{"id":517768,"date":"2025-10-21T19:47:20","date_gmt":"2025-10-21T19:47:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/517768\/"},"modified":"2025-10-21T19:47:20","modified_gmt":"2025-10-21T19:47:20","slug":"retired-defence-forces-members-challenge-pension-cuts-after-rejoining-public-service","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/517768\/","title":{"rendered":"Retired Defence Forces members challenge pension cuts after rejoining public service"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>An organisation representing retired <a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" href=\"https:\/\/www.irishexaminer.com\/maintopics\/defence-forces_topic-5074892.html\">Defence Forces<\/a> personnel has launched a challenge against the Government over the abatement of pensions applied when former military members take up employment elsewhere in the public service.<\/p>\n<p>The abatement is costing some veterans as much as \u20ac10,000 a year, according to Retired Enlisted Members\u2019 Association (REMA) spokesperson Gerry Rooney.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">The measure was introduced in 2012 following what he described as a \u201cunilateral decision\u201d made by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform (DPER) during the recession.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">Mr Rooney, a former general secretary of PDFORRA \u2014 the association representing 6,500 enlisted Defence Forces members \u2014 said REMA has lodged a claim arguing that the abatement was not properly implemented under Defence Forces regulations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">REMA, established just over a year ago, aims to protect the interests of retired military personnel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">The complaint has been submitted to the Department of Defence\u2019s internal dispute resolution process, Mr Rooney said, adding that several individuals have also filed similar complaints.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">\u201cIn practice, abatement means that soldiers, sailors and aircrew who have retired and earned their pensions see a portion of it abated where they take up employment in a better paid public service job. The practice is unfair, was introduced unilaterally and without consultation,\u201d Mr Rooney said.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">\u201cIt has had a particularly big impact on retired members of the Permanent Defence Forces (PDF) and is inconsistent with the way TDs, Senators and Ministers are treated. Abatement is not applied at all to politicians,\u201d Mr Rooney said.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">He said REMA has engaged with the Department of Defence about the abatement process, which applies to PDF members who joined the public service after 2012.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">\u201cREMA has made it clear that abatement was never a part of the Defence Forces pension schemes for enlisted personnel and that they should have been exempted in the same manner as TDs, Senators and Ministers. Moreover, the fact that abatement was introduced unilaterally and without consultation makes it legally questionable and open to challenge,\u201d Mr Rooney said.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">He noted that the Pensions Abatement Act 1965 provided for abatement across the public service, but politicians, garda\u00ed and Defence Forces members were excluded.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">\u201cAbatement was re-introduced unilaterally and without consultation under Section 52 of the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other provisions) Act 2012 with only TDs, Senators and Ministers excluded,\u201d Mr Rooney said.<\/p>\n<p class=\"\">REMA is seeking legal advice on its next steps. Mr Rooney added that if no progress is made through the Department of Defence dispute resolution mechanism, the association and affected individuals will appeal to the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"An organisation representing retired Defence Forces personnel has launched a challenge against the Government over the abatement of&hellip;\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":517769,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3093],"tags":[51,41229,474,617,2499,16,15],"class_list":{"0":"post-517768","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-personal-finance","8":"tag-business","9":"tag-defence-forces","10":"tag-finance","11":"tag-pensions","12":"tag-personal-finance","13":"tag-uk","14":"tag-united-kingdom"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/115413886222678468","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/517768","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=517768"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/517768\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/517769"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=517768"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=517768"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=517768"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}