Administering Authority Discretions : Abatement Policy

Agenda item number: 4 a)

Meeting: Tuesday 9 March 2010

Committee: Pensions Committee

Purpose

To propose a change to the abatement policy applied by Cambridgeshire County Council acting as administering authority for the Local Government Pension Scheme.
 

Electoral divisions / districts

All electoral divisions

From

Corporate Director: People, Policy and Law

Name:Allison Kew
Post:Head of Pensions
Email:Allison.kew@cambridgeshire.gov.uk
Tel:(01223) 718026

Member contact:
Name:Cllr. John Reynolds
Portfolio:Chairman of the Pensions Committee
Email:John.reynolds@cambridgeshire.gov.uk
Tel:(01223) 699173

Related documents

Recommendation

1. To change the abatement policy to:
Under Regulation 70 of the Local Government Pension Scheme (Administration) Regulations 2008 and Regulation 109 of the Local Government Pension Scheme Regulation 1997, Cambridgeshire County Council's policy is to abate pension when the member has entered a new employment with a Scheme employer or has re-entered the Local Government Pension Scheme in the following circumstances:
a) For individuals whose LGPS pension at the point of re-employment is more than £10,000 per annum and who return to work for 30 or more hours per week.
b) Where an individual returns to employment with the same employer within six months of retirement in circumstances where there are significant similarities in hours, responsibility and pay grade.
c) Where an individual employer requests abatement in specified circumstances.
Where abatement is pursued the method of calculation will continue to be as given in Schedule D5 of the Local Government Pension Scheme Regulations 1995 with the proviso that only earnings from permanent or temporary contracts of employment should be taken into account (earnings from casual employment should be ignored).
2. That the Corporate Director: People, Policy and Law, in consultation with the Chairman of the Pensions Committee be given delegated authority to implement this policy.
 

Details

Key decision: No