NHS pay review body: twenty-sixth report 2012 - Official Documents

18
•
•
The IFS estimated that, for the period January 2009 to September 2010, public
sector workers were paid on average 7.5% more than private sector workers, taking
into account their gender, age, level of education and qualifications held. The IFS
found that the differential had increased since 2008, but was not significant in
London or the South East;
The ONS estimated that the differential in average hourly pay (excluding overtime)
in favour of the public sector was 7.8% in April 2010, compared with 5.3% in April
2007.
2.19 The IFS also estimated the effect on the average pay differential between the public and
private sectors implied by the current policy of a two-year pay freeze: its calculations
suggested that the differential would reduce to 0.9% in favour of the public sector by the
end of the current pay freeze in 2013.
2.20 Though these analyses are useful to some extent, there are limitations regarding their
applicability to our remit group: the differential for the NHS alone may be different
to that of the wider public sector. Additionally, there may be occupations or groups
of occupations where the differential against the private sector, taking into account
their particular characteristics, may be substantially different from an overall average
differential23 . This may not be possible to address within a pay system specifically
designed to deliver equal pay for work of equal value in the NHS.
Membership of the NHS Pension Scheme
2.21 The Department of Health provided estimates of the percentage of non-medical staff (on
a headcount basis) in England who are members of the NHS Pension Scheme. Figure 2.9
shows that, overall, 86% of staff contributed to the NHS Pension Scheme in both 2009
and 2010, and that the percentage of staff contributing to the scheme tended to increase
with AfC bands.
2.22 The Department’s figures also demonstrated that there is an association between age and
scheme membership: staff aged under 30 or over 59 were least likely to contribute to the
scheme. Figure 2.10 shows that the effects of lower membership rates for the lowest AfC
bands, and the youngest and oldest age groups, are additive: less than half of staff aged
under 25 and in AfC Band 1 were members of the scheme in September 2010.
23
For example, a highly-specialist scientist in our remit group could have a negative differential, compared to private
sector workers with comparable qualifications.