Harrow's Pension Fund has revealed a substantial gender pension gap, with active members experiencing a 36% disparity and pensioners facing an even wider gap of 48%. These findings, detailed in the triennial valuation report for 2025, highlight a persistent issue in pension provision.
The report indicates that for active members, the mean CARE pension gap stands at 33%, and the final salary pension gap is 42%, contributing to the overall mean total pension gap of 36%. For pensioner members, the overall gap is a significant 48%.
The gender pension gap is calculated using the formula: $$GPG = \frac{Mean\ pension\ value\ for\ males - Mean\ pension\ value\ for\ females}{Mean\ pension\ value\ for\ males}$$. The analysis for active members relies on membership data provided by the Fund for the 2025 actuarial valuation, including gender information. All multiple membership records have been summed for the fund calculation.
While the report acknowledges the gap, it notes that direct action by the fund is limited in the short term. This is because rectifying the disparity is largely dependent on broader societal changes, such as achieving equal pay. The report suggests that the only way to rectify it will be to equal salaries, wouldn't it? Which is fine, but not meaningless.
It also highlights that the pension is so linked to service that it is almost impossible to catch up that gap through pay alone. You need to actually go really, really far ahead to try and get that kind of parity.
The report also implies that changes in working patterns will eventually be reflected in the gender pension gap data over time, indicating that evolving societal working patterns are also a factor in narrowing the gap.
The gender pension gap can vary by employer category for active members. For instance, Centrally funded public sector bodies excluding academies
show a 27% CARE pension gap and a 48% Final Salary pension gap, whereas Academies
exhibit an 8% CARE pension gap and a 9% Final Salary pension gap. Charts within the report also illustrate the gender pension gap at different ages for active members, suggesting variations across age groups.
For pensioner members, the report shows a mean pension gap of 48% and provides charts illustrating the total pension at each age, split by sex, and the gender pension gap at each age, implying variations across age groups.
While the fund's primary focus is on ensuring long-term solvency and cost efficiency, the gender pension gap remains a significant concern that will be monitored. Mandatory reporting on the gender pension gap is set to be introduced. The report includes analysis of the gap for active and pensioner members, using metrics such as the number of members, mean age, mean pay, and mean pension values. The purpose of this reporting is to know where we are, to start off with this so we can see over time what's happening. Is this a gap that's getting bigger or smaller? And try to tease out what it means.
The report can be found in the Triennial Valuation 2025 Final Report.
