LGPS gender gap reporting guidance a 'first step' towards more in-depth data
Pardon the Interruption
This article is just an example of the content available to mallowstreet members.
On average over 150 pieces of new content are published from across the industry per month on mallowstreet. Members get access to the latest developments, industry views and a range of in-depth research.
All the content on mallowstreet is accredited for CPD by the PMI and is available to trustees for free.
Industry figures have welcomed a requirement on Local Government Pension Scheme funds to produce gender pension gap reports, as the Government Actuary’s Department has published guidance to be used in the 2025 valuation cycle.
GAD’s final guidance for the 2025 valuation, issued in February, has been amended based on feedback to a draft version that was shared with fund actuaries in August 2025. Given the tight timeframes – the deadline for completing 2025 valuations is 31 March this year – the requirements are lower than what the government proposes should be reported in future.
Headline metrics for 2025 will compare accrued pension for each of active and pensioner members “as a first step towards the gender pension gap and gender pension savings gap metrics outlined in the consultation document”, GAD said, while employer reporting is limited to an accrued pension breakdown by employer category using the categorisation approaches already used by the sector.
The new guidance builds on two gender pension gap reports commissioned by the Scheme Advisory Board from GAD in 2022 and published the following year. Looking at 2020 data, the department found a mean pension gap of 41% among active LGPS members and 49.4% for mean pensions in payment.
The 2025 guidance “will be substantially updated to more closely reflect the final consultation outcome in good time for the 2028 round of LGPS fund valuations”, GAD noted.
The introduction of gender pension gap reporting in the LGPS has been welcomed, despite the additional burden on administering authorities.
Consultancy Hymans Robertson, a member of SAB’s Gender Pension Gap working party, is supportive of the requirement to report the gender pension gap in LGPS triennial valuation reports.
“We believe that providing quantitative analysis on this important aspect will help encourage debate and awareness of the gap, leading to positive action,” said senior actuarial consultant Greer Flanagan.
“As an active member of the LGPS community, we are pleased to see the scheme taking a leading role in highlighting awareness and, via MHCLG’s recent Access and Fairness consultation, also taking action to help reduce the gap,” she added.
Some are keen to see that action happening. “I am all in favour of highlighting the gender pension gap via reporting, but I’m more interested in the steps that might be taken to address it,” said partner at law firm Squire Patton Boggs, Kirsty McLean.
Given that the LGPS has a high proportion of female members, “it’s great that the government are taking steps to better understand the issues and proposing concrete measures to tackle them”, she added.
The proposed requirement to make all unpaid parental leave pensionable in the LGPS is particularly noteworthy, McLean said.
She believes that, as an additional employer cost, it “would no doubt be unwelcome, but if that obligation was extended more broadly across the public and private sector it could make a meaningful difference”.
GAD’s final guidance for the 2025 valuation, issued in February, has been amended based on feedback to a draft version that was shared with fund actuaries in August 2025. Given the tight timeframes – the deadline for completing 2025 valuations is 31 March this year – the requirements are lower than what the government proposes should be reported in future.
Headline metrics for 2025 will compare accrued pension for each of active and pensioner members “as a first step towards the gender pension gap and gender pension savings gap metrics outlined in the consultation document”, GAD said, while employer reporting is limited to an accrued pension breakdown by employer category using the categorisation approaches already used by the sector.
The new guidance builds on two gender pension gap reports commissioned by the Scheme Advisory Board from GAD in 2022 and published the following year. Looking at 2020 data, the department found a mean pension gap of 41% among active LGPS members and 49.4% for mean pensions in payment.
The 2025 guidance “will be substantially updated to more closely reflect the final consultation outcome in good time for the 2028 round of LGPS fund valuations”, GAD noted.
The introduction of gender pension gap reporting in the LGPS has been welcomed, despite the additional burden on administering authorities.
Consultancy Hymans Robertson, a member of SAB’s Gender Pension Gap working party, is supportive of the requirement to report the gender pension gap in LGPS triennial valuation reports.
“We believe that providing quantitative analysis on this important aspect will help encourage debate and awareness of the gap, leading to positive action,” said senior actuarial consultant Greer Flanagan.
“As an active member of the LGPS community, we are pleased to see the scheme taking a leading role in highlighting awareness and, via MHCLG’s recent Access and Fairness consultation, also taking action to help reduce the gap,” she added.
Some are keen to see that action happening. “I am all in favour of highlighting the gender pension gap via reporting, but I’m more interested in the steps that might be taken to address it,” said partner at law firm Squire Patton Boggs, Kirsty McLean.
Given that the LGPS has a high proportion of female members, “it’s great that the government are taking steps to better understand the issues and proposing concrete measures to tackle them”, she added.
The proposed requirement to make all unpaid parental leave pensionable in the LGPS is particularly noteworthy, McLean said.
She believes that, as an additional employer cost, it “would no doubt be unwelcome, but if that obligation was extended more broadly across the public and private sector it could make a meaningful difference”.
