“I'm able to do more in the day, which means I'm providing more value to my clients - and it's helped my margins in terms of how much I can bill. LexisNexis is helping me make money.”
ParrisWhittakerAccess all documents on AFPS
Judgment published on 10 December 2024 The Employment Tribunal (ET) concluded that a mistake in the agreed statement of facts did not disturb its determination that refusing Majorj Charles Milroy access to the armed forces’ pension scheme, as a part-time worker, constituted less favourable treatment. In a reconsideration decision issued on 20 November 2024, Employment Judge Frances Eccles stated that, despite the inaccuracy, the interests of justice did not require the tribunal to amend or overturn its original ruling. The ET also recorded that the initial statement of facts was wrong to imply that mobilised reservists were eligible to join the Armed Forces Pension Scheme 1975, known as the AFPS 75. The panel found that the AFPS 75...
Employment Judge Frances Eccles, sitting at the Glasgow Employment Tribunal, held that the MoD contravened the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, SI 2000/1551 by subjecting Major Charles Milroy to less favourable treatment than comparable full-time staff. As a territorial army reservist he was paid a reduced daily rate and denied entry to the armed forces’ pension scheme, per a judgment issued on 5 August 2024 and published on 12 August 2024. In the 5 August 2024 reasons, Judge Eccles concluded the claimant had been treated less favourably as a part-time worker because he was refused membership of the Armed Forces Pension Scheme 1975 (AFPS 75) and its successor schemes, and because a divisor of 365.25 was applied to calculate his daily pay, when contrasted with the approach to full-time comparators. Judge Eccles further determined that the MoD had barred Milroy—who served in the Territorial Army from 1982 until retiring in 2019—from joining the pension arrangements for military personnel, namely AFPS 75 and later iterations, purely on...
Statutory framework At present, four principal pension schemes operate in England and Wales for members of the armed forces. These are: Armed Forces Pension Scheme 1975 (AFPS 1975) — formerly open only to the regular forces; closed to new members from 6 April 2006 and stopped future accrual from 1 April 2022 Armed Forces Pension Scheme 2005 (AFPS 2005) — likewise for the regular forces only; also closed to future accrual from 1 April 2022 Reserve Forces Pension Scheme 2005 (RFPS 2005) — open to full time reservists; again closed to future accrual from 1 April 2022 Armed Forces Pension Scheme 2015 (AFPS 2015) — open to the regular forces and all reservists; effective from 1 April 2015 There are also several other schemes, run by the same manager, that provide pension or other occupational benefits to armed forces personnel. This Practice Note focuses on AFPS 2015. The AFPS 2015 was established under section...
These are occupational arrangements for staff working in central or local government, a nationalised industry or other statutory bodies. They encompass pension schemes established by statute for: armed forces (AFPS) police firefighters civil service (CSPS) teachers local government (LGPS) National Health Service Public sector pension schemes cover roughly 12 million people, including about 5 million active members. The LGPS in England and Wales is the largest public sector pension scheme. Key features Often termed unfunded—in essence, there is no pot built from past worker payments to meet current pensions; benefits are met by today’s employees and the employer (effectively the state) on a pay‑as‑you‑go basis Most operate in deficit as contributions do not fully cover current pension outgoings, with the Treasury making up the shortfall The LGPS is distinct as it holds underlying investments Contributions Contribution levels differ significantly between sectors and by scheme There...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews the range of public sector pension arrangements and the particular matters to consider when addressing them within family proceedings, including principal features, benefits, valuation, and the effect of steps taken to eliminate unlawful discrimination arising from the 2015 reforms (the McCloud remedy). It also sets out key practical pointers when dealing with a public sector pension... Public sector pensions are occupational arrangements for staff employed by central or local government, a nationalised industry, or other statutory bodies. They include schemes for: armed forces police firefighters civil service teachers local government National Health Service (NHS) Public sector schemes, especially those for uniformed services, are often intricate, so in many instances it is vital to obtain advice from a pensions on divorce expert (PODE). See also the Pension Advisory Group: A Guide to the Treatment of Pensions on Divorce (December 2023) (Second Edition) at Appendix I for the complexities within certain...