Post 1995 Supplementary pension query

S

stoves1

Registered User
Messages
85
I retired in 2022 as reached compulsory retirement age (60), joined Garda in 1999, so had to go on jobseekers for 9 months, had to get refused job seekers allowance in order to get my supplementary pension from dept of justice.
This Supplementary pension ( circa one third of my pension) is calculated in conjunction with contributory old age pension rate as of my retirement date ie May 2022, so recieved Supplementary after the nine months after informing Garda Pensions that i am not getting anymore welfare benefits.
I now notice that his Supplementary rate has not increased in line with anything, either ( yearly increase in OAP Contributory rates or % increases in national wage agreements), unlike the rest of my pension & pensionable allowances. ( The Supplementary part of my pension is the same amount as my retirement date)
I believe this is wrong as their are many government departments and public sector union body's which say:
Pension PRSI Class D ( pre 1995) = Pension Class A (Post 1995) + Supplementary
Having raised this with Garda pensions they say that this is a matter for DPERS.
I would appreciate advice as to how i can get my proper pension please, i have raised it with retirement organisation, Local Junior minister ( says its complicated),
I am thinking of raising a complaint to the financial services and pensions ombudsman would apppreciate feedback please. thanking you
 
Yes I would like someone to respond on this as it is not covered by anyone in P Service pensions
In fact, they are very reluctant to tell you about it at all
From reading the above I think it is linked to the CURRENT COAP pension - the % quoted for the SUPP pension amount seems to be very low at one third - I would expect it to be double that ..but i think it will depend on yoiur service etc on your main occ. pension amount
 
Thank you for reply, No matter where you work within the public service and joined after 1995 to 2013 you come within this system if you retire before the COAP age 66, you recieve this supplementary pension having to go through the hoops of claiming jobseekers benefit for 9 months first.
As we have to retire at age 60 it means i will be on this supplementary for 6 yrs until 66, then claim COAP as in my case i already have 40yrs prsi.
So my point is the supplementary part of my pension is calculated on my retirement date and does not increase at all for 6yrs, i think this is being interpreted wrong by justice pensions and wonder is it the case with all post 1995 retirees within the public service if they retire or are retired before COAP- age 66
 


The wording on this document is open to interpretation, but "equivalent benefits, had integration not applied, "would indicate you get exactly the same amount ( Public Sector pension, plus Supplementary pension) as the previous pension arrangments. This must, surely, include any relevant increases for the 6 years.

" A supplementary pension is not intended to bridge the shortfall in pension up to the maximum rate of SPC. Instead, it will give eligible members pension benefits equivalent to those they would have received if integration had not applied to their occupational pension."
 
Interesting thread, I will enquire with my benefits section but I reckon that the supp pension once taken, does not increase each year, until the COAP.
 
Nordkapp said:
Interesting thread, I will enquire with my benefits section but I reckon that the supp pension once taken, does not increase each year, until the COAP.
Click to expand...

If thats the case then all the government issued documents, circulars and various public sector advisories should be changed. They should read that all post 95 retirees, are no longer entitled to equivalence with pre 95 retirees. Their pensions will devalue, with inflation, for 6 years and not maintain equivalence with their pre 95 colleagues until the COAP is accessed. Even then, if the retiree does not have full entitlement to a full COAP, their pension will continue to devalue, in comparison to the pre 95 arrangements.

Its really not asking much that those planning to retire between 60 and 66 should have clarity on their entitlements.
 
For your information , this is from the Superannuation Handbook , your coordinated total income from the state ie work pension and SW/Supplementary Pension has to be the same figure as if you were Pre 95 , the purpose of this was to prevent fast accrual grades , Gardai , Prison Officers and Fire Service getting a big top up on the contributory pension which many had by leaving young in their early 50s , paying PRSI and getting Full Old Age Pension based on the old PRSI contributions scale .
Post 95 has to get payment from the state equivalent to Pre 95 , the problem is too many Departments dont know how to apply this properly.
1707410447412.png
 

MSN

www.msn.com www.msn.com

Of note the following
“In that light, DPENDPR have been reviewing the current process with a view of establishing a more efficient and, where possible, a technologically enabled approach to eligibility testing that will remove undue cost for all parties involved, while preserving the principle of Exchequer neutrality,” Justice added.

I know that some of the Unions will be starting a campaign about this soon , but it will effect all public sector who are Post 95 at some point not just the fast accrual grades.
 
I was at a union sponsored pre-retirement course and they hinted that negotiations were at an advanced stage regarding the need to sign and would be hopeful of an announcement. I didn't get a timeline, but I expected Months rather than years the way they were talking.
 
The other thread, on this topic, has been locked. There was a lot of aggressive posting from posters, who clearly didn't know what they were talking about.
However, the original request from the OP was perfectly valid.
Has anyone simply stated to their Intreo Office that they are not seeking employment ( because they are retired), been refused Jobseekers Benefit and then claimed the Supplementary pension?
 
I
Allpartied said:
The other thread, on this topic, has been locked. There was a lot of aggressive posting from posters, who clearly didn't know what they were talking about.
However, the original request from the OP was perfectly valid.
Has anyone simply stated to their Intreo Office that they are not seeking employment ( because they are retired), been refused Jobseekers Benefit and then claimed the Supplementary pension?
Click to expand...
If you are referring to my post, well I do know what I am talking about. I suggest you read the rules for claiming JSB. They are clear.
If the rules change, so be it. But the current rules are all we have to go on.
 
Conan said:
I

If you are referring to my post, well I do know what I am talking about. I suggest you read the rules for claiming JSB. They are clear.
If the rules change, so be it. But the current rules are all we have to go on.
Click to expand...
But these "claimants" don't want to claim Jobseekers, they are going through a farcical process, urged by all the public sector bodies, pensions and Intreo advisors, to claim Jobseekers. These people are retired, they want to retire, not work. They want to receive their full pension entitlement.
But they can't, because they have a right to a social welfare payment.
Most people just seem to play along, claim ( dishonestly?) Jobseekers for 9 months and then claim the Supplementary.
Has anyone been honest and told the Intreo officer that they have no intention of looking for work, because they have retired? If that has happened, is the Supplementary pension paid, immediately?
 
Your knowledge of the rules for JB is questionable.
This statement made by you in the locked thread is incorrect.

"claiming you read the "situations vacant pages", is NOT actively seeking employment"



This is what the JB guidelines state regarding actively seeking employment.....


Steps required to prove genuinely seeking employment
  • looking for information on the availability of employment from employers, advertisements, employment agencies and people who have placed advertisements indicating that employment is available;
 
Allpartied said:
Has anyone been honest and told the Intreo officer that they have no intention of looking for work, because they have retired? If that has happened, is the Supplementary pension paid, immediately?
Click to expand...
If you make that statement to the deciding officer you are forcing them to reject your JB claim.

Stating that you are available for and genuinely seeking employment is non necessarily being dishonest.

You don't necessarily need to put much effort into genuinely seeking employment and anybody resident in the state and capable of working is "available for employment"

It's all a game. If you decide not to play along and claim JB, you might end up with a shortfall to the first 9 months of your PS pension.
 
Last edited:
S class said:
This is what the JB guidelines state regarding actively seeking employment.....


Steps required to prove genuinely seeking employment
  • looking for information on the availability of employment from employers, advertisements, employment agencies and people who have placed advertisements indicating that employment is available;
Click to expand...

I note that the bold heading uses the word "Steps" which (as many of us know) is the plural of the word "step".

Yet you have decided only to list a single "step"! Perhaps, in the interests of clarity, you could consider listing all of the "Steps required"?
 
Steps which would indicate that a person is genuinely seeking work may include:
  • making oral or written applications for work to employers or persons who have advertised job offers on behalf of an employer;
  • looking for information on the availability of employment from employers, advertisements, employment agencies and people who have placed advertisements indicating that employment is available;
  • availing of reasonable training opportunities suitable in his or her case;
  • acting on the advice given by a Case Officer, the Local Employment Service (LES) or the Contractor. A Deciding Officer should question a person on whether he or she has acted on the basis of that advice.
  • taking positive, well-advised steps towards establishing him or herself in self-employment which would take the form of
  • researching possible areas of self-employment, or
  • preparing business plans for a self-employment project, or
  • attending relevant "start your own business" courses, or
  • seeking information, advice or guidance in relation to any of these steps.
Regard may be had to any other steps which a person has taken - provided they offer the best chance of getting employment.

Taking one step on a single occasion in a relevant period may not be enough to satisfy this condition unless that is all that was reasonable for the person to do in that period. Each action, such as

  • reading the Situations Vacant columns in the newspaper;
  • reading the job advertisements in the Intreo Offices and using the Work and Training Information System (WATIS) machine
  • writing to an employer,
  • applying for a particular job vacancy,
constitutes a single step to get employment. For example, checking the WATIS machine, writing to an employer and applying for a job vacancy in the same period would be taken as 3 steps to seek employment.

The steps which people are expected to take to seek work will vary from person to person and from one period to the next. In determining what are reasonable steps, the Deciding Officer should consider the nature and conditions of the employment sought and have regard to the individual circumstances of the person concerned in examining the steps taken to seek the type of employment in question.
 
Last edited:
As I have previously posted, it is my experience that a person aged 60+ will not be persued by the deciding officer to provide evidence of taking multiple steps to seek employment.

The post 95 PS retirees referred to in this thread are not being well served by the hard line comments of certain posters. Their comments do not accurately reflect the real life situation.
 
The issue for me is the need to collect the payment personally weekly in a post office. This limits the ability to travel as you are only allowed a couple of weeks holidays in the year. I find this severely limiting.
 
Yes that's annoying.

You could probably argue a case that as you don't qualify for JB while abroad, you are entitled to supplementary pension for those periods.

This whole situation of requiring PS retirees to claim JB is an absolute injustice.

There should be an extension of the rules applying to over 62s to include over 60s PS retirees. This would allow payment into their bank account.
 
Last edited:
I was thinking of retiring at 60, but I might hang on to 62 to avoid having to sign. Not being able to have the freedom to travel is a big disadvantage for me. I live nearly 3 hours away from Dublin / Belfast airports so Looking at late evening flights on a Friday evening, flying back on a Friday morning. it is an injustice considering I have been paying PRSI for 42 years and I have a full PRSI record mostly earned contributions with about 50 allowed contributions. I was having cancer treatment in the mid 90's, the certs said that I had Cancer and I was dragged in to see the Social Welfare Doctor. The minute the Doctor saw me he knew I was having treatment coming in the door. he said I should have told them I was having cancer treatment, and they would not have called me in, this was on loads of certs I submitted and apart from a brief period of unemployment in the mid 80's (Who wasn't) I had no illness claims.

On pension I will be a high-rate taxpayer, so I will be paying a sizeable portion of the JS on Tax, PRSI and USC.

I work in a niche area, and the only job that I could probably do that would utilise my skillset is the one I will be retiring from.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top