![](Aspose.Words.944a6cff-c9d2-45b7-97d0-f80d1e1eef09.001.png)
Chief Minister’s Department
Civil Partnerships Consequential Amendments to States
Employees Pension Schemes
The Civil Partnerships(Consequential Amendments) (Jersey) Regulations 201- also include changes to the following occupational pension schemes, in which civil partners will enjoy identical benefits as those enjoyed by spouses and their widows/widowers and dependants:
- Public Employees (Contributory Retirement Scheme) (General) (Jersey) Regulations 1989
- Public Employees (Contributory Retirement Scheme) (Existing Members) (Jersey) Regulations 1989
- Public Employees (Contributory Retirement Scheme) (New Members) (Jersey) Regulations 1989
- Public Employees (Retirement) (Jersey) Law 1967
- Teachers’ Superannuation (Existing Members) (Jersey) Order 1986
- Teachers’ Superannuation (New Members) (Jersey) Order 2007
In relation to two “closed schemes” within the pensions legislation, members who become civil partners will not enjoy the same benefits to those enjoyed by widows. The two “closed’ schemes” are:
- Public Employees (Contributory Retirement Scheme) (Jersey) Regulations 1967
- Public Employees (Contributory Retirement Scheme) (Former Hospital Scheme) (Jersey) Regulations 1992
In 1987 the members of the scheme contained in the 1967 Regulations, and in 1992 the members of the Former Hospital Scheme contained in the 1992 Regulations, were given the option to remain under those schemes or to transfer into the PECRS Existing Members Scheme or the PECRS New Members Scheme. Some 85% of members chose to move to the newer schemes. Those who opted to remain were given an undertaking by the States that their benefits, under those closed schemes, would ‘never be diminished nor would they be enhanced’. The closed schemes were effectively mothballed and frozen in time.
Benefits enjoyed by members under those closed schemes remain different to the newer schemes. For instance, there are differences in optional and normal retirement ages between men and women, lower “death-in-service” benefits, no medical retirement enhancements, no option for commutation of pension (tax free lump sums) and no dependant’s pension. In addition, these closed schemes do not include “widower’s pensions”. Past legal advice has indicated that the closed schemes would not, today, be considered Human Rights compliant but may be considered as compliant under Human Rights legislation because members were given the option to move to the newer schemes (but many chose not to).
Those members who chose to remain within the closed schemes retained the guarantee of index linking to pensions and an earlier optional and normal retirement age for women.
It would seem anomalous to introduce widower’s pensions into the scheme going forward, which would immediately create a financial liability for the scheme, and might also leave the States open to claims from widower’s who in the past were not eligible for a pension.
It is also anomalous to introduce pensions for civil partners when neither scheme has a provision for widower pensions. In addition if it were decided to introduce pensions for civil partners into these two schemes, either only female civil partners would benefit by a “widow’s” pension, i.e. two males in a civil partnership would never be considered a ‘widow’ so would not be eligible, or alternatively, if one member of any civil partnership were treated as being the equivalent of a widow, and the other the equivalent of a widower (whatever the sex of the partnership), that would result in both male and female civil partners benefiting, but not widowers.
Although these two schemes will not enable civil partners to have the same rights as widows under the schemes, children of civil partners will nevertheless be treated in the same way as children of married couples.
It is considered highly unlikely that the policy not to provide for civil partners to enjoy the benefits of these two closed schemes would result in any civil partner being disadvantaged, given that there are only 102 active members in the 1967 Regulations scheme, and 11 under the 1992 Regulations scheme.