Site icon AgeWage: Making your money work as hard as you do

What Reform UK could do to women’s pensions

henry tapper

A Pension Time-Bomb if you’re the wrong side of the pension gender gap

I have published details of the work that Prospect Union have done and are doing to narrow the pensions gap. I am pleased that I can follow this up by a disturbing article by Corporate Adviser’s Emma Simon about a threat in an area that I thought was improving, the gap between women’s and men’s public sector pensions.

Political plans to reform public sector pensions risk widening gender pension gap

The article continues

However, this new analysis from the union Prospect shows that the gender gap now stands at 32.9 per cent (for the 2023/24 year) — a figure which it describes as still “unacceptably high”.

This gap between men and women’s pensions is 3.6 percentage points lower than the previous year, but it does mean the women pensioners receive on average £7,200 less a year annual than men.

The union however has warned that even the slow progress being made on this issue to date, risks being undone by policies put forward by Reform, particularly in relation to public sector pension schemes.

This matters not just in local politics, the Pensions Commission is looking at pensions from a national point of view and though its final report is due in 2027 , the  implementation of its recommendations could well be stymied by a new Government.

It says that there is a danger that political parties seeking to address the cost-of-living crisis start to see pensions as part of the “so-called culture wars” and seek to shut down public sector schemes to new entrants. This they warn will further exacerbate the gender pension gap in years to come.

Overall it says there has been a long-term reducing in the gender pay gap due to greater female participation in the workforce over past decades; greater female participation in pension schemes (relative to male participation – particularly driven by part-time workers) over this period; increased state pension entitlement for women (relative to men – driven by the introduction of HRP and, much later, the new state pension) and relatively high levels of women enrolled in DB schemes compared to men, especially in the public sector.

Our Pensions Minister recently told a Pension Age audience that this was a reason to be “perky“.

Prospect adds that a number of pension schemes have taken proactive steps to reduce their gender gaps in recent years. Some of the most effective incoming changes are those implemented by the Local Government Pension Scheme, which came into effect from April 2026. 

Prospect has called on the government to adopt the measures across other public sector schemes. The changes include:

  • Making authorised unpaid absences of periods under 15 days automatically pensionable
  • Extend the time limit for buying back pensionable service in respect of authorised unpaid leave of 15 days or more
  • Make unpaid additional parental leave automatically pensionable (with the cost met by employers)

Propsect senior deputy general secretary Sue Ferns says:

“The continuing reduction in the gender pension gap is welcome. However, there is still a shortfall of £7,200 a year in income for an average retired woman compared to an average retired man.

“Progress remains far too slow, and it is of particular concern that the gaps in some public sector pension schemes are even worse than the average.

“It is however particularly encouraging that some, like the LGPS, are actively bringing in measures to address the problem. The government’s agreement to assess these measures for other schemes is a huge step in the right direction and others should follow their example.

“We cannot become complacent that things will continue to improve. There is a real political threat from those who wrongly characterise this cost-of-living issue as part of the so-called culture wars, and who would seek to shut down public sector schemes to new entrants. If carried out this could reverse all recent progress, leaving millions of people worse off.”

Exit mobile version