Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Bionic on 14 September 2011, 07:45:51
-
How the hell do the public sector workers with their proven inefficiencies and constant mistakes at our cost believe that they are due a far better pension than we, the tax payers, who they are intent on making pay for it? As far as I am concerned they are underworked, overpaid and receive to much pampering to start with. Whose pension pots were robbed to pay for the last lot when it was discovered that their own pension pot did not hold enough? - yep...it was ours. They have gall and face to hold up banners demanding 'No Cuts' and worse 'Fair Pensions'! Fair pensions? What is fair when they want far more than the rest of us will ever get?
Bring back Maggie and get these union robbers back under control before they destroy this country completely.
By the way...The union leaders and organisers will be receiving full salaries and expenses while the rest of their members will not. How stupid does that make their members look for supporting the strike their leaders have incited? ;D ;D If I did not laugh I would cry at its utter stupidity cos once again it is vulnerable who will suffer :'( and not those with shiny asses and polished chair seats who will remain blinkered and unsympathetic to that fact!
NO support should be shown to them at all, they should be ostracised by the remainder of society as a whole until they see sense. They are parasites on us all who care nothing for anyone but themselves..........
-
Public sector pensions will change in 2015, instead of being based on final slaery it is going to the average over your career.
But not just civil servants but this is the Armed Forces as well. Think about that next time a big military conflict comes along (there has recently been an SDSR so history dictates we are due another one soon)
In the forces we sacrifice a lot to serve the country including a wage much lower comparable to the same role and responsibility. Ex forces generally die earlier than civilians for a multitude of reasons thus the good pension we used to get was fair. Now that is being changed, cue the exodus!
-
You can't just tarnish the entire public sector with the same brush.... the average worker's pension isn't fantastic, believe me I know. I've got 10yrs from my last job and it's worth jack and yes I know 10yrs isn't that long either.
The REAL gold plated pensions are the exc'c and chf exc's etc, they're the one's on 100k + and living the high life, not the office worker. I don't see many people going ballistic over MP's pensions etc, yet they're on pensions the like's of us could only ever dream of! >:(
Rant over :(
-
Public sector pensions will change in 2015, instead of being based on final slaery it is going to the average over your career.
But not just civil servants but this is the Armed Forces as well. Think about that next time a big military conflict comes along (there has recently been an SDSR so history dictates we are due another one soon)
In the forces we sacrifice a lot to serve the country including a wage much lower comparable to the same role and responsibility. Ex forces generally die earlier than civilians for a multitude of reasons thus the good pension we used to get was fair. Now that is being changed, cue the exodus!
Imo public sector workers should have pensions on the same basis as private sector workers - pension paid depends purely on how well your pension pot has been invested.
The armed forces and police should be exempt from that.
It should be illegal for public servants to strike.
Ideally, those who do should be instantly dismissed.
Bionic - I agree with much of what you say, but they arent all,useless,lazy,wasters.There are some good people in the public sector, who still actually recognise the concept of public service. ;)
-
Yup, public sector pensions need to be real world pensions (and they are not at the moment).
And I speak as somebody who has a wife with a lower end job in the public sector (so know how good it really is).
Also retirement age needs to be brought into line to.
-
It might be a good idea to get all the information before making broad sweeping statements based on ignorance and attention grabbing sensationalist headlines. There are many things wrong with the public sector and the pension schemes. It seems that in recent years, when the gravy train of private sector pensions crashed, jealous, malevolent attention has turned to public sector pensions. The main problem with the public sector pensions is that the funds have been plundered and mis managed by the idiots 'administrating' them.
Lots of people in the public sector work very hard thanks, and it's a disgrace for you to generalise and say they don't. The contribution rate for the scheme at my workplace is 11%.
More attention should be focussed on the astronomical cost of 'benefits', holiday camp prisons and many other things, long before attacking the pensions of hardworking people.
-
The contribution rate for the scheme at my workplace is 11%.
.. which wouldn't get you a great pension in the real world private sector. ;)
-
The fact is Geoff that the current arrangements for public sector pensions are not affordable or sustainable, and they were never going to be.They were agreed between Labour and the unions.The unions fund the labour party, so they had a little bit of leverage. ;) ::)
The amounts promised, coupled with the additional 800,000 jobs created,plus the fact that people are living longer than they used to means the figures dont even come close to adding up.It would bankrupt the country if it were to try to fulfill the obligations under the current system. Brown knew this, which is why he plundered the pension pots of private sector workers to try to fill the gap in the public sector.
We are now at the ridiculos situation where I contribute more to the public sector pension pot than I do to my own pension pot. Thats wrong whatever way you want to look at it.
If an employee is guaranteed an amount of money upon retirement, regardless of what happens to the investment of their pension contributions, that promise can only be fulfilled by taking the money off other people. ;)
-
The problem here is most people accept there needs to be change, it is the rate of change that people find difficult.
For example a 25 year old being told you will have to work till you are 70 wouldn't rail. However someone who has worked all their life and is nearing retirement age to find that retirement age is going up a few years or the pension you receive is going to be significantly less isn't acceptable. On a micro scale think what would happen if this month your paypacket was £300 light.
The blame sadly lies with our useless system of government which fails to tackle long term issues because "they would be unpopular and not get in next term"
Want some examples?
High speed trains
Proper accountable MOD spending
Aircraft carriers
NHS
Education
Roads
Congestion Charging
The list is endless.................
-
There is no right answer to this as it's highly subjective.
From the perspective of the people who are affected they are seeing a major change to what they signed upto.
From others perspective they/we see them being brought towards reality.
Two opposite views.
I lost my final salary scheme when my company got taken over - TUPE rules dont apply to pensions. There was nothing I could do about it. They see industrial action as a possibility, there is however no public support.
This will run, there will be strikes but the gov't wont give in. Interesting to see the situation in France/Spain etc where they will be much more millitant.
-
One aspect of the strikes is that is getting it into the minds of everyone, I had a system here at Sky, but did not really understand what it meant.
Looking into it, using pension calculators, made me realise I need to inject more into my fund. I now put in 8% & Sky top it up with a further 8% - So a 16% is not too bad, but aim to get it up to 20% within next couple of years.
Must be others soo which this has triggered an interest, Final Pension salaries were always open for abuse too, getting a massive pay rise before retiring.
-
To get a reasonable pension you need to be looking at the best part of 25% of your salary being invested somewhere........and then hoping that when you draw it the stock market is ok.....so not good news for those looking to draw thiers down now! (note, this is for real pension funds and not the public sector ones which we can no longer (and probably never could) afford and will have to change!) :y ;D
-
Redaing the comments below the BBC news item on this subject and surprisingly few (given Beeboid readership) are supportive of the unions. ;)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14907909
-
Redaing the comments below the BBC news item on this subject and surprisingly few (given Beeboid readership) are supportive of the unions. ;)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14907909
And the reason for that is the "gold plated" BBC pension which was spun off from the Govt scheme some years ago. Dont forget that the BBC journalists go on strike from time to time. Just bear in mind that when your fave BBC news reader is commenting about the pension situation they are doing it from the "I'm all right Jack" perspective.
-
To get a reasonable pension you need to be looking at the best part of 25% of your salary being invested somewhere........and then hoping that when you draw it the stock market is ok.....so not good news for those looking to draw thiers down now! (note, this is for real pension funds and not the public sector ones which we can no longer (and probably never could) afford and will have to change!) :y ;D
Good schemes take the money pot built up out of stocks and shares(which can go down as well as up) well in advance of taking the annuity. In fact good schemes get out of risky shares into more stable blue chip shares before the pot is converted into cash for want of a better description.
All of them still outrageously charge far too much despite the subject being well aired. So your private pension is severly eroded by the charges made by the monkeys bankers running the scheme. Where are the strikes over this? Government/bankers in cahouts ?! Wash my mouth out.
-
As far as I can see, most of this thread is uniformed rhetoric. No change there then ;D
-
As far as I can see, most of this thread is uniformed rhetoric. No change there then ;D
That gives hope to the some that isn't then.
-
;DSome of you may not like this but both my wife & I work in the public sector & yes we will have decent pensions when we retire, but hey anyone can apply for a job with them but a lot choose not too because when times were good they could earn more elsewhere & chose not to think about their retirement years. A lot of this is sour grapes people need to think ahead & if they do not tough s**t!!!
-
So you think its ok that I contribute more to your oension than I contribute to my own ? ;)
Nothing to do with sour grapes.Everything to do with fairness and economic reality. :y
-
Yes why not? The clue is in the title we serve the public i have lost count of the times people have said "could not do your job for any amount of money" why should i not have a comfortable retirement i have earnt it fair & square and guess what, the changes coming in will not affect me one bit!!Roll on retirement. ;D
-
Yes why not? The clue is in the title we serve the public i have lost count of the times people have said "could not do your job for any amount of money" why should i not have a comfortable retirement i have earnt it fair & square and guess what, the changes coming in will not affect me one bit!!Roll on retirement. ;D
In your position, I wouldnt be able to sleep at night. ::)
This govt. should have the balls to sort the problems before they become insurmountable, as people like yourself obviously dont care what effect your future lifestyle has on the rest of the country that you claim to serve.
1. New employment legislation restricting union activity, particularily in the public sector. Preferably making it unlawful for public servants to take industrial action, and revoking the recognition of unions in key services.
2. Tear up the present agreements on pay and conditions before they bankrupt the country.
3.Reduce the number of people employed in the public sector by a minimum of 750,000 - pre new Labour levels in other words.
4. Explain to the public sector at large that it is funded via taxation on the private sector, therefore when the rpivate sector periodically hits hard times there will be less money available to fund the public sector.Therefore the public sector will always have to take the pain the same as the private sector does. The only alternative is to once again borrow billions of pounds to fund the shortfall, and look where that has got us.
5. Also explain that pensions in the 21st century are paid from the profits (or otherwise) from the investments of the recipients pension pot.There isnt a money tree in the garden of the treasury. Any other arrangement means taking the money from other people. People dont have any automatic right to a set amount of pension income upon retirement. Those days are long gone, and the sooner it is enforced upon the public sector the better for the country as a whole.
If the people concerned really are genuine public servants who care about serving their country, rather than serving themselves, they shouldnt have a problem with that. ;) ::)
-
I think we should stop here guys as there is no right answer to this debate - as I said before.
Are there overpaid/breakless people in the public sector - yes, of course - but in the private sector also. I'm sure we all know some of each. In the same way there are also underpaid people in both sectors.
:-X
-
Let me put you straight on a couple of points here Albs (again). My missus pays 6.25% of her salary in pension contributions. The local authority (that's you, according to you ::)) pay another 13%. So that's 19.25% of her salary going into the pot. When/if her contribution rises to 9% of salary, the LA will still pay in 13%. So no saving to your good self.
Retirement age: My missus joined the pension scheme before 2007, so will still retire at 60.
2. Age retirement
The NPA for a teacher is dependant upon whether the teacher joined the scheme on or before 1 January 2007. Where a teacher was a teacher of the TPS before 1 January 2007 and has not transferred their service out, their NPA is 60. Where a teacher joins the scheme for the first time on or after 1 January 2007 their NPA is 65.
If a deferred teacher subsequently returns to service with a break of less than five years, and accrues 30 days reckonable service or 60 days’ pensionable employment, they will retain a NPA of 60 for their future service. If a teacher returns with more than a five year break in service, then future service will have a NPA of 65 but previous service will retain a NPA of 60. These are “mixed service” teachers.
So, apart from a rise in contributions, it doesn't make all that much difference, assuming it goes ahead.
-
Heres the reality check though, just because you have a contract dated x stating this is what you get, does not mean it cant be changed (been there, done that, bought the T-shirt)
And they will change them
We have a few options (plus others)
1) Change the pensions
2) Increase taxes for all
3) Reduce the spending on public sector to meet pension outputs.
4) Increase retirement age further
Either way, there WILL be a bitter pill to swallow (note, I am affected by this due to er-indoors)
-
I simply plan to die before retirement. No need to plan for old age, that way ;)
-
I think we should stop here guys as there is no right answer to this debate - as I said before.
Are there overpaid/breakless people in the public sector - yes, of course - but in the private sector also. I'm sure we all know some of each. In the same way there are also underpaid people in both sectors.
Its got nothing to do with how hard working or otherwise people are Robert. Just about whats right and wrong in the current and long term economic climate of our country.Simple as that. :y
:-X
-
Heres the reality check though, just because you have a contract dated x stating this is what you get, does not mean it cant be changed (been there, done that, bought the T-shirt)
And they will change them
We have a few options (plus others)
1) Change the pensions
2) Increase taxes for all
3) Reduce the spending on public sector to meet pension outputs.
4) Increase retirement age further
Either way, there WILL be a bitter pill to swallow (note, I am affected by this due to er-indoors)
I personally think that the lib dems will sh!t their pants long before such draconian measures are in place (they'd have to do something or they will be unelectable for the next 50 years).
Don't get me wrong.....I know we are in the doo-doo and that harsh measures are inevitable. It's the politics of envy I object to. Every security guard, shop assistant, taxi driver etc. thinks that public sector should be hammered, all because they haven't got a decent pension. Tough titty.
-
Let me put you straight on a couple of points here Albs (again). My missus pays 6.25% of her salary in pension contributions. The local authority (that's you, according to you ::)) pay another 13%. So that's 19.25% of her salary going into the pot. When/if her contribution rises to 9% of salary, the LA will still pay in 13%. So no saving to your good self.
Retirement age: My missus joined the pension scheme before 2007, so will still retire at 60.
2. Age retirement
The NPA for a teacher is dependant upon whether the teacher joined the scheme on or before 1 January 2007. Where a teacher was a teacher of the TPS before 1 January 2007 and has not transferred their service out, their NPA is 60. Where a teacher joins the scheme for the first time on or after 1 January 2007 their NPA is 65.
If a deferred teacher subsequently returns to service with a break of less than five years, and accrues 30 days reckonable service or 60 days’ pensionable employment, they will retain a NPA of 60 for their future service. If a teacher returns with more than a five year break in service, then future service will have a NPA of 65 but previous service will retain a NPA of 60. These are “mixed service” teachers.
So, apart from a rise in contributions, it doesn't make all that much difference, assuming it goes ahead.
Nothing personal Steve, but I believe the authority shouldnt be paying anywhere near 13%. All the stuff you wrote in blue - it should be torn up and replaced with something more realistic.
Retirement at 60 shouldnt be an option in the 21st century, unless the individual is fortunate enough to be able to fund their own retirement.
-
Let me put you straight on a couple of points here Albs (again). My missus pays 6.25% of her salary in pension contributions. The local authority (that's you, according to you ::)) pay another 13%. So that's 19.25% of her salary going into the pot. When/if her contribution rises to 9% of salary, the LA will still pay in 13%. So no saving to your good self.
Retirement age: My missus joined the pension scheme before 2007, so will still retire at 60.
2. Age retirement
The NPA for a teacher is dependant upon whether the teacher joined the scheme on or before 1 January 2007. Where a teacher was a teacher of the TPS before 1 January 2007 and has not transferred their service out, their NPA is 60. Where a teacher joins the scheme for the first time on or after 1 January 2007 their NPA is 65.
If a deferred teacher subsequently returns to service with a break of less than five years, and accrues 30 days reckonable service or 60 days’ pensionable employment, they will retain a NPA of 60 for their future service. If a teacher returns with more than a five year break in service, then future service will have a NPA of 65 but previous service will retain a NPA of 60. These are “mixed service” teachers.
So, apart from a rise in contributions, it doesn't make all that much difference, assuming it goes ahead.
Nothing personal Steve, but I believe the authority shouldnt be paying anywhere near 13%. All the stuff you wrote in blue - it should be torn up and replaced with something more realistic.
Retirement at 60 shouldnt be an option in the 21st century, unless the individual is fortunate enough to be able to fund their own retirement.
Fortunately, it doesn't matter one jot what you think. ;D
-
I think we should stop here guys as there is no right answer to this debate - as I said before.
Are there overpaid/breakless people in the public sector - yes, of course - but in the private sector also. I'm sure we all know some of each. In the same way there are also underpaid people in both sectors.
Its got nothing to do with how hard working or otherwise people are Robert. Just about whats right and wrong in the current and long term economic climate of our country.Simple as that. :y
:-X
Agreed - I was just making the point that there are good & bad on both sides of the fence - they aren't the cause of the problem so we can't make sweeping generalisations about whole sections of our society. That would be like saying that all Omega owners are sensible or honest which is obviously not true either.
-
Heres the reality check though, just because you have a contract dated x stating this is what you get, does not mean it cant be changed (been there, done that, bought the T-shirt)
And they will change them
We have a few options (plus others)
1) Change the pensions
2) Increase taxes for all
3) Reduce the spending on public sector to meet pension outputs.
4) Increase retirement age further
Either way, there WILL be a bitter pill to swallow (note, I am affected by this due to er-indoors)
I personally think that the lib dems will sh!t their pants long before such draconian measures are in place (they'd have to do something or they will be unelectable for the next 50 years).
Don't get me wrong.....I know we are in the doo-doo and that harsh measures are inevitable. It's the politics of envy I object to. Every security guard, shop assistant, taxi driver etc. thinks that public sector should be hammered, all because they haven't got a decent pension. Tough titty.
Nothing whatsoever to do with envy.I dont have an envious bone in my body.I do have a very well developed sense of fair play though, and the current arrangements on pay and pensions for many public sector employees is absolutely crazy when put into the bigger picture of all the circumstances in the country.They can to some degree blame their unions, because under Labour they were allowed to build a big powerful empire - 750,000 non jobs = 750,000 extra members. It has to bite them on the arse now.There is no way no how that the country can afford to employ them all, pay them the salaries which have risen dramatically in the last 15 years,allow them to retire earlier than everyone else, and pay them much bigger pensions than everyone else.The figures cannot be made to add up.
I keep asking the same old question - wheres the money going to come from to pay for all this ? :-/
-
Heres the reality check though, just because you have a contract dated x stating this is what you get, does not mean it cant be changed (been there, done that, bought the T-shirt)
And they will change them
We have a few options (plus others)
1) Change the pensions
2) Increase taxes for all
3) Reduce the spending on public sector to meet pension outputs.
4) Increase retirement age further
Either way, there WILL be a bitter pill to swallow (note, I am affected by this due to er-indoors)
I personally think that the lib dems will sh!t their pants long before such draconian measures are in place (they'd have to do something or they will be unelectable for the next 50 years).
Don't get me wrong.....I know we are in the doo-doo and that harsh measures are inevitable. It's the politics of envy I object to. Every security guard, shop assistant, taxi driver etc. thinks that public sector should be hammered, all because they haven't got a decent pension. Tough titty.
Quite the contary, WE are ALL living beyond our means with respect to OUR countries finances.
WE have a public sector we cant afford.
WE have a public sector which has some benefits which are very generous and outdated.
WE are all currently suffering due to the economic climate and hardship measures being handed out (with I suspect worse to come).
THE fundamental issue is that if you work out the percentage paid by both the authority and the employee and run it through a calculator based on a standard pension fund....you would get considerably less than is contractualy guaranteed.
I have no issue with the state contributing a theoretical decent percentage, I do have an issue with it being based on salaries rather than the countries economic state and financial contributions. :y (If that make sense)
-
Makes perfect sense. :y In fact to argue any other point of view, can only be arguing from emotion or self interest - which is no basis for a point of view. ;)
-
Heres the reality check though, just because you have a contract dated x stating this is what you get, does not mean it cant be changed (been there, done that, bought the T-shirt)
And they will change them
We have a few options (plus others)
1) Change the pensions
2) Increase taxes for all
3) Reduce the spending on public sector to meet pension outputs.
4) Increase retirement age further
Either way, there WILL be a bitter pill to swallow (note, I am affected by this due to er-indoors)
I personally think that the lib dems will sh!t their pants long before such draconian measures are in place (they'd have to do something or they will be unelectable for the next 50 years).
Don't get me wrong.....I know we are in the doo-doo and that harsh measures are inevitable. It's the politics of envy I object to. Every security guard, shop assistant, taxi driver etc. thinks that public sector should be hammered, all because they haven't got a decent pension. Tough titty.
Quite the contary, WE are ALL living beyond our means with respect to OUR countries finances.
WE have a public sector we cant afford.
WE have a public sector which has some benefits which are very generous and outdated.
WE are all currently suffering due to the economic climate and hardship measures being handed out (with I suspect worse to come).
THE fundamental issue is that if you work out the percentage paid by both the authority and the employee and run it through a calculator based on a standard pension fund....you would get considerably less than is contractualy guaranteed.
I have no issue with the state contributing a theoretical decent percentage, I do have an issue with it being based on salaries rather than the countries economic state and financial contributions. :y (If that make sense)
Your arguement makes perfect sense, Mark. But from the point of view of the people affected they are going to have to suffer the pain for something that the banking sector caused. They may feel a bit better about it if the people who caused the crisis payed their share.
You never know...a few of the banks are looking shaky..... ::)
-
>:(Why should i not be able to sleep ?I signed a contract & kept to it & so have my employers, that is all i want from them, and they get my commitment back in return.
-
Because your happy about the fact that I may be paying more into your pension than I am into my own.To me, that is unvblievably selfish. Your employer shouldnt have made that contract with you.They had no moral right to do so, as they had no means of ensuring it could be fulfilled.In fact it was always bordering on the impossible that it could ever be fulfilled.
Your employer is employed by the country and its greater respnosibility is (or should be ) to the country.
The country cannot possibly afford to meet the terms of your contract, therefore the employer has a (greater ) duty to void it.
Its sad for the people involved, but it was always going to happen.The banking crisis has just meant that it has to happen sooner than it otherwise might have done.
Unfortunately, all other sectors of society, bankers included (in fact they had it first so weve all forgotten) have had to take the pain. Its inevitable that the same has to happen to the public sector. There is no realistic alternative. ;)
-
Contracts get changed all the time in all walks, thats a fact of modern life......and one that will be seen by most people.
Is it equaly fair that teaching assistants have 7 weeks paid deducted from thier salary as they are no longer allowed the holidays teachers enjoy. This involves a change of contract and is happening.
As for the bankers arguement, reality is that its the governments that have been the route cause of the issues as they have over spent during good times running up stupid debts with the last lot reducing (which for some stupid reason I voted for once!) unemployment by creating public sector jobs.
-
Heres the reality check though, just because you have a contract dated x stating this is what you get, does not mean it cant be changed (been there, done that, bought the T-shirt)
And they will change them
We have a few options (plus others)
1) Change the pensions
2) Increase taxes for all
3) Reduce the spending on public sector to meet pension outputs.
4) Increase retirement age further
Either way, there WILL be a bitter pill to swallow (note, I am affected by this due to er-indoors)
I personally think that the lib dems will sh!t their pants long before such draconian measures are in place (they'd have to do something or they will be unelectable for the next 50 years).
Don't get me wrong.....I know we are in the doo-doo and that harsh measures are inevitable. It's the politics of envy I object to. Every security guard, shop assistant, taxi driver etc. thinks that public sector should be hammered, all because they haven't got a decent pension. Tough titty.
Quite the contary, WE are ALL living beyond our means with respect to OUR countries finances.
WE have a public sector we cant afford.
WE have a public sector which has some benefits which are very generous and outdated.
WE are all currently suffering due to the economic climate and hardship measures being handed out (with I suspect worse to come).
THE fundamental issue is that if you work out the percentage paid by both the authority and the employee and run it through a calculator based on a standard pension fund....you would get considerably less than is contractualy guaranteed.
I have no issue with the state contributing a theoretical decent percentage, I do have an issue with it being based on salaries rather than the countries economic state and financial contributions. :y (If that make sense)
Your arguement makes perfect sense, Mark. But from the point of view of the people affected they are going to have to suffer the pain for something that the banking sector caused. They may feel a bit better about it if the people who caused the crisis payed their share.
You never know...a few of the banks are looking shaky..... ::)
It would have happened anyway Steve. That just brought things forward. The banking sector has taken a huge amount of pain ( not the Fred the shreds of this worls obviously) in terms of many thousands of lost jobs, greatly reduced profits, almost total collapse in share prices and very large tax rises for those still working there.They took the pain first (despite the headlines) then the rest of the private sector, now its going to have to be the public sector. No way round it Im afraid. ;)
-
;DJust like i said SOUR GRAPES.
-
Not in the slightest. Just cold hard logic and reason. ;)
Tell me please, where will the money come from for ever and a day to carry on employing the same number of public servants and paying them under the same terms and conditions they are cureently employed under ? ::)
-
;DJust like i said SOUR GRAPES.
Lol, just wait, your contractual change will come....like it or not!
No sour grapes here, just a reality check for some
-
The public sector employees need to understand that the current system is unaffordable.
And even for the lowest jobs, represents a far better pension than is available elsewhere, by some considerable margin.
The country is in a double dip recession, its just that it takes 6 months for the official figures to catch up. Every CEO and MD in the land knows it. If, as is looking likely, Greece defaults, we are probably looking at at least 5yrs of zero/negative growth.
With the public service's £150bn annual overspend, and a deficit of over £1tr, we will soon lose our top credit rating, struggle, like Greece, to service the loans, and then, believe me Mr Public Sector, you will truely understand whan pain is - the current cuts will be nothing in comparison.
The current situation is utterly, completely unsustainable.
Virtually every single private firm have closed any DB pensions, and only offer DC pensions. Those people that remain in DB pensions, due to being in the scheme before it closed, have found they are now putting considerably more in for the same benefit.
So, private sector employees have to think hard, and decide what they want to do - go DC, or pay enough into the scheme to make it work (think in the region of 15-20% additional contributions).
Additionally, remember, the public service is supposed to serve the tax paying public, not drain them dry.
-
The proposed strikes are political, hoping to damage the non labour govt. It would be nice if the union memebrs saw through it and realised that they are being used as pawns in a game and refused to co-operate .
Would also be nice to see the union bosses hauled to court and have their assets sequestrated.
Greece will default and the Euro will almost certainly implode in the near future. It will bring serious pain, even for the UK, for quite some time, although it will imo be of great benifit to the UK in the long term. ;)
-
;DJust like i said SOUR GRAPES.
'fraid not, old fruit.
It WILL happen. There are NO options. There are a million and one ways to kick you out of the current scheme. I have that T-Shirt myself ;)
-
:yLike i said earlier think ahead & plan your future , which was instilled into me back in my youth, different back then live within your means was another piece of advice i took to heart. Only now do i realise how important that was i could buy a brand new car tomorrow if i wanted but do i really need it ? A lot of people got themselves in to debt because it became too easy me i look after what i have and do not envy anyone else because they have a newer car, bigger house or better pension scheme & no my lump sum(tax free!!) & pension is all guaranteed too.
-
:yLike i said earlier think ahead & plan your future , which was instilled into me back in my youth, different back then live within your means was another piece of advice i took to heart. Only now do i realise how important that was i could buy a brand new car tomorrow if i wanted but do i really need it ? A lot of people got themselves in to debt because it became too easy me i look after what i have and do not envy anyone else because they have a newer car, bigger house or better pension scheme.
I too am bless with your lack of envy. Did we have the same dad ;D
But public sector workers still need to accept the fact that their pensions must and will change.
-
;DJust like i said SOUR GRAPES.
Lol, just wait, your contractual change will come....like it or not!
No sour grapes here, just a reality check for some
It will indeed come, Mark, and in the not-to-distant future. In education, academies are being rolled out, a great opportunity to change t&c's. No doubt similar schemes will be mooted for the health service and once those two nuts are cracked, then everything else will be quietly privatised. Then, of course, we'll have all the wingeing bastuds saying "It was so much better when we had proper council workers. I don't know who's running what now".
We will, of course, become just like our American cousins, where if you're sick and skint, you die.
I'm off to read 'The fall of the Roman Empire' ;D
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlBiLNN1NhQ
-
Read it at work!! Only kidding. ;D
-
;DJust like i said SOUR GRAPES.
Lol, just wait, your contractual change will come....like it or not!
No sour grapes here, just a reality check for some
It will indeed come, Mark, and in the not-to-distant future. In education, academies are being rolled out, a great opportunity to change t&c's. No doubt similar schemes will be mooted for the health service and once those two nuts are cracked, then everything else will be quietly privatised. Then, of course, we'll have all the wingeing bastuds saying "It was so much better when we had proper council workers. I don't know who's running what now".
We will, of course, become just like our American cousins, where if you're sick and skint, you die.
I'm off to read 'The fall of the Roman Empire' ;D
Outsourcing small departments constantly is another top tip for changing pensions. Pensions are not covered under TUPE :-X
-
:yLike i said earlier think ahead & plan your future , which was instilled into me back in my youth, different back then live within your means was another piece of advice i took to heart. Only now do i realise how important that was i could buy a brand new car tomorrow if i wanted but do i really need it ? A lot of people got themselves in to debt because it became too easy me i look after what i have and do not envy anyone else because they have a newer car, bigger house or better pension scheme & no my lump sum(tax free!!) & pension is all guaranteed too.
It is at the moment. Dont assume it will stay that way. Economic meltdown is about to happen in the Eurozone, and this country will be caught in its wake for several years.
Things will get worse before they get better. ;)
-
I wasn't going to reply to this, but, my wife works in local government, reasonable salary, 17 years, retirement pension approx £80 per month.
...and no, she won't be going on strike.
So, who is getting all these wonderful pensions your going on about.
-
All goes into my account on the 23/9/2011 :y
-
The fact is Geoff that the current arrangements for public sector pensions are not affordable or sustainable, and they were never going to be.
Whats your source for that statement? It contradicts everything I have read in the media* AND at work
*less the usual scaremoungering from certain newsgroups
-
The fact is Geoff that the current arrangements for public sector pensions are not affordable or sustainable, and they were never going to be.
Whats your source for that statement? It contradicts everything I have read in the media* AND at work
*less the usual scaremoungering from certain newsgroups
"The Office for Budget Responsibility estimated that there is an annual shortfall of £4 billion between what workers are paying into the schemes and what is being paid out to retired workers, a figure expected to rise to £9 billion by 2015. A sum that has to be picked up by the taxpayer."
Seems neither affordable nor sustainable to me.
Hutton Report, quoted in the Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/8373775/Hutton-pensions-review-QandA.html
-
One example. If you want to spend the time Im sure there will be many more. Please note, this is from 2006. The situation is obviously almost immeasurably worse now than it was then. ;)
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-1605645/The-public-sector-pension-burden.html
This also makes interesting reading.
http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2010-06-14/uk-prepares-for-public-sector-pension-reform
-
Just for the record we had a choice 4 or 5 years ago to opt out of our scheme to a different one but there were so many terms & conditions none of us could make head nor tail of it,so we all stayed with the original one (thank god) as we would have lost part of the tax free lump sum.New entrants are not so fortunate either with pay , conditons etc ,whether they will last for 32 years like i have remains to be seen some of them do the same job as me for£12,000 a year less but these are desperate times & i do realise i am one of the fortunate ones.
-
The fact is Geoff that the current arrangements for public sector pensions are not affordable or sustainable, and they were never going to be.
Whats your source for that statement? It contradicts everything I have read in the media* AND at work
*less the usual scaremoungering from certain newsgroups
"The Office for Budget Responsibility estimated that there is an annual shortfall of £4 billion between what workers are paying into the schemes and what is being paid out to retired workers, a figure expected to rise to £9 billion by 2015. A sum that has to be picked up by the taxpayer."
Seems neither affordable nor sustainable to me.
Hutton Report, quoted in the Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/8373775/Hutton-pensions-review-QandA.html
Not so bleak according to the NAO:
http://www.nao.org.uk/whats_new/0910/0910432.aspx
I agree that things have to change but some of the stuff being quoted on here is spin. Now if I wanted to reform something to my favour would I massage reports and findings or even better put it under the nose of the press....hmm.....cynical, moi? ::)
-
geoffr70 obviously does not believe anyone should be allowed their own opinion.
I wrote what I believe to be the truth and obviously many lies will be told to cover up the true facts of the Public Sector 'benefits' the general public will never be allowed to enjoy!
Consider this - Public Sector (servants as they were once called) are rel;ied upon to perform their tasks accurately and efficiently to benefit the public who have required their service for one reason or another. Logically therefore if they are so adamant that they serve the public well they should not be allowed to strike because all that happens is that they cause mayhem and yet more difficulties for others. Empathy? They do not know the meaning of the word, or symapathy comes to it. The only thing that concerns them is their own lifestyle and sod the rest. For many of them who constantly make mistakes even when provided with the correct, accurate and proven information the only penalty should be the sack! That applies to any and all Public Sector workers. Why is my wife paid less in the private sector than her equvalent in the public sector? Is there a valid reason? Of course not and thereby ends the tale......
Thankfully comments of the like he made are a very small minority of the responses and give a far more accurate picture of what is felt by the majority.
ALL pensions should be calculktaed using the same formulae and rules. We all work and pay taxes so there should marally be no difference in the pension scales and payments! That is I suppose too fair for them to accept though.
No apologies from me then! ;D
-
8-)I earnt & deserved everything i got, there will always be those who have & those who have not ,just a matter of making the right decisions if you are not satisfied with your job or conditons look to better yourself ,I did & am now reaping the benefits better then being bitter & twisted!!
-
Earnt & deserved is purely subjective.If you work for a company which makes a profit and you can quantify how much of that profit you generated, then you can demonstrate exactly how much you have earned and what you deserve.
In your position you obviously cant do that, so its purely your own opinion. ;)
And the world is not so simple a place that have & have nots are decided purely by making the right or wrong decisions. ::)
-
Tried working for a couple of companies both making vast profits at the time , did not like the way they treated customers or staff , so looked elsewhere because i knew i could do better. Hence my outlook on life & because decision making is part of my day i adopted that strategy into my life but you have to be very disciplined for it to work something a lot of folks cannot do,. they let simple emotions take charge ie envy ,jealousy etc . I was trained by the best so perhaps that is why it worked for me. :y
-
The contribution rate for the scheme at my workplace is 11%.
.. which wouldn't get you a great pension in the real world private sector. ;)
It would after 46 years thanks. As for your stupid comment on the 'real world', it's only now that the private sector has gone balls up that jealous ignorant attention turns to the public sector, like I said! It's the people who believe the tripe from successive governments and the media who should live in the real world and get their heads out of their arses. Look I can do a smiley face too 8-)
-
At last someone with a good comment !! :y
-
Earnt & deserved is purely subjective.If you work for a company which makes a profit and you can quantify how much of that profit you generated, then you can demonstrate exactly how much you have earned and what you deserve.
In your position you obviously cant do that, so its purely your own opinion. ;)
And the world is not so simple a place that have & have nots are decided purely by making the right or wrong decisions. ::)
Can't agree with you there. I won't use the word rubbish which I really wanted to!
People go to work to earn money/benefits/reward. It is a fact without it they would have to be on state handouts(another topic altogether)
Those people do what they are expected to do. Empty bins, gamble clients money on stocks, make people well, put out fires and so on. If they are not doing a good job then they have line management and ultimately the boss to answer to. Fact. Now if the line management aren't doing a good job that is a different matter.
The other comment I would make is the silence of the majority on this and other subjects. Statistically there must be a lot of people out there who sympathise with these peoples situation. As ever very few will make a comment because to do so will result in being flamed by the vocal right wing element.
I liked the comment someone made earlier that while the private sector (power house of the economy) had good times and were tucking away massive profits no one gave the public sector pensions etc a second thought. Now they can have a good old fashioned witch hunt. Are they trying to divert attention from the very folk who caused the current economic disaster( for that is what it is) with their cavalier attitude. Methinks they are.
-
:yAnd another one, human nature try & shift the blame elsewhere forget the fact that some of us may have put their lives on the line at sometime . Why should they be better off than us ? Snatch their pensions off them that will solve everything , I think not.
-
Earnt & deserved is purely subjective.If you work for a company which makes a profit and you can quantify how much of that profit you generated, then you can demonstrate exactly how much you have earned and what you deserve.
In your position you obviously cant do that, so its purely your own opinion. ;)
And the world is not so simple a place that have & have nots are decided purely by making the right or wrong decisions. ::)
I liked the comment someone made earlier that while the private sector (power house of the economy) had good times and were tucking away massive profits
Huh? Do you think they were staching these profit away under their mattresses or something? :o
They paid corporation tax. Their workers paid tax and NI. A significant chunk of profit was doubtless invested in new machinery, new outlets and so on, thus providing employment to the many: form toolmakers to shopfitters.
Without the income generated by the private sector, the government could not pay the public sector a penny. Where do you think the government gets its income from? ::)
All that is being discussed is the fact that the public sector must bear its share of the financial burden arising from the current economic situation. We're all in it together.
-
Tilbo/varche/geoff. Try reading back cthrough the whole thread and digesting what has been said in an objective,dispassionate way. ;) ::)
None of you have put up a single argument against the viewpoints which have been made - we could argue all day long about why the country is skint, but the simple fact is that it is skint - so, I ask again - wheres the money going to come from ? ;)
-
Excess were on inside of both front tyres ................ do you think my wishbone bushes may be to blame ?? :D :D
-
Spell check .............. excess WEAR :y
-
Excess were on inside of both front tyres ................ do you think my wishbone bushes may be to blame ?? :D :D
The answer's simple, then. Send the public sector over to Tony at WIM and he'll get it back into alignment. :y
;D
-
Paddty,
Are you trying to say that the economy is like a front suspension, with the tyres representing the public and private sectors and the wishbone bushes being central government and quasi supranational institutions? It is an interesting analogy, though I think one needs to take into account toe & camber alignment, which could, I suppose, be interest rates & M2 money supply, respectively. ;)
-
Tilbo/varche/geoff. Try reading back cthrough the whole thread and digesting what has been said in an objective,dispassionate way. ;) ::)
None of you have put up a single argument against the viewpoints which have been made - we could argue all day long about why the country is skint, but the simple fact is that it is skint - so, I ask again - wheres the money going to come from ? ;)
I thought I answered this much earlier on. Just to recap.
1. Yes there needs to be change but not at the proposed rate.
2. Funding could come from cutting down on waste. GB Plc is a billions a year prolific waster of public finances. MOD procurement for example. Someone said the "gap" is 4 billion a year- seems a lot. It isn't. The country can magic up vast amounts out of thin air for what I call daft projects (the 10 year war in Afghanistan unless we are there purely to show off our military wares for sale, aircraft carriers, bailing out euro zone countries - the list is very long)
3. The money. Where is it going to come from? Well the country made a commitment to pay(salary and benefits)to its public sector. The money will have to come out of the tax revenues that everyone (private or public)pays. Hard times for everyone (working) I am afraid. Even harder times for the chancellor. Still no signs of all these jobs they were going to create(as I predicted there wouldn't be when the condems came to power). In a few months he will be presiding (floundering) over a double dip. Still he will be able to hide behind the bigger event of the coillapse of the euro. ;D
-
geoffr70 obviously does not believe anyone should be allowed their own opinion.
I wrote what I believe to be the truth and obviously many lies will be told to cover up the true facts of the Public Sector 'benefits' the general public will never be allowed to enjoy!
Consider this - Public Sector (servants as they were once called) are rel;ied upon to perform their tasks accurately and efficiently to benefit the public who have required their service for one reason or another. Logically therefore if they are so adamant that they serve the public well they should not be allowed to strike because all that happens is that they cause mayhem and yet more difficulties for others. Empathy? They do not know the meaning of the word, or symapathy comes to it. The only thing that concerns them is their own lifestyle and sod the rest. For many of them who constantly make mistakes even when provided with the correct, accurate and proven information the only penalty should be the sack! That applies to any and all Public Sector workers. Why is my wife paid less in the private sector than her equvalent in the public sector? Is there a valid reason? Of course not and thereby ends the tale......
Thankfully comments of the like he made are a very small minority of the responses and give a far more accurate picture of what is felt by the majority.
ALL pensions should be calculktaed using the same formulae and rules. We all work and pay taxes so there should marally be no difference in the pension scales and payments! That is I suppose too fair for them to accept though.
No apologies from me then! ;D
I'll bet they do know the meaning of empathy. As for symapathy....that's got me stumped as well as them. :-?