowed to progress it.

The government is expected to appeal against the decisions regarding both the judges and firefighters.

Greater Manchester PC Lee Broadbent has been coordinating the police challenge, which is currently stayed pending final judgements in the other cases.

He said: “The decisions yesterday were good news, the government lost on both counts. It will be a long process yet as I expect the government will keep appealing.”

But PC Broadbent said he feels the police case is stronger than that of the firefighters.

View On Police Oracle

[Posh 291]

Seems like positive news. Hopefully all those who joined the service prior to the reforms will be reverted and have any money owed returned with statutory interest!

[MerseyLLB 8,426]

It's difficult to judge how much better or worse off some people will be.

Half final salary on the 2006 scheme I joined could end up being worse than the 2/3 average salary 2015 scheme depending on career choices, inflation pay rises etc.

There's alot of people who will be scratching their heads trying to do the sums!

[bensonby + 3,503]

1 hour ago, MerseyLLB said:

It's difficult to judge how much better or worse off some people will be.

Half final salary on the 2006 scheme I joined could end up being worse than the 2/3 average salary 2015 scheme depending on career choices, inflation pay rises etc.

There's alot of people who will be scratching their heads trying to do the sums!

On a an annual income basis I’ll probablt be slightly better off on the 2015 scheme, but I will have to work several extra years, I pay more into it, and there is no separate lump sum. All said and done, I’m worse off. 

[MerseyLLB 8,426]

1 hour ago, bensonby said:

On a an annual income basis I’ll probablt be slightly better off on the 2015 scheme, but I will have to work several extra years, I pay more into it, and there is no separate lump sum. All said and done, I’m worse off. 

I might have misunderstood the comparison document we were given then?

I thought both 2006 and 2015 were simply anything up to 25% of annual pension can be commutated at a rate of £12 lump sum for every £1 of annual pension?

Having a look the 2006 scheme was simply 4 x annual pension amount as a lump sum with no option to boost the lump but ability to swap for extra pension. So you can do it backwards but not the other way?

Fag packet maths shows that they work out basically even on that basis but as you say on 2015 scheme we pay almost a third more contributions and rely on career average rather than the final salary benefit.

[bensonby + 3,503]

My understanding of the old scheme was you received 1/2 final salary (for 35 years service) AND a lump sum. The current scheme allows you to convert some of it for a lump sum. Unless I’ve misunderstood?

[MerseyLLB 8,426]

2 hours ago, bensonby said:

My understanding of the old scheme was you received 1/2 final salary (for 35 years service) AND a lump sum. The current scheme allows you to convert some of it for a lump sum. Unless I’ve misunderstood?

No, reading the schemes again... You're right. 

2006 scheme the projection given back in 2010 was based on final salary of top PC 36519 you could retire full pension after 35 years at age 55. 

This would give annual pension of £18250 and an immediate lump sum of £73000.

I hadn't realised the scheme was as good as that as I thought you had to sacrifice your pension for lump sum and I hadn't remembered 55 being full pension.

The scheme was actually pretty good, just not anywhere near as good as the 87 scheme.

***

Just to kick everyone in the teeth I hadn't recalled but 

2010 top PC pay 36519

2017/18 currently top PC pay 38,001

In 8 years the very top you can earn as a PC has risen by £1482. 

4% in 8 years by my maths...

Wow.