Has anyone ever challenged the pension abatement

P

partnership

Registered User
Messages
651
If you have a public sector pension and take up employment in the public sector your pension is subject to abatement. If you take up private sector work it is not abated.

This seems to be unfair. Your pension is based on your service and you have paid into it so why should you lose out through abatement? It is also a disincentive for anyone to remain the the public sector if they have done their 40 years.
Has this been challenged in the courts yet?
 
I agree that it seems unfair and I'm surprised that it hasn't been challenged in the courts (or perhaps it has?)

The basis for it appears to be about saving money - and the wording suggests that a public sector pension combined with a PS salary is some kind of charity that you're lucky to be in receipt of, rather than a payment for services rendered. The justification for it is not explained anywhere officially that I can find - and it's based purely on that fact that it has "always been done that way".

The principle of pension abatement has existed in the public service for many years, with its application stemming from the relevant pension scheme rules and legislation applicable to a particular public service body or sector. This meant that, historically, pension abatement generally only applied to the pensions of retired public servants who secured another public service appointment in the body/sector from which they originally retired.

Found this from a Parliamentary Question answered by Paschal Donohoe last year. Note the use of the word "valuable" in relation to your PS Pension - i.e you've won the Pensions Lotto!

www.oireachtas.ie

Public Sector Pensions

Public Sector Pensions Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 27 June 2023
www.oireachtas.ie
The policy rationale behind abatement is to avoid a situation where individuals benefit from both a valuable public service pension and also a public service salary. In that context, pension abatement represents a suitable and measured response to legitimate public concerns and remains a key component of Public Service pension policy.
 
Last edited:
The UK public service also has pension abatement. It still applies in the same way as ours did prior to 2012, ie, to re-employment within the retiree's own sector - civil service, heath, education, etc.

I don't know the history but it is quite possible that we inherited abatement along with the rest of the UK civil service pension provisions at the foundation of the State. It has certainly been around long enough in both jurisdictions for a challenge to have been mounted if anyone was inclined to do so - or advised that it could be successfully challenged.

Our abatement provisions were generalized across the PS in 2012. It is probably not a coincidence that it was at a time when there had been fairly widespread incentivized early retirement schemes on offer.
 
Hard to believe Abatement has not been challenged. It seems very unfair. Worked in University Admin for 15 years paid D class contributions. Preserved Defined Benefit Pension with mandatory drawdown at 60. Worked in private industry for a couple of years and then took up a teaching position in a primary school for 17 years. If I was to calculate the pension for each time period/position together with the reduced contributory pension (excluding the years that were D class contributions my pension would total approx 21,000. However if both public service positions where combined the total pension is then approx 20,000. An ongoing loss of 1,000 p.a. There is also the fact that the whole of the D class Defined Benefit pension of 8000 p.a. is abated between the years of 60 and 66 which is a loss of 48,000!!

It really should be challenged. How could I go about this?
 
According to this Parliamentary Question asked by Dara Calleary in 2022 there have been no legal challenges to Pension Abatement to date.

This is very surprising - I would have thought it would be challenged given the amount of people it affects. Can it really be that robust legally?

www.oireachtas.ie

Pension Provisions

Pension Provisions Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 14 July 2022
www.oireachtas.ie

Q: Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of legal challenges to date per Department to pension abatement under the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Act 2012, in tabular form.

A: There have been no legal challenges to date in respect of the application of Section 52 of the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Act 2012 in which the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform has been a respondent.
 
There’s a provision for the minister to exempt certain classes of person or individuals.

I wonder how often it has been used?

4) The Minister may, at his or her discretion waive the application of subsection (1) in any particular case, including a case involving a class of person or persons, if the Minister is satisfied that—​
(a) persons with particular training and experience are required for particular work in the public service body concerned,​
(b) the pensioner has that training and experience, is being employed for that work and is otherwise suitable for employment in all respects, and​
(c) it is not practica​
 
www.oireachtas.ie

Public Sector Pensions

Public Sector Pensions Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 3 May 2023
www.oireachtas.ie

Details there, limited number of cases in the HSE during covid, and one for teachers but limited in the number of days per year.

I would say its not given easily.
 
One option is your PS employer to pay you through a company.

One I used is https://www.fenero.ie/ Not to avoid amatement, just a company didn't want to pay me through the payroll, it was a private sector company.

Works well, Fenero issue the invoice through an umbrella company that employs you. The company pays the invoice, Fenero pay you, less their fee and the Employers PRSI which you are charged. You can also avail of 1,500 of tax free gift cards per year as well.

And the tax and PRSI paid appears on your revenue account with the umbrella company as your employer.

Once the invoice was paid, the money was in my bank account in a couple of days and a few days later the gift cards arrived by email.
 
The other related issue is the deduction of the supplementaty pension for days worked.

It looks like they have applied unemployment benefit rules to a pension payment.

This applies to all work, not just PS work.
 
We now have an answer to the title of this thread - some of us will be watching this very closely. (Can't see how a case such as this can lose. The fact that, "it is has always been done this way," is a weak defence.)

www.irishexaminer.com

Retired Defence Forces members challenge pension cuts after rejoining public service

The Retired Enlisted Members’ Association says pension abatement rules unfairly penalise former Defence Forces personnel rejoining the public service
www.irishexaminer.com www.irishexaminer.com

The abatement is costing some veterans as much as €10,000 a year, according to Retired Enlisted Members’ Association (REMA) spokesperson Gerry Rooney.

The complaint has been submitted to the Department of Defence’s internal dispute resolution process, Mr Rooney said, adding that several individuals have also filed similar complaints.

“In practice, abatement means that soldiers, sailors and aircrew who have retired and earned their pensions see a portion of it abated where they take up employment in a better paid public service job. The practice is unfair, was introduced unilaterally and without consultation,” Mr Rooney said.

“It has had a particularly big impact on retired members of the Permanent Defence Forces (PDF) and is inconsistent with the way TDs, Senators and Ministers are treated. Abatement is not applied at all to politicians,” Mr Rooney said.
 
I'm actually one of the people involved in this challenge, God help me !
I'm losing 900 euro a month for my public service pension for the crime of going back to work in the public service taking home weekly around 500 euro after tax
Hardly a kings random.
 
I'll be following it closely too. But at this point I can't see much rationale in Gerry Rooney's argument that just because politicians aren't subject to abatement - although seemingly every other public servant is - then neither should former enlisted personnel. :confused:
 
To me it's quite straightforward and comes down to lack of equity - i.e treating people doing the same job differently, based on their previous career (even if it has little to do with their new PS role.)

The tax system takes care of any perceived "excess" income, including pension payments.
 
I'll keep people updated.
I sent off the paperwork ages ago
We see what happens, even if they capped it at say 200 per month e.g
I'd be happy
 
It’s hard to reconcile with the constitutional right to earn a living.

My mother is a retired teacher and is subject to abatement for subbing in a normal school but not her hours in a private language school. The differential tax treatment for what is basically the same work is again very difficult to justify.

Likewise on EU freedom of movement grounds. A retired teacher from France could teach in an Irish school with no abatement whereas their colleague who’d retired after a career in Ireland would be subject to it.
 
Interesting Seanad debate from 2016 on the subject of pension abatement. The question was asked by Gerard Craughwell and once again, the answer provided by Paschal Donohue's stand-in was weak and unconvincing. (Key parts below.) Would love to see this challenged in court on equality/equity/property rights grounds.

Public Sector Pensions: 20 Jul 2016: Seanad debates (KildareStreet.com)

A site about the Houses of the Oireachtas that you can actually follow.
www.kildarestreet.com

Q: To highlight the unfairness, I will set out an example involving two public servants who have retired from a security related post at the age of 58 years. Let us suppose their pre-retirement salary was €45,000 per year. They both now have a pension of €22,500. Then let us suppose both are offered positions in different public hospitals and the salary for the new job is €45,000. Person A, who went to the job by way of an agency, gets a €45,000 salary and his pension of €22,500 as a result of being an agency employee. Person B is hired directly by the hospital. However, because the salary is now €45,000 his pension is totally abated because he cannot earn more or benefit as a result of pension abatement. This is totally unfair. Only a small number of people are affected by this because most staff rehired to the public service come through agencies.

We have frequently heard from Governments in the past that the pensions of former taoisigh and Ministers are subject to property rights and cannot be touched. The argument is that the relevant people have earned them and paid for them and that they belong to them. Yet this does not apply when we are discussing people in the public service who retire on relatively meagre pensions and seek to re-enter the public service or are offered jobs because they have particular expertise.

A: I thank Senator Craughwell for raising this issue. Abatement in the public service is intended to ensure that when retired public servants who are in receipt of a public service pension are reappointed to the public service, the associated pensions are reduced in order that they receive no more than the pension and pay that they would have received if they had continued to serve in their former post. The practice of abatement goes as far back as the Superannuation Act of 1834

...it represents a suitable and considered response to legitimate public concerns about the simultaneous payment of pension and salary in the public service. The Minister is satisfied that the abatement of public service pensions, which is what the Senator is talking about, as provided under the terms of section 52 of the 2012 Act is lawful, fair and necessary. However, I will bring the Senator's concerns about the issues raised to the Minister, Deputy Donohoe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top