The BMA blog

Archive

Syndication

Tagcloud

active transport air pollution bahrain ballots banding bma council bma council chair bma council chair mark porter bma medical ethics bma membership bma parliamentary unit bma regional services board of professional activities board of science cannabis careers certificate of completion of training child and teenage health child healthcare class a drugs class b drugs class c drugs climate change clinical commissioning group clinical commissioning groups clinical directors clinical excellence awards clinical leadership clinical performance cocaine competition complaints conservative party consultant contract consultants consultants committee consulting patients contracted hours contracts cycling diet disability drug dependency emergency care england european working time directive food food safety and standards foundation programme funding general medical council general practice general practioners committee general practitioners committee gmc gp health and social care act health and well-being health policy and economic research unit healthcare spending healthy eating her majesty's revenue and customs heroin hours of work human rights illegal drugs industrial action international committee international development it junior contract junior doctors junior doctors committee labour party leadership liberal democrat party mass media medical education and training medical students medical students committee modernising medical careers nhs nhs care nhs employers nhs pensions nhs reform nhs supplies nhs system reform noise pollution northern ireland on call rotas out of hours services out of hours work out-of-hours work patient choice pay pct peadiatrics and child health pensions pensions committee performance postgraduate deaneries poverty procurement professional activities public health raising concerns rationing reconfiguration reconfiguration and integration revalidation review body on doctors' and dentists' remuneration science and public health scotland scottish national party scottish parliament study leave substance abuse targets tax tooke inquiry training waiting lists water pollution welsh gps committee west midlands westminster parliament whistleblowing

Signs of a fairer deal on NHS pensions post 2015

It’s been almost all bad news for doctors on the Government’s changes to the NHS pension scheme over the past 18 months.

And so the latest response to the BMA from Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt, opening up the potential for a much flatter contribution structure post 2015, is a significant milestone in our campaigning.

There has been a lot of activity on NHS pension changes over recent weeks, not least 2,500 BMA members responding to our call to write to their MPs to urge them to make amendments to the Public Service Pensions Bill (for which, thank you!).

The Bill, which brings together all of the public sector pension schemes under one legislative framework and enshrines the Government’s major structural changes, is currently going through its Commons stages. We’ve published a new analysis of the unfairness in the Government’s approach to public sector pension reform, I’ve met the Health Secretary twice since his appointment in September and I’ve given evidence to MPs scrutinising the pensions Bill.

While MPs on all sides appear unwilling to oppose the main thrust of public sector pension reform, I’m aware from my own meetings in and around Westminster that our combined lobbying is drawing interest. There is a growing awareness that doctors’ anger is not just going to go away and that the NHS and its staff are bearing a big burden in the response to the UK’s economic crisis — whether that’s through pension changes, pay freezes or efficiency savings.

Now, directly in response to our most recent pensions analysis, the Health Secretary has said he is to bring forward discussions on post-2015 contribution rates that were originally scheduled to begin next year. He also announced that, while the overall cost envelope for staff contributions remains unchanged, the Government has not made any decisions about the contribution rates across salary levels from 2015. Instead, he says he expects NHS employers and trade unions to make recommendations 'to be reached transparently, taking account of actuarial advice, and based on an agreed set of principles that is reasonable and fair to all staff'.

2015 is when the NHS final salary scheme will close (except for those within ten years of retirement, who are protected). This means the vast majority of NHS staff will then be in a career average revalued earnings (CARE) scheme, with a more even correlation between salary and pension for staff at all levels. We have argued that in a CARE scheme, aside from needing to protect the lowest paid and to reflect higher rate tax relief, there is no justification for ‘tiered’ contribution rates — ie staff on different salaries paying different proportions of their salary in contributions. Importantly, the Health Secretary says that these are 'reasonable' points that should be taken into account.

Of course, this isn’t by any means a government U-turn and there are still big problems with the current plans. These include the steep contribution rises due in April 2013 and 2014, as well as the linkage from 2015 between the NHS scheme and the state pension age, which is rising to 68. The Treasury also continues to put up a brick wall against any attempts to engage in a debate about fairness in the approach across all public sector schemes.

But with the opening of the Department of Health consultation on April 2013 pension contribution increases yesterday, the continuing parliamentary journey of the Public Service Pensions Bill and the Working Longer Review just underway — on top of the, now, more promising talks on post 2015 contribution levels — we have some clear opportunities for the next phase of our campaigning and lobbying activities.

And the role of individual doctors in making sure the profession’s voice is heard will be more important than ever.

Mark Porter is BMA council chair

 

Posted in:  Pensions

Tags:  pensions

Comments

  • Dr D M Bush

    21 November 2012

    The combination of increased (compulsory) contributions and the spectre of the Chancellor removing tax allowances from those contributions seems to me to be unreasonable and unsustainable. I would face the prospect of my contributions costing me up to £10000 more annually, which would force me to leave the pension scheme. Perhaps this is the intent?

  • Specialist

    21 November 2012

    How is a career average pension scheme fair to medical and surgical super specialists, especially academic physicians who have spent extra years in pursuing additional postgraduate degrees. These doctors have spent many years on lower pensionable salaries and often do not partake in private practice. Where is the BMA lobby to protect academic doctors?

  • steven haigh

    21 November 2012

    I am underwhelmed by the offer of a fairer deal from 2015. It is nothing more than a government ploy to fool us into thinking that the government are behaving more reasonably whilst pushing through the draconian changes pre 2015 - by which time we will have lost an unacceptable and irretrievable amount of ground. And what's to say that the government of 2015 will honour any promise (we previously made an agreement in 2008). Do not let this detract from the battles we are fighting in 2012-14 please.

  • Simon Fountain-Polley

    22 November 2012

    The relevance of the BMA now rests on how sucessful it is in ensuring a fairer system of pension contributions - if the BMA fails in its trade union role many of us may decide to use our BMA contributions to pay for increases in pension contributions

  • Rob Atenstaedt

    22 November 2012

    Not clear what is meant by a "flatter contribution structure post 2015". By that stage many of us will already be contributing 14.5% of our salary to our pensions. I doubt very much that this will then be reduced; once we are on 14.5% we will be stuck on this rate for the rest of our careers (unless it goes up again!)

    We need further industrial action now - before our rates go up in April 2013 and then again in April 2014!

    We also need to address the age discrimination in the pension transitional protection arrangements for the over 50s. Everyone in the NHS pension scheme, regardless of age, should get 10 years transitional protection.

  • Dr Sharma

    29 November 2012

    Well the Scottish consultants didn't go for more action - guess we'll see the buck stop here. In truth the BMA had the mandate in the summer and blew it - failing to get public support for clearly unfair proposals. When I've spoken to non-NHS workers about why I'm angry they've agreed with my motives - so why couldn't the BMA convince?

  • Dr Raveendran

    12 December 2012

    GP partners paying both the employees as well as the employers pension contribution. This means currently i am paying 22.5% of my income towards pension and this could go upto 28.5% by 2015. the higher rate tax relief may gradually come down. I feel this is time to leave the pension scheme for all GP partners and this may lead to the reversal of current NHS pension pot status - instead of yielding money to the treasury the taxman may need to pay for the pension in the coming years

  • Dr Fox

    13 January 2013

    I quite agree Dr Raveendran, what perplexes me is the fact that at no point has this monstrosity been pointed out by out representatives.

    Come on BMA how about representing GP partners? 28% pension contributions, then taked at the highest rate and anything left over taxed up to 45%.
    Im leaving the scheme this year before there is a flood of departures.

  • Dr Ryan

    13 January 2013

    I am afraid there is little point in relying on fairness.the proposed changes are clearly discriminatory towards doctors I would like to se the bmj looking into appointing a lobbying firm as this seems to be the only way politicians change thir minds.How about a contibution strike by telling us all how to opt out of the scheme temporarily till the doh comes to its senses.Perhaps we should ask for all the money back.Could the bma float the idea of a scheme with low overheads?

  • Dr S Au

    20 January 2013

    I agree as there seems to be no indication how to stop them taking 15% of our earnings for pension contributions. I think we can stop doing something such as revalidations etc and the govt will have to listen. I don't think they are taking us seriously or indeed we need to opt out the scheme --- any thoughts

  • Dr Harriss

    22 January 2013

    I am sceptical of any "listening" by the government because they have come up with a mechanism to claw back our pensions at any time without consultation with changes to the Lifetime Allowance (reducing to £1.25M). Have you all worked out what this means especially if the current factor (20) used to make this calculation is increased?

  • Dr Jones

    28 January 2013

    The contribution fight is all but lost -the treasury wants its money back and with the NHS the single largest Govt payroll , unfair NHS pension contributions are an effective tax - without changing the tax rate;
    Our fight must then be the grossly unfair link to of NPA to the rising state pension age - heading for 68;

  • K.G

    16 February 2013

    BMA is a eunuch when action is required. It has become part of the Establishment.

  • JCD

    11 March 2013

    I fear all changes stacked against us and so easy for government to pass legislation and make seemingly minor adjustments to the lay person but with massive impact to us. Also paying GP locum super ann contributions on horizon and with lifetime allowance reducing to £1.25M I have had enough and only feel safe by stopping superann contributions at age of 53 yrs from end of this month and take a chance. Difficult to believe I would one day wish I was much older than I am!!!!

  •  
  •  

NHS pension reforms

Get all the latest updates on the NHS pension reforms