What kind of move is this? Transfer or competition?Hi I have a chance to move employers within the Public service onto a higher payscale (from LA to Dept of Defence)- I am wondering what affect this will have on my pension.
You should be ok on this score, as you would be moving without a break in service (or a break of less than 26 weeks). This is from the Single Scheme booklet:As a pre 2004 entrant to PS I presume my minimum retirement age(The age I can access my full pesnion) would be 60?(I started age 20) - would this still be the case if i moved?
I queried this as follows: Q: If I was appointed to this role would my existing pre 2004 superannuation conditions remain unchanged?
A: Your pension entitlements would remain the same – you will continue to be a member of the non-contributory pension scheme – we will look after transferring your service to our Department.
I dont really understand the implications of this ER?It would seem they are accurate in saying that your pension entitlements remain the same. However, if you joined the PS in 1999 then it is highly unlikely that you are in a non-contributory scheme. The latter ended for entrants after 1995. But no change from your current contributory scheme.
If you joined the PS in 1999 you are almost certainly in a contributory pension scheme (are you paying Class A PRSI?). So they were incorrect to say that "you will continue to be a member of the non-contributory pension scheme". However, I guess this is a misunderstanding on their part. The bigger point is that they are saying that you will remain a member of your existing pension scheme (which is contributory), and will not be transferring to the Single Scheme.I dont really understand the implications of this ER?
thanks for all the replies, its hard to understand, I am Class A, this quote is the crucial point for me.My mistake, Protocol. The Class D do contribute but at a lower rate. However, the main point for ADK is that they indicate that he would stay in his existing pension scheme, which means that his normal retirement age would remain at 60.
thanks for all the replies, its hard to understand, I am Class A, this quote is the crucial point for me.
It is certainly worth seeking clarification. However, the situation seems to be that the actual position advertised here is not as a public servant. The prior status of the applicant is, therefore, probably not relevant. The appointment will be as an employee of a public service body rather than as a public servant. These positions seem very rare but apply in certain circumscribed areas, eg, a civilian employee attached to the defence forces.It may be just you are offered a generic contract.
My current scheme you can access pension benefits at 60 whereas on this new scheme 65 without being actuarily reduced? why would anyone go fro this?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?