Unions 'handing Government the high ground' on public sector pension talks, expert says

Public sector pensions specialist John Hanratty of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com, said that "questions were being raised" over the motives of the unions which had rejected the proposals.

Changes to public sector pension schemes are due to come into force from 2015. The Treasury announced heads of agreement on the new arrangements just before Christmas.

Both UNISON and the teaching unions had been fairly detailed in their concerns over the 'accrual rate' at which members' pension benefits will build up and the effect of extending the retirement age on manual labourers, which Hanratty said could simply be "the prelude to further negotiations". However, the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) has been accused by the Government of "not engaging" throughout the reform process, he said.

UNISON, the largest of the public sector unions, has committed itself to further talks. Prospect and the GMB have also agreed to negotiate further while others, including health service union Unite, have rejected the Government's proposals. Meanwhile the PCS is continuing to call for strike action as part of its campaign against civil service pension scheme reform, following a nationwide strike by public sector workers last year.

From 2015 the various pension schemes under consideration will be calculated on a career average basis rather than on a final salary basis, meaning that the amount of a scheme member's pension will be based on average pay rather than earnings on retirement. The age at which public sector employees can retire will also rise in line with the state pension age.

Increased pension contributions, amounting to an average of 3.2% of scheme members' salaries, will be phased in over three years from 2012. However, the second and third years of these increases will be reviewed if schemes experience high drop-out rates from staff who cannot afford to pay more, the Government has said.

"Throughout the negotiations over the reform of public service pensions, the Government has been criticised – and not just by the unions – for the way it has communicated its position and how negotiations have been going," he said.

"Given the widely accepted belief that reform of the public service schemes is necessary to ensure fair, sustainable and cost effective pension provision for public service workers going forward, continued engagement is essential."

However, Hanratty said that it had to be remembered that the different unions represented different elements of the public sector, and that some of the pension scheme proposals appeared to be "more advanced" than others. The Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS), for example, intends to introduce a career average arrangement in 2014 – a year earlier than the others – in exchange for no increase in employee contributions for the vast majority of its members.

UNISON members in the LGPS voted this week to continue negotiating with their employers over the changes, with a full consultation on the final offer due in April.

Heather Wakefield, the union's head of local government, did not rule out the possibility of further strikes if "talks should break down".

Mark Serwotka, general secretary of main civil service union PCS, said the union had "no choice" but to oppose the Government's offer.

"We have consistently called for proper negotiations on the key issues of paying more and working longer for less but the Government has refused at every point, leaving us with no choice but to oppose what is nothing more than a political attempt to make the least culpable pay the highest price for the failings of the banks," he said.

"With no significant movement since two million public servants took strike action together on 30 November, further co-ordinated industrial action will be necessary to stop these unfair and entirely unnecessary plans."