The major public-sector pension schemes look similar from a distance. All are career-average, defined-benefit schemes that pay an inflation-linked income for life. Up close they differ a lot: in what members pay, how fast pension builds, and how it's increased while you work. Putting the same salary through each one is the clearest way to see the differences.
Five schemes at £45,000
Take a salary of £45,000 in 2026/27 and assume a basic-rate taxpayer in England with no student loan.
A police officer in the 2015 scheme pays 13.88%, about £6,246 a year, and takes home about £30,923. Their year of service builds about £814 of pension, at one 55.3th of pay. A teacher in the Teachers' Pension Scheme pays 8.6%, about £3,870, takes home about £32,824, and builds about £789 a year, at one 57th. An NHS employee pays 9.8%, about £4,410, takes home about £32,392, and builds about £833, at one 54th. A civil servant in alpha pays 5.45%, about £2,453, takes home about £33,958, and builds about £1,044, at 2.32% of pay. A member of the Armed Forces pays nothing, takes home about £35,920 before accommodation and food charges, and builds about £957, at one 47th.
What the comparison shows
Two patterns stand out. First, member contributions and pension built don't line up. Police officers pay the most and build less than civil servants, who pay the least of the contributory schemes. The difference reflects things the headline rates don't show: earlier pension ages in some schemes, different benefits for families and ill-health, and how each scheme was costed when it was set up.
Second, the way pensions grow while you work differs. Police and Armed Forces pensions are increased in line with average earnings, plus 1.25% for police. NHS and teachers' pensions are increased by consumer prices plus 1.5% and 1.6% respectively. alpha is increased by consumer prices alone, which partly offsets its faster build rate. Over a long career these differences compound, so a scheme with a slower build rate but faster revaluation can end up worth more.
Why the cliffs matter more in some schemes
All the contributory schemes use non-marginal tiers: once your pay crosses a threshold, the higher rate applies to all of it. The jumps are biggest where the tiers are widest apart. That's why a promotion or pay-point rise can briefly reduce take-home pay in policing and teaching, and why the calculator above checks each scheme's boundaries for you.
Using the comparison
None of these schemes can be swapped for another, so the comparison is mainly useful in two situations. If you're choosing between public-sector careers, it shows that take-home pay alone understates the differences. And if you're weighing a public-sector job against a private one, it shows that the pension is worth far more than the employee contribution suggests. Each contributory scheme here is backed by employer contributions of more than 20% of pay, and the Armed Forces scheme is funded entirely by the employer, against a 3% minimum for most private-sector auto-enrolment pensions.
What these figures leave out
The comparison above uses one salary and ignores some real differences between the schemes. Pension ages vary: police and Armed Forces members can usually retire earlier than NHS staff, teachers or civil servants, which makes their pensions more valuable for the same annual amount. Ill-health and death benefits differ too. And contributions are tiered differently, so at other salaries the ranking can change. Use the comparison as a starting point and check your own scheme's member guide for the detail.
Next steps
Pick your scheme and pensionable pay above for exact figures. Each service also has its own calculator: police, Civil Service, Armed Forces and the NHS.