If you are, currently, retired did you have any problems getting the supplementary pension paid when you retired?
No problems as such. I had to apply and then show that I met the conditions (sign a declaration and have a form completed by the DEASP). Then I waited a few months until it came through (it was backdated).
Did you go through the farce of claiming jobseeker's allowance? How does that work?
Whether or not it is a farce depends on your point of view.
I did not have an issue with it. I applied and was granted. Signing once a month for 9 months. As it happens, the Jobseekers Benefit payment was higher than I would have been receiving on the Supplementary (or subsequently received). Also, I welcomed the PRSI credits. I would have had no option but to apply as the form that the DEASP had to complete as part of my Supplementary application referenced the JB. I assume that if the DEASP had refused the JB application I would have been eligible for the Supplementary at that stage, but I can't confirm.
Whether or not it is a farce depends on your point of view.
I did not have an issue with it. I applied and was granted. Signing once a month for 9 months. As it happens, the Jobseekers Benefit payment was higher than I would have been receiving on the Supplementary (or subsequently received). Also, I welcomed the PRSI credits. I would have had no option but to apply as the form that the DEASP had to complete as part of my Supplementary application referenced the JB. I assume that if the DEASP had refused the JB application I would have been eligible for the Supplementary at that stage, but I can't confirm.
Hi folks - I have a question about the Supplementary pension which I'd appreciate if someone could clarify for me please
The following is one of the conditions for qualifying for the supplementary pension:
'He/she does not enter other employment which involves the payment of a social insurance contribution'
I have a rental property - does the income from this 'classify as other employment which involves the payment of a social insurance contribution?
Thanks -Sidzer
It is an affront to people who’ve worked hard all their lives; forced to “sign-on” like Jimmy Rabbitte.
Nah. That is just a state of mind. I consider myself fortunate to have been in the pre-2004 pension scheme which allows normal retirement from 60. It is the post-2004 people and, even more, the Single Scheme people who have been disadvantaged. And you can forget the "Jimmy Rabbite" stereotype. Any people I met in the queue were just ordinary people from a variety of interesting backgrounds and situations. Jobseekers Benefit is short term and based on PRSI record. Social Welfare staff were all fine also.
I have had pension advisors tell me that this is the case. That the employer can say that retiring at 60 or any age prior to 67/68 could be classified as " your own fault" and therefore allow them to deny the retiree access to the supplementary pension.
I would suggest that this is just sales talk - or else idle speculation. If you are pre-2004 your normal retirement age is anytime from 60. You cannot be penalised for retiring from then on. (If you take CNER before that you cannot claim Supplementary until 60 of course). "No fault of your own" would refer to situations beyond the claimant's control, eg, Jobseekers Benefit used to be for one year - it was only after this that you could claim Supplementary then. It could be reduced to 6 months in the future in which case the Supplementary would be payable at that stage - or the DEASP could change the conditions in some other way - or the person could refuse to apply at all (that clearly is in the person's control).
I am well aware I am not alone - I know others in my situation who have also gone through the process. Of course, I have no way of knowing if this is the universal experience. As I say, I do not know what would have happened if DEASP had denied my claim outright - I can only guess that I would then have been able to apply for the Supplementary straight away (on the basis that this would have been "outside of my control" also).
I think that's a bit flippant, to be honest, I am being told that I won't receive the pension that I believed I was to receive, that's not a state of mind, that's a major game-changer.
My compulsory retirement age is 60 ...............
and my employer paying their contribution, I am being advised that I will not receive my full pension when I retire, which is now in five years. I have been advised that I must first sign on the dole for nine months, even though I am retiring. Currently the rate of JSB still actually leaves me short of my full pension, when that exhausts after 9 months, then I have to apply for the supplementary allowance to bring me up to the pension that I believed that I would be in receipt at when I retired at 60. I have never signed on the dole in my life and it is beyond bizarre to me that after working my entire life and paying all of the required contributions that I will not receive the pension that I believed I was entitled to when I have no choice but to retire at age 60.
I am not meaning to be flippant. But what you believed and what were the actual terms of the scheme may not have been the same thing. As far as I know, the terms of the pre-2004 scheme have not changed since the inception of "Integration" in 1995, except for the introduction of the Supplementary Pension in 1999 ([broken link removed]). Nothing happened in relation to my retirement that was not consistent with the terms of the scheme. And this scheme is, in my opinion, significantly more attractive than either the post-2004 scheme or the Single Scheme.
If yo have a compulsory retirement age of 60 then you are not in one of the mainstream public sector schemes but one for a special category of workers. That being so, I am not familiar with it and cannot comment directly. However, just a few observations.
Did the terms of the scheme change suddenly or were you just unfamiliar with the terms? These are two very different scenarios and you would have considerably more rights in one of them. What you believed you were entitled to and what were in the terms of the scheme are not necessarily the same (and I not being flippant).
As regards the Jobseekers Benefit being less than you would be entitled to with the Supplementary. This being so, then the terms of the Supplementary allow for a reduced Supplementary to bring you up to the relevant amount. So if your full Supplementary Pen. should be €260 p/w and Jobseekers pays €200 p/w, you would be entitled to a Supplementary of €60 p/w for the duration.
The terms of my scheme were very clear, 40/80ths of my final pensionable salary, but that is not the information that I am now receiving.
With respect to the supplementary payment, the information I have received clearly states that before I can apply for this then I must exhaust all my social welfare entitlements, so if I am in receipt of JSB, then I can't apply for the supplementary.
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?