Timing is critical to the success of LGPS Access and Fairness consultation proposals, warns Hymans Robertson

LGPS administering authorities may struggle to deliver the changes proposed in the LGPS Access and Fairness consultation, because they are already delivering other time-intensive changes such as the McCloud remedy and connection to the Pensions Dashboard, argues Hymans Robertson. The consultation aims to deal with important social issues and rectify inequality and discrimination that exists for a number of members in the LGPS. However, its success will depend on changes being implemented in a timeframe that seamlessly integrates with the LGPS’s current workload, says the leading pensions and financial services consultancy.

While LGPS pension administrators‘ software providers will be important partners in delivering the changes, they are also stretched as they’re working to develop the required solutions for the McCloud remedy. So, these software providers would also need sufficient time to make any updates, adds the consultancy.

Commenting on the value that the Access and Fairness consultation will bring to the LGPS, Con Hargrave, GAP Consultant, Hymans Robertson, says:

“The government are taking welcome steps to address some long-standing and important issues in the LGPS. The proposals in the consultation should help improve member outcomes and rectify some of the inequalities and discriminations that exist in the LGPS. However, some of the changes will, in practice, be complex to deliver and likely require manual and time-consuming calculations, as well as historic investigations. The backdated changes to survivor pensions, death grants after age 75, and cohabiting partner pensions, are examples. This doesn’t mean that the changes aren’t valuable, but it does mean that expectations should be realistic to ensure that the government’s aims can be met.” 

Commenting on how the government can help LGPS administrators in delivering these changes, Hargrave adds:

“The government have sought views on the administration impacts of the proposals, and we’d encourage a staggered implementation to prevent overloading administrators. The proposals to change how periods of absence are treated under the scheme will require employer payroll developments and this is therefore an obvious candidate for delayed implementation, so that the necessary preparations can take place.

“Whilst it is likely the changes to address the Goodwin discrimination will be amongst the government’s highest priorities, the administration requirements are some of the most complex. For this, clear and detailed implementation expectations from the government will be helpful and ensure that administrators can plan comprehensively for the changes they need to make.”

Important information

This communication is based upon our understanding of events as at the date of publication. It is a general summary of topical matters and should not be regarded as financial advice. It should not be considered a substitute for professional advice on specific circumstances and objectives. Where this page refers to legal matters please note that Hymans Robertson LLP is not qualified to provide legal opinion and therefore you may wish to obtain independent legal advice to consider any relevant law and/or regulation. Please read our Terms of Use - Hymans Robertson.