Comparing the University Superannuation Scheme to other non-contributary schemes?

[briskwalker]

I'm currently working in HE, and I'm a member of the USS defined benefit scheme. I contribute 6.1% of my salary, and my employer contributes a further 14.5%, which makes a total contribution of 20.6%.

I've applied for a new job with an independent public body. It's too early to see the full details of their pension scheme, but the job advert says there is a "non-contributary pension of at least 8%".

So, for ease of comparison, if my salary is the same, I think I will be 6.1% better off, yes?

But there is a big difference between a 20.6% contribution and an 8% contribution. Does this mean ...
a) the benefits will be worse than USS.
b) the benefits may be similar or better but, if so, that's because the pension has historically been better managed.
c) it's impossible to speculate without the full pension info.
d) something else?

I'm interested in your thoughts and experiences.

What type of pension is the new one? USS is defined benefit ie you get a certain % of your final salary at retirement (bit more complex than that). Most independent schools have defined contribution schemes - that means that what you get out at the end depends on how investments have done.

So in a DB scheme your employer is taking the risk on investments, inflation and how long you live. In a DC you are taking all the risks.

It's non-contributary, so a defined benefit scheme.

Non contributory doesn't mean it's a defined benefit though?

The answer is c though - would need to understand lots more about both schemes. For example, is the new school the only employer in the scheme? If so, that increases the risks of the scheme. In USS there are many employers so your employer becoming insolvent wouldn't mean the scheme going to the PPF.

C). The fact that you're quoting the USS employer contribution rate tells me you don't understand it!

As PP said - USS is a defined benefit scheme (up to a certain salary threshold, above which it is more of a defined contribution scheme, but let’s ignore that), So if you are below the threshold, it doesn’t matter to you how the pension is managed, your income at the end is linked to your salary and the number of years worked.

In a defined contribution scheme, if does matter to you how it is managed, because your particular pot grows with the investments made by the manager.

ETA; of course it matters to the health of the USS as a whole how it is managed, but not to any one individual