logo
The best jobs that allow you to retire early and how you could boost your pension pot to £345k

The best jobs that allow you to retire early and how you could boost your pension pot to £345k

The Suna day ago

EVERYONE dreams of escaping the daily grind early and retiring - but what jobs will help you do that as quickly as possible?
Here, we reveal the top roles to get the best paid pension and the employers offering more to make you richer in retirement.
It might be tempting to choose a job based on salary alone, but it's important not to overlook how it will affect you when you retire.
While private sector jobs tend to offer more flexibility and a higher salary, public sector jobs typically offer more generous "defined benefit" or "final salary" pension schemes.
These schemes guarantee an income that rises with inflation, making them a "gold-plated" option rarely found in the private sector.
In the private sector, you'll likely have a "defined contribution" scheme, where your retirement income depends on contributions and investment performance.
Auto-enrolment requires at least 8% of your salary (5% from you, 3% from your employer) to go into a pension fund, and the government adds to this through tax relief. For basic-rate taxpayers, every £80 contributed becomes £100.
Although defined contribution schemes may seem less appealing, starting early and maximising contributions can build a substantial retirement fund.
According to the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association, a single person needs £13,400 per year for a basic retirement, while a couple requires £21,600.
Craig Rickman, pensions expert at interactive investor (ii), said: "Don't overlook pensions when job hunting.
"Even though it might not seem like extra cash in your pocket right now, an attractive workplace pension means you don't have to save as much personally every month to retire comfortably.
"That's why it's vital to engage with your workplace pension at the earliest opportunity."
Kings Speech 2024 reveals huge pensions shake-up that could add over £11,000 to retirement pots
Below we reveal the best jobs in the public and private sector to help you build your pension pot and boost your chances of retiring early.
Top jobs for solid pension pots
Town planners have some of the most generous pension pots.
For example, someone earning £30,000 a year from the age of 30 could retire with an annual pension of £41,400 through the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS), according to ii.
The LGPS works by adding a small portion of your salary - 1/49th - into your pension pot each year.
This amount grows over time in line with inflation, helping it keep its value.
Boost your pot by £354,000
RETIREMENT expert Helen Morrissey, head of retirement analysis at Hargreaves Lansdown, shares how to maximise your pension savings.
She said: "Small changes can make big differences to your pension."
"And increasing your contributions beyond auto-enrolment minimums can make a huge impact over time.
"The amount you contribute now will directly impact how much money you have when you decide to retire, typically around age 68.
"For example, if someone starts saving at age 21 and continues until age 68, with a starting salary of £25,000 per year and an investment growth of 5% per year after fees, they could save around £236,000 by retirement.
"This assumes they contribute 5% of their salary, and their employer adds an additional 3%."
"If you increase your contribution to 10%, with your boss still adding 3%, you could boost your savings to roughly £384,000.
"But what if your boss is feeling generous?
"A more substantial contribution from your employer can significantly boost your retirement savings.
"For example, If you save 5% of your salary and your boss matches that with another 5%, your pension could reach approximately £295,000 by the time you retire.
"Even better, if both you and your boss contribute a hefty 10% of your salary each, you could be looking at a substantial pension pot of around £590,000.
"It really pays to find out what your employer's policy is on pension contributions – it could make a massive difference to your future."
Meanwhile, armed forces personnel don't have to pay into their pensions at all, as the Ministry of Defence contributes on their behalf, adding 1/47th of their salary each year and adjusting it for inflation.
The standard pension age is 60, but those who serve for at least 20 years and leave after age 40 can benefit from the Early Departure Payment (EDP) scheme, which provides a tax-free lump sum and monthly income.
For example, a sergeant retiring as a major could receive a pension of around £32,000 a year.
Plus, teachers can build a pension of roughly £25,700 a year after 40 years of service on a £60,000 salary, plus a £170,000 if they tax a one-off tax-free lump sum, according to ii.
Tax inspectors in the Civil Service Alpha scheme could receive £23,600 a year on a £36,100 salary.
The Civil Service Alpha pension scheme is a 'career average' defined benefit scheme where you build up an annual pension based on 2.32% of your pensionable earnings each year, adjusted for inflation
Police officers can retire after 30 years with about £22,000 annually.
Firefighters retiring at 60 might get £20,000 to £29,000 a year, depending on service length.
NHS workers build pensions based on 1/54th of their salary each year, offering strong retirement income.
Museum curators in public roles could get £15,000 a year after 30 years, earning £30,000 annually.
I tracked down lost pension and boosted my pot by £5,000
KATHERINE Brant was one of millions who lost track of an old pension pot – a common problem in the UK, where 4.8 million pots are "missing,
Each time you start a new job you start a new pension, which can leave you with several pots of cash that are easily forgotten about.
On average, employees lose sight of pots worth £10,000.
As an assistant manager at a charity shop in Lincoln, Katherine, 32, realised she had no idea where her old pensions were, fearing that the savings from her previous jobs might be lost forever.
Determined to take action, she decided to get on top of her pension planning during the pandemic.
"I only had a very basic understanding of how pensions worked, but I knew I must have old pots knocking around somewhere that I'd completely lost," she said.
Her search led her to Moneybox, an app designed to help people locate and consolidate their pension pots.
Unsure of what to expect, Katherine signed up and provided her details.
What followed was life-changing. The app helped her uncover a forgotten £2,000 pension pot, which has since grown to £5,000, significantly boosting her retirement savings.
With decades left before retirement, Katherine now has plenty of time to grow her savings even further.
"Finding this extra money feels life-changing—I had no idea it was even there," she said.
If you're looking to track down a lost pension pot, you can also use the government's Pension Tracing Service by visiting gov.uk/find-pension-contact-details.
Top jobs in the private sector
Some private sector companies offer generous contribution rates to employees.
The financial services industry tends to be a good place to start, with average employer contributions around 9.5%.
For example, Unilever provides a benefits package equal to 25% of your salary.
If you earn £40,000, this means £10,000.
You can decide how to use it - put it all into your pension, take some as extra pay, or split it, such as £8,000 for your pension and £2,000 as cash.
Shell follows with a total pension contribution of 20% (5% from employees and 15% from the employer), which can rise to 27.5%.
Legal & General combines a basic contribution with a matching scheme, allowing employees to potentially reach a total of 20%.
Kingfisher, owner of B&Q and Screwfix, offers a sliding scale where employees contributing 8% or more receive 14% from the employer.
Phoenix Group boosts salary sacrifice contributions, enabling employees to receive 14.2% while contributing only 2%.
A salary sacrifice scheme is where you agree to reduce your gross salary in exchange for a non-cash benefit, like increased pension contributions.
This reduces your taxable income and National Insurance contributions, potentially saving you money while boosting your benefits.
Royal Mail contributes 13.3% to its Collective Defined Contribution scheme, with employees adding 6%.
Tesco matches pension contributions up to 7.5%.
INDUSTRY trade body The Pension and Lifetime Savings Association calculates how much a single person and a couple need to afford different levels of comfort in retirement.
They factor in all household bills, groceries, travel and car costs, going away on holiday, clothes, beauty treatments and more, into the amount of money you need per year.
There are three lifestyle levels - minimum, moderate and comfortable.
Here's how much you need per year to afford them all.
Basic retirement: A single person needs £13,400 annually for a basic retirement lifestyle, while a couple needs £21,600. This covers essential needs plus a few extras like a small holiday and monthly cheap meal out.
Moderate retirement: A single person needs £31,700, while a couple needs £43,900. This covers one holiday abroad a year, eating out once a week, and budget for two or three weekly activities like going to the cinema or swimming.
Comfortable retirement: A single person needs £43,900, while a two-person household needs £60,600. This includes a foreign holiday and several mini breaks a year, as well as beauty treatments and hair appointments every six weeks.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Palace co-owner John Textor would sell shares for Europa League chance
Palace co-owner John Textor would sell shares for Europa League chance

The Independent

time35 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Palace co-owner John Textor would sell shares for Europa League chance

Crystal Palace co-owner John Textor is willing to sell his shares in the club in order to ensure the Eagles can enter next season's Europa League, according to reports. The American, whose Eagle Football Group owns 43 per cent of Palace, has imperilled the club's chance of a first-ever European campaign owing to his involvement with Ligue 1 side Lyon, but is ready to offload his stake to his fellow co-owners in order to bring the saga to an end. UEFA does not allow clubs with the same ownership to compete in the same European competitions in a season. As well as his stake in Palace, the 59-year-old has a controlling stake in the French club, also via Eagle Football. However it is also reported that the European governing body does not consider Textor's influence at Selhurst Park to be decisive and is leaning towards allowing the club into the Europa League regardless. The PA news agency understands no formal decision is likely on Palace's fate until the end of June. Textor has previously spoken of his frustration at how little influence his stake entitles him to, over football matters. Victory for Oliver Glasner's side over Manchester City in last month's FA Cup final gave them their first major trophy and with it a first crack at Europe. However, Nottingham Forest have since written to UEFA to challenge Palace's Europa League spot and in the hope of taking their place. Forest's owner Evangelos Marinakis, who also owns Greek side Olympiacos, placed his shares in the club in a blind trust before the governing body's March 1 deadline, anticipating Nuno Espirito Santo's side's European qualification. At present Forest, who finished seventh in last season's Premier League, are set to enter the Conference League but would take Palace's Europa League place, should they be deemed ineligible.

Fact check: how accurate are Rachel Reeves's spending figures?
Fact check: how accurate are Rachel Reeves's spending figures?

Times

time37 minutes ago

  • Times

Fact check: how accurate are Rachel Reeves's spending figures?

'The chancellor's speech was full of numbers, few of them useful,' said Paul Johnson, the head of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Reeves's speech was political to the core — and that extended to her use of statistics. The chancellor appears to have used whichever numbers best suited her position, predominantly to inflate the scale of the government's spending plans. She used bigger, cumulative figures to highlight the scale of investments, rather than annual numbers, and cash increases stripped of their context. She also used Tory spending plans from before the election, which never came to pass, as the baseline for the biggest numbers in her speech. When it did not suit her she ignored the Tory spending plans. While none of the figures are technically inaccurate, economists argue that they are a statistical sleight of hand and that Reeves would be better off being consistent in her use of numbers. Spending going up The claim: The first number in Reeves's speech — bar her obligatory reference to the £22 billion 'black hole' she claims to have been left by the Tories — was the boast that 'in this spending review, total departmental budgets will grow by 2.3 per cent per year in real terms'. The reality: This figure includes spending announced at the budget last year, where there were some of the biggest increases. Over the next three years, total spending — combining day-to-day and investment — will increase by 1.5 per cent. Day-to-day spending will rise by 1.2 per cent a year for the rest of the parliament, about half the rate it rose this year. • More for public services The claim: Reeves promised to add '£190 billion more to the day-to-day running of our public services' as well as an extra £113 billion to public investment. The reality: This is a comparison with previous Conservative plans — dismissed as 'essentially fictitious' by Johnson — drawn up before the election to set a trap for Labour and allow Rishi Sunak to promise tax cuts. The Tory plans envisioned day-to-day spending rising by only about 1 per cent a year, and big cuts in capital spending. Reeves reversed these by changing her fiscal rules to allow more borrowing and is increasing infrastructure spending. But on an annual basis, capital spending will be £151.9 billion in 2029-30, £20.6 billion more in cash terms than it is now. Day-to-day spending will rise by £50.7 billion by 2028-29. More for schools The claim: Reeves said she was providing a 'cash uplift' of more than £4.5 billion for schools by the end of the spending review period. The reality: Context is everything. The Treasury concedes in the small print that the core budget for schools will rise by 0.4 per cent over the next three years. It says that when the cost of expanding free school meals is stripped out of the figures 'you get a real-terms freeze in the budget'. • Rachel Reeves is testing voters' patience … she needs results Backing innovation The claim: Reeves declared that the government was 'backing [Britain's] innovators, researchers and entrepreneurs' with research and development funding rising to a 'record high of £22 billion per year by the end of the spending review'. In a press release the government said that spending on research and development was £86 billion. The reality: Despite the rhetoric, this spending pledge represents a significant scaling back of the government's investment ambitions in research and development. The previous government pledged to hit the £22 billion target by this year and then delayed it until 2027. This target has now been put back even further to 2029. Indeed, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology's budget will barely rise at all next year — far from the rhetoric of Reeves's statement. The £86 billion referred to in government press releases is a cumulative figure. More for social housing The claim: Reeves boasted of 'the biggest cash injection into social and affordable housing in 50 years', saying this would total £39 billion over ten years. The reality: The figure would represent almost a doubling of the £2.3 billion affordable homes programme. However, this spending ramps up slowly, reaching just £4 billion a year by the end of the parliament, leaving it to future chancellors to find ways of maintaining the spending. The overall capital budget for the housing ministry is actually flat over the spending review, with ministers relying on savings elsewhere — especially a reduction in the capital costs to councils of homes for asylum seekers. If these savings fail to materialise, painful decisions will be needed. NHS spending The claim: With health the big winner, Reeves boasted of 'an extra £29 billion per year for the day-to-day running of the health service' along with a 50 per cent boost in the NHS technology budget. The reality: The £29 billion figure is for NHS England specifically, and its budget will rise by 3 per cent a year in real terms, within a 2.8 per cent per year overall Department of Health rise. Capital budgets were increased last year but will be held flat for the rest of this parliament. Increasing technology spending further will therefore come at the cost of crumbling buildings or modern scanners and other kit. NHS leaders are already saying they will find it harder to shift to more modern, efficient treatments without extra equipment and buildings. Efficiency savings The claim: Reeves said the government had carried out a zero-based review of all government spending that would make public services 'more efficient and more productive' and, according to the Treasury, save £13 billion a year by 2029. The reality: These savings are, to put it charitably, extremely hypothetical and in some cases seem wildly optimistic. The NHS, the government thinks, will save nearly £9 billion from higher productivity — despite the fact that the health service has got less rather than more productive since Covid. And the culture department thinks it will save £9 million from 'digital reform' — despite the fact that the MoD, which is a much larger organisation, only thinks it can save £11 million. Overall the savings appear, at best, to be highly aspirational. But if they are not met, it will have a real-world impact on the amount of money the government has for public services.

Planet Normal: ‘The numbers don't add up' in Rachel Reeves' spending review
Planet Normal: ‘The numbers don't add up' in Rachel Reeves' spending review

Telegraph

time37 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Planet Normal: ‘The numbers don't add up' in Rachel Reeves' spending review

Mr Lyons wasn't convinced by the numbers, ' Early in her speech the Chancellor said, is the plan credible, and the answer unfortunately is, no.' 'T he starting position is debt is very high, and I think we're in the early stages of Britain going into a debt crisis. If you're looking for good news, it might be that we're not the only country facing this problem; but today the Chancellor gave a speech that I think lacked a lot of the detail.' Allison is not convinced by the claims the economy is stabilising, ' We know it is not true, and we are already starting to see the impact on employment and on businesses. We know payrolls have fallen, that employment's fallen by over 250,000 since Rachel Reeves' budget. This is not an economy where you should be taking the gambles that she's taking. Where is the growth going to come from?'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store