Majority of public servants avoid controversial change in State pension age

Pabilito

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
5,847
Majority of public servants avoid controversial change in State pension age - Independent.ie


“THE majority of public servants are not impacted by the increase in the State pension age, it has emerged.

As the backlash grows over the pension age rise, it has been confirmed that public service employees can retire at the age of 63 and get a supplemental pension until the State pension kicks in at 66.

In contrast, private sector workers who are legally obliged to retire at 65 are unable to claim the State pension until a later date as the State contributory pension is now only paid from the age of 66.”



Surely state pension changes should affect ALL citizens or NONE regardless of who the employer is.
 


enuffisenuff

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
3,618
looks some employees are more equal than others......disgusting!!!!
 

brughahaha

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
16,168
In the same way that USC doesn't apply to Public Servants on over 100k ...it only applies to the Private Sector.

I the same way that parking isnt a taxable perk because its enjoyed by the same people , where as every other perk that can be construed as a financial benefit in any way is taxed to the hilt.

The upper echelons of the Irish PS are the true elite in this society
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
17,016
Majority of public servants avoid controversial change in State pension age - Independent.ie


“THE majority of public servants are not impacted by the increase in the State pension age, it has emerged.

As the backlash grows over the pension age rise, it has been confirmed that public service employees can retire at the age of 63 and get a supplemental pension until the State pension kicks in at 66.

In contrast, private sector workers who are legally obliged to retire at 65 are unable to claim the State pension until a later date as the State contributory pension is now only paid from the age of 66.”



Surely state pension changes should affect ALL citizens or NONE regardless of who the employer is.
I hope you'll forgive me for introducing a fact into your thread. I know it won't dent your prejudices but I'm odd about such things.

Civil servants retiring today will almost all have been recruited before 1995. They have no entitlement to the state OAP or to Unemployment Benefit.
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
17,016
In the same way that USC doesn't apply to Public Servants on over 100k ...it only applies to the Private Sector.

I the same way that parking isnt a taxable perk because its enjoyed by the same people , where as every other perk that can be construed as a financial benefit in any way is taxed to the hilt.

The upper echelons of the Irish PS are the true elite in this society
Link?
 

brughahaha

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
16,168


Non-PAYE income above €100,000
There is a USC surcharge of 3% if your non-PAYE income is more than €100,000 a year.


All company directors and self employed are regarded as non PAYE .... yet you have to put yourself on the payroll software and pay yourself in the exact same manner as PAYE.
 

IDBI0

Active member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
288
Although I'm self-employed I have no issue with this. Those were the terms and conditions those PS workers signed up to. It's a legacy issue and when they have moved through the system in a few years it will be a level playing field. The real issue is who is using this to stir the sh*t? There is always someone/organisation that stands to gain by pitting workers against each other, be they private/public/self-employed.
 

IDBI0

Active member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
288

Non-PAYE income above €100,000
There is a USC surcharge of 3% if your non-PAYE income is more than €100,000 a year.


All company directors and self employed are regarded as non PAYE .... yet you have to put yourself on the payroll software and pay yourself in the exact same manner as PAYE.
Might be true for Company Directors but it's not true for self-employed.
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
17,016

Non-PAYE income above €100,000
There is a USC surcharge of 3% if your non-PAYE income is more than €100,000 a year.


All company directors and self employed are regarded as non PAYE .... yet you have to put yourself on the payroll software and pay yourself in the exact same manner as PAYE.
Grand but what you said was:-

"USC doesn't apply to Public Servants on over 100k ...it only applies to the Private Sector. "

And that's a bare faced lie.
 

IDBI0

Active member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
288
looks some employees are more equal than others......disgusting!!!!
You have to look at the entire package they are on, not just the pension element. There is a concerted effort being made today to divide and conquer workers with regard to the pension issue.
 

brughahaha

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
16,168
Grand but what you said was:-

"USC doesn't apply to Public Servants on over 100k ...it only applies to the Private Sector. "

And that's a bare faced lie.
No ..you're just illiterate (and desperate to deny the shocking greed and entitlement of the upper echelons of the PS)

Unless you can point me to any Non PAYE Public Servants ?

So if they are not Public Servants they are .............

You'll get there eventually :p
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
17,016
No ..you're just illiterate (and desperate to deny the shocking greed and entitlement of the upper echelons of the PS)

Unless you can point me to any Non PAYE Public Servants ?

So if they are not Public Servants they are .............

You'll get there eventually :p
If stupidity ever makes it as an Olympic sport you're a guaranteed gold medallist.

(1) There are PAYE workers in the public sector.

(2) There are PAYE workers in the private sector.

(3) All PAYE workers pay USC on the same basis.

Your claim was:- "USC doesn't apply to Public Servants on over 100k ...it only applies to the Private Sector."

So we must draw one of two conclusions from all this:-

(1) You're a liar

or

(2) You're an imbecile.

Delete as applicable.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
25,816
The mistake the article makes is in pretending that the pension of public servants and the State pension ought to be the same thing. The pension for public servants is an occupational pension for which they have been paying contributions (in addition to PRSI payments which essentially fund their state pension).

So yes, private occupational pensions have different terms than the State pension. Provision for early retirement, lump sums or cashing in parts of the annuity in return for a lump sum etc are all benefits that might be available. If someone has been paying into a pension for 30+ years, there is no legitimate basis to determine now that they should not be able to avail of the benefits they signed up for.
 

Pabilito

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
5,847
RTE had an article on this link earlier this afternoon which has been “updated” twice in the last hour resulting in significant sections been deleted from it. For example, the original version of the article on the link (which I have screen shots of) stated:

“According to the Irish Times, in 2014 the then minister for public expenditure and reform, Brendan Howlin, signed an order granting public servants an effective subsidy through a supplementary government pension, equal in value to the State pension, to cover the gap until the State pension kicks in.”

“It has now emerged that their public service counterparts can claim a supplementary pension from retirement at 63 until they qualify for the State pension element of their total retirement entitlements”


The current version of this article states:

“Pension experts have said that this deal insulates that cohort of state employees from the financial loss caused by the pension reforms , while private sector workers continue to lose out and are forced onto social welfare”
 

pedagogus

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
2,731
RTE had an article on this link earlier this afternoon which has been “updated” twice in the last hour resulting in significant sections been deleted from it. For example, the original version of the article on the link (which I have screen shots of) stated:

“According to the Irish Times, in 2014 the then minister for public expenditure and reform, Brendan Howlin, signed an order granting public servants an effective subsidy through a supplementary government pension, equal in value to the State pension, to cover the gap until the State pension kicks in.”

“It has now emerged that their public service counterparts can claim a supplementary pension from retirement at 63 until they qualify for the State pension element of their total retirement entitlements”


The current version of this article states:

“Pension experts have said that this deal insulates that cohort of state employees from the financial loss caused by the pension reforms , while private sector workers continue to lose out and are forced onto social welfare”
RTE had an article on this link earlier this afternoon which has been “updated” twice in the last hour resulting in significant sections been deleted from it. For example, the original version of the article on the link (which I have screen shots of) stated:

“According to the Irish Times, in 2014 the then minister for public expenditure and reform, Brendan Howlin, signed an order granting public servants an effective subsidy through a supplementary government pension, equal in value to the State pension, to cover the gap until the State pension kicks in.”

“It has now emerged that their public service counterparts can claim a supplementary pension from retirement at 63 until they qualify for the State pension element of their total retirement entitlements”


The current version of this article states:

“Pension experts have said that this deal insulates that cohort of state employees from the financial loss caused by the pension reforms , while private sector workers continue to lose out and are forced onto social welfare”
I find those excerpts mystifying. The vast majority of those retiring now are pre95 workers. Such Civil and Public Servants have never been entitled to either the Contributory PRSI pension or the Non-contributory State Pension. To be fair I think there is confusion even amongst financial journalists about this. I think the bridging pension referred to is to do with sorting out an issue for some Civil Servants in regard to not being able to draw their Occupational Contributory pension before 65 despite having clocked up the years.
Despite reiterating this point about the normal OAP not being available to pre95ers you still hear it trotted out. I should know as I retired from teaching in 2013.
 

crossman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
1,713
I find those excerpts mystifying. The vast majority of those retiring now are pre95 workers. Such Civil and Public Servants have never been entitled to either the Contributory PRSI pension or the Non-contributory State Pension. To be fair I think there is confusion even amongst financial journalists about this. I think the bridging pension referred to is to do with sorting out an issue for some Civil Servants in regard to not being able to draw their Occupational Contributory pension before 65 despite having clocked up the years.
Despite reiterating this point about the normal OAP not being available to pre95ers you still hear it trotted out. I should know as I retired from teaching in 2013.
You are right. People are confusing public service pensions (paid by government as their employer) with the OAP (paid as a social welfare pension).
 

IDBI0

Active member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
288
I find those excerpts mystifying. The vast majority of those retiring now are pre95 workers. Such Civil and Public Servants have never been entitled to either the Contributory PRSI pension or the Non-contributory State Pension. To be fair I think there is confusion even amongst financial journalists about this. I think the bridging pension referred to is to do with sorting out an issue for some Civil Servants in regard to not being able to draw their Occupational Contributory pension before 65 despite having clocked up the years.
Despite reiterating this point about the normal OAP not being available to pre95ers you still hear it trotted out. I should know as I retired from teaching in 2013.
For some PS workers, for example, nurses, their pension is a combination of the state pension and their employer pension (HSE). If they retire before reaching the state pension age then the state pension portion has to be made up in some way, hence the supplement. Although I was given to believe that this is paid by the employer (who may be reimbursed by the state, I'm not sure. It's all state money anyway).
 

Pabilito

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
5,847
I find those excerpts mystifying. The vast majority of those retiring now are pre95 workers. Such Civil and Public Servants have never been entitled to either the Contributory PRSI pension or the Non-contributory State Pension. To be fair I think there is confusion even amongst financial journalists about this. I think the bridging pension referred to is to do with sorting out an issue for some Civil Servants in regard to not being able to draw their Occupational Contributory pension before 65 despite having clocked up the years.
Despite reiterating this point about the normal OAP not being available to pre95ers you still hear it trotted out. I should know as I retired from teaching in 2013.
It’s quite simple (aside from the confusion about pre 95 public servants). Any public servant employed on or after 1995 will receive the State pension as a component of their overall pension.

For example a pubic servant who joined in 1995 at age 40 will be 65 this year and can retire this year with the equivalent of the same pension he would have received before the changes to State pension age thanks to this special supplementary pension designed to tide him over until he qualifies for the State pension in 2021 at the increased age of 67. That scenario will continue into the future such that no public servants going forward suffer any financial loss as a result of increasing the State pension age.
 
Last edited:

Pabilito

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
5,847
For some PS workers, for example, nurses, their pension is a combination of the state pension and their employer pension (HSE). If they retire before reaching the state pension age then the state pension portion has to be made up in some way, hence the supplement. Although I was given to believe that this is paid by the employer (who may be reimbursed by the state, I'm not sure. It's all state money anyway).
Why do you think nurses "state pension portion has to be made up in some way"? and why do you not apply the same rationale to the state pension portion of private sector employees pensions?
 
Last edited:

Roman Emperor

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
10,115
...
For example a pubic servant who joined in 1995 at age 40 will be 65 this year and can retire this year with the equivalent of the same pension he would have received before the changes to State pension age thanks to this special supplementary pension designed to tide him over until he qualifies for the State pension next year at the increased age of 66. That scenario will continue into the future such that no public servants going forward suffer any financial loss as a result of increasing the State pension age.
Are you sure about this. My understanding was that public servants received the supplementary pension because they were obliged to retire at 65. Given that retirement at 65 is now optional, how likely is it that the supplementary pension provision will continue ?. I personally think it's unlikely....it would be difficult to justify.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top