Agenda item

LGA Fire Pensions Adviser, Clair Alcock, provided members with an update on the work to make people aware of the risks within the Firefighters Pension Scheme. Clair mentioned the Pension Scheme Governance and LGA Firefighters Pension AGM events being held on 9-10 October 2017 and encouraged members to attend if they could.

On the Scheme Advisory Board, Clair told members that details of the three members nominated to sit on the board had been referred to the Minister and she was hoping for confirmation shortly. Members were told that the board had been consulted by the Government Actuary’s Department (GAD) with regards to two elements of the 2016 valuation, past service costs and industry specific assumptions, in order to respond to the consultation, external actuarial advice has been sought. It is estimated by GAD that the details of the change to employer contributions for 2019 will be finalised by about April 2018. Clair told members that changes to tax rules in 2016 will lead to significant numbers of the workforce becoming liable for tax payments on their pension savings. Tax awareness seminars had been commissioned to provide clarity on this issue. Details on events from the board can be found here.

Gill Gittins, LGA Principal Negotiating Officer, then updated members on the pay offer. Gill noted that the National Employers had written to the employees’ side suggesting that a 1 per cent uplift in pay was agreed while discussions about the wider offer were ongoing. A response on that matter was awaited. She advised members that the National Employers would be meeting on 5 October and that there were clear indications that the employees side wished to remain positively engaged in negotiations to secure an overall agreement on broadening the role and related pay increases. It also remained engaged in joint political lobbying work and issues being explored in the joint Technical Working Group in respect of learning points from the trials.

Gill also advised members that the team would be in contact with FRAs shortly before the meeting on 5 October to assess the impact of the FBU direction to its members that they should no longer engage with the trials with effect from 18 September as a consequence of rejecting the over-arching longer term offer. It was noted that there could be an issue at local level around MTFA for those services with specialist teams. It appeared that some local union officials may be interpreting the FBU instruction as also applying in that area despite it not being part of the trials. The FBU had issued a circular on MTFA following reports of some services advising staff that such work is contractual and already part of the role. The circular had expressed a contrary view but also advised members that its Executive Council had not made any decision yet, therefore it was not covered by the trials decision. 

Members made the following comments:

·         Members thanked the workforce team for their ongoing work, recognising the union change from initial rejection to a recommendation to accept, and felt it was a shame that the pay offer had then been rejected by FBU members. There were concerns that the workforce felt acceptance of the 2 per cent offer included an agreement to continue co-responding work indefinitely. Gill advised members that FAQs had been issued to FRAs at the start of the process, and that the FBU had also issued clear FAQs and a letter from the President so efforts had been made to make it clear what acceptance would entail.

·         Members were keen that the pace of the discussions remained unchanged and that an agreement on broadening the role was secured.

·         Members said that they understood why employees were concerned about the level of proposed increases in the context of increasing media coverage of public sector pay and lifting pay restraint but the Government position remained unclear.

Decision:

Members noted the update from the workforce team.