Professional added years on pensions in public service

P

poorrelative

Registered User
Messages
124
Just wondering if anyone knows whether professional added years are now defunct in the public sector since compulsory retirement at 65 has been abolished? Previously certain grades, who couldn't possibly attain 40 years service by the age of 65 because of the experience required to enter the position, could apply for professional added years to bump up their service to 40 years. Now that it is possible to continue working past 65 until 40 years are served then I assume that pots an end to professional added years?
 
I believe that 65 is still the operative age. There was administrative guidance on it circulated last year (2022). Google this for it: "Civil Service Professional Added Years Checklist".

However, there also seems to have been some discussion as to its "ongoing relevance" but no action on this as of yet. I imagine any change would have to be phased in and negotiated with unions.
 
I would have had a PAY application considered in 2024, based on my normal retirement age of 60. I joined the PS in 1999.

I could have continued working till 70, but retired at 60 and a couple of months.
 
I know of a guy who was employed into a certain position based on his qualifications and previous work history , so under that scheme he got 10 years added , he is now retired a few years on a full pension , a good deal for him . But I don't know exactly what circular it was applied under.
Google AI search threw this lot up if it helps .
1783958691056.webp
 
The PhD would have to be included as a mandatory requirement in the job spec, With the length of time it typically takes to complete the PhD, It should lead to a good application and award, however if working and getting pensionable service while studying a PhD would lead to a deduction. In my case, the post I applied for, the permanent grade had a Masters as one of the requirements, However I was employed initially at a grade that the minimum requirement was a Degree. In the couple of years between the temporary and full employment, I think I earned a couple of years pensionable service, one of which was used to reduce the nett award to NILL.
 
Mocame said:
Professional added years are still applied in the universities for PhDs only.
Click to expand...
not true in all universities....only lecturers (even though some don't have or require a PhD). University researchers (PhDs are required) are not entitled to PFA....go figure
 
No its the job type. Researchers are excluded even if they have CIDs. May not be in all universities but it is like that in UCC for sure. It could probably be challenged by the unions but there are so few researchers that stay until retirement age I guess.
 
PAY has definitely disappeared for new University entrants.
UL, where I work has about 80 people left in the system who have letters telling them how many years they can expect to receive. This generally consisted of people being awarded as many years as it would take to get a full pension entitlement (40 years service). In 2018 we were told these letters no longer apply. This prompted a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth. It's still in dispute afaik, with the Union attempting to go legal. I am one of the 80, but with people allowed to work until they are 70, the University has given us the facility to get to 40 years by working until we are at deaths door.
 
It is odd that they can be given letters with the number of years they could expect to receive. It looks like an arrangement that was outside the circular. Can they still apply under the circular, disregarding the letters.
 
The letters were received when UL had its own Pension Committee. This ended well before 2018 afaik. I received mine in 1995 for example. So for over 20 years I assumed I did not have to make provision for those missing years. When we were told the letters were null and void which to be fair were only advisory (but didn’t read that way), the cost of making provision was a lot higher. That’s what ticks me off the most. I wish we never had PAY, then I could have availed of cheap notional service. We can still apply for PAY within 6 months of retiring but there is very little clarity on what you will actually receive. The only way to get an idea is by asking newly retired colleagues. UL and the Union are not forthcoming with any data.

First world problems so no sympathy expected :-)
 
An interesting angle on this was that you were given pensions advice by unqualified pensions advisors, but I think the QFA came in much later. our pensions office (A former IT) are keen not to give any advice, the give factual information of course, but not any advice, as they are not qualified to give advice. Is is a case for the pensions ombudsman, you were disadvantaged by advice you were given by your university. The QFA came in 1st Jan 2007. It would be interesting if any employee got a letter after 2007, when it was mandatory to have the QFA to give pensions advice.

"1 January 2007 (The Initial Requirement): The Financial Regulator (now the Central Bank of Ireland) introduced the Minimum Competency Requirements (MCR). This made it legally mandatory for anyone providing financial advice or selling retail financial products (like life assurance, pensions, investments, and mortgages) to consumers to hold a recognised professional qualification (such as the QFA) or be formally grandfathered based on experience."
 
Last edited:
Well they weren't selling anything and they would argue they were not advising us too. AFAIK the PAY scheme closed to new entrants 1/1/2013. It's possible someone after 2007 has a letter.
 
It might be argued that the comfort of the letter prevented the poster purchasing added years, so in that sense it might be advice. Be interesting to look at the minutes of the pension committee to see what decisions the committee made over the years, 1 on the basis they gave out the letters, 2 When and any actions they took when the letters were voided by the department. If you could buy back the years at the earlier price it might be worth looking at some sort of action. You buy the pension based on the salary the year you buy it as well, and the salaries would have doubled over the intervening period as well.
 
DingDing said:
It might be argued that the comfort of the letter prevented the poster purchasing added years
Click to expand...
Almost certainly that will be one of the arguments used by the legal team. It will be interesting to see what happens. It has been a very slow process. Who knows, we might all get what we were promised anyway. Nobody knows for sure though.
 
Is it defintely true that it is cheaper to buy notional service earlier on ceteris paribus?
Could you still buy it now? Personally I actually think AVCs are a more flexible option in some cases but there are pros and cons with both I think and depends on the person and if they are married or not etc
 
Yes, there was a time round 2006 it got dearer as a percentage of your pay. It was also based on your pay at the time. Since the Op started in 1995, the pay would have at least doubled with pay rises and benchmarking, and if the percentage increased as well, its a double increase.

The comfort of the letter, cost the OP a lot of money. Why would a letter be issued by a pensions committee if it was not valid. It would be interesting to see how this was considered when the pensions were removed from the control of the university. You would expect any 1/2 decent due dilligence / risk assessment would have dealt with it. In this context the minutes of the various meetings of the trustees of the outgoing and incomming pension would be interesting. I would have expected the risk to have been identified and mitigating actions put in place, which just seems to be just cancelling the letters.

Interesting that the Union have no interest in progressing this. It would be worth putting motions to congress if this was a route for the local branch.

The 2 circulars are linked in the post below
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top