30 September 2005
Local government unions have rejected the employers' latest pension proposals as 'beyond the pale'.
A national strike across local government was called off in April when Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott agreed to revoke amendments to the local government pension scheme that increased the standard retirement age from 60 to 65.
The increase was facilitated by removing the so-called '85-year rule', which meant that scheme members who retired between the age of 60 and 65 could take unreduced benefits, as long as their years in service, plus age, added up to 85.
The revoked amendment included protection for older workers due to qualify under the rule before 2013, but the Employers' Organisation's latest set of proposals, obtained by Public Finance, do not.
'The proposals are much worse,' Unison's head of local government Heather Wakefield told PF. 'Not only are they proposing to remove the rule of 85 next April, they are now offering no protection for existing scheme members.'
Wakefield said the EO's proposals did not reflect the content of talks between the union and former pensions secretary Alan Johnson.
'The Johnson talks are suggesting there should be a protection period of at least between 2013 and 2018, and actually there are still discussions going on about protection for life for existing scheme members.
'Local government is being treated worse than other public sector workers. There's got to be parity of treatment with the other schemes,' she added.
The EO's proposals were presented to the unions on September 23. In addition to removing protection for older members and increasing the normal retirement age to 65, the EO proposed increasing employee contribution rates by 1% for 2 years.
Terry Edwards, EO assistant director, explained that the 1% increase was intended to offset the lost savings employers would have made had the amendment not been revoked earlier this year.
PFsep2005
