Public Sector Pensions Reform - About friggin time..

[brunswick]

@ beo.....yes they do have to do with pensions because people think it is ok to work till older due to a (manufactured by the central banks) hole in the economy.

@ simmo, never went to uni, and earned over 350,000 net in the working / career world before i joined the dots and got the f00k out sharpish....i tore up my pension on the way out........it won't exist in 20 years....when the pension will be the least of your worries.

 

[Daffy Duck]

Maybe if a certain Chancellor of the Exchequer, namely Mr Gordon Brown, hadn't raided pension funds in 1997 to raise money when Labour first came into power, most pension funds today would be sustainable.

 

[simmo]

Maybe just maybe your not critical for the health of our families or education of our children.

Maybe your not providing a service that is required at present, its what us in the private sector need to understand too.

How can any ONE individual be critical to the health of our nation or the teaching of our children? There are hundreds of thousand of people working in the NHS and tens of thousands of teachers how can any one person be critical.....especially when unions bargain their wages benefits/salaries etc. on behalf of all of them as a collective unit?

As an entity the public sector provide the services we all need, but the private sector as an entity (of which I just one individual) that ultimately needs to be financially successful to pay for these services.

 

[Titanic]

Maybe if a certain Chancellor of the Exchequer, namely Mr Gordon Brown, hadn't raided pension funds in 1997 to raise money when Labour first came into power, most pension funds today would be sustainable.

Indeed. He and Blair have a lot to answer for.

"The end of Tory boom and bust"... my arse!

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Lord B - I meant by the unions burying their heads in the sand about how to fund the schemes. The 20% shortfall caused by the raid on pensions has been impossible to replace through alternative income streams and the difference has to come from increasing premiums and/or reduced benefits.

I understand that unions are there to protect these things but they can't just demand the local government magic up some money to fund it.

As beorhthelm has wisely said ... "here we are, we need to work forward from what we have".

All I'm arguing is that we shouldn't be blaming public sector workers for the mess. It might even be the case that, over the years, public sector pay has been held down in comparison with private sector pay and the beneficiaries of secure public sector pensions have taken that as an alternative to the higher pay available (with higher pension risks) in the private sector.

Most of my working life was spent in public transport planning, having dealings with colleagues who were originally based in other public sector organisations. OK, post-privatisation of the operating companies, I have a "more secure" pension than they do. But it grates a bit to read yesterday that one of those former public sector individuals who I had "equal" dealings with in the old days is now Chief Honcho of the Go Ahead Group and no doubt enjoying this year's 41 per cent increase in his pay - which was more than £1.3 million pa last year. All for what? Running a private sector company that needs more public subsidy than the transport operators needed when they were in public ownership.

Ker...ching!

 

[Buzzer]

That one policy of raiding pension funds has had a devastating effect and increased short-termism in the financial markets. As the biggest shareholders in the PLCs the pensions were able to demand higher dividends to help cover the shortfall in the funds thus depriving companies of funds for capital investment and growth.

It cant be stressed enough how bad a decision it was to raid pensions. Without doubt the worst mistake, Brown made.

Edit - Lord B, I'm not blaming the public sector for anything. I don't think many people are in this thread. All we're debating is pension reform.

 

[beorhthelm]

There's a big difference in public sector contributions

thats the point i was trying to make. but also, i dont think people, even in the public sector, are aware of some of the employer contributions made are substantially more. relative to the private sector, public sector jobs are usually safe (though obviously not right now) and compared to the typical private pension (say 5% employer, 4% employee, thats what im on and its supposed to be reasonable), the public pensions are very good.


Buzzer is very right to higlight the pension's dividend robbery, it apparently lead to a number of private pensions closing or changing from final salary to definded. if it had such an effect on private pensions, it must have had a similar effect on the public sector pension provision too.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I think the government haven't acted boldly enough on raising the pension age for men and women. I'm 42 and I understand I'll start to receive the state pension age just after my 66th birthday, i.e. just over a year after the standard age of 65. And this is in 24 years time! If we're so f***ed I feel people of my age should be expecting state pension at 70, not 66.

I can expect to live until 90-odd, and will no doubt be a burden on the NHS in my later years so it makes sense to have to work 5 years longer. I believe women should be looking at 70 for pension age as well.

The acid test will be in a years' time when the planned employee pension reforms are due to come in. Will this government have the balls to insist on employees paying in a mandaotry 3% of net salary and employers 4% of gross salary on top of rises in Employees and Employer's NI?

We could do it if we scrapped the nuclear option. I love James Bond as much as the next man but those days have gone.

 

[Beach Hut]

If they were prepared to contribute 11% or more then I feel sorry otherwise 5% contribution for final salary in not deserved

 

[ben andrews' girlfriend]

When you have a pop at public sector workers, you are also having a go at Nurses, Fire Fighters, Police think about it. Go and do their jobs for a week or two and see how you feel about your statement after this.

Why not blame the bastards that put us in the mess in the first place.

Absolutely. I can't imagine doing my full nursing job when I'm in my 60's. Nursing is a tough, physical job, and that's just on basic wards, let alone in intensive care, or even when you're doing CPR. With the population getting older and more sick, nursing is going to get tougher, not easier. It's going to be horrendous working 12 hour shifts at that age and being up-to-date with the changes. It's mentally exhausting too.

Nurses et al shouldn't be punished for the job they do when we become older.

 

[Norman Baker suck my lozenge]

Absolutely. I can't imagine doing my full nursing job when I'm in my 60's. Nursing is a tough, physical job, and that's just on basic wards, let alone in intensive care, or even when you're doing CPR. With the population getting older and more sick, nursing is going to get tougher, not easier. It's going to be horrendous working 12 hour shifts at that age and being up-to-date with the changes. It's mentally exhausting too.

Nurses et al shouldn't be punished for the job they do when we become older.

Nail struck firmly on head.
I also don't relish the thought of some 70 year old fireman carrying Me down 6 flights of stairs with flames licking at My arse!
Once again successive Governments do what they do best ,turn worker against worker an leave the shysters that dropped us in this pile of shit get away with robbing us all blind.

 

[Uncle C]

so its ok for bank bosses to get millions in bonuses, and the normal worker has to suffer?

so its ok to spend 26Bn on trident update, and the normal worker has to suffer?

so its ok to give millions to the EU, and the normal worker has to suffer?

so its ok for the government to give most of the tax to the central banks it owes interest to, and the normal worker has to suffer?

So its OK for Wayne Rooney and Lewis Hamilton to earn TWICE as much as the highest paid bankers.

 

[bhaexpress]

So its OK for Wayne Rooney and Lewis Hamilton to earn TWICE as much as the highest paid bankers.

Well, they are more interesting ......

 

[Iggle Piggle]

Finally, when the private sector moved from defined benefits to money purchase schemes, they did not retrospectively change the t+c's for existing members without agreement- this would have been unlawful.

Well, its not like we had a choice either. My choice was basically sign these revised T&C's or piss off. When my FPS scheme was ditched it was effectively a 15% pay cut take it or leave it. I'd bet money now that a better deal will be struck in the public sector.

If you think about it though, you can't work for 30 years, pay 5 - 10% of salary and expect to retire for another 30 years on half the money you were earning.

Anyone who has a final Salary pension scheme that they are drawing now should realise how lucky they are. No-one will have one in 30 years.

 

[nicko31]

Firstly, I don't remember my public sector pension being non contributory. It's only the top bods who get theirs for free.

Secondly, there are also loads of failed pension schemes from the private sector bailed out by public funds. Do you think this should stop too, and those poor ripped off pensioners should go and live in the real world aswell?

Finally, when the private sector moved from defined benefits to money purchase schemes, they did not retrospectively change the t+c's for existing members without agreement- this would have been unlawful.

Without the teachers, nurses, coppers, soldiers and others employed by the state, your life would quickly become pretty shitty. Yesterday I was having a drink with a para who had suffered a permanent disability via head wound in Iraq. Perhaps you would like to explain to him he needs to live in the real world.

I'm not saying that the public sector is not contributory, but the amount they have to put in a small and no where near the real cost. Most in the public sector have no idea what a guaranteed final salary pension costs, try 25% on top of gross. The private sector have had to accept their pensions were not sustainable and get on with things.
I just hope the Unions don't end up costing us shit loads more with strike after strike. Labour should have dealt with this 10 years ago, the ship is sinking fast and we need to plug the hole fast..

 

[drew]

Firstly, I don't remember my public sector pension being non contributory. It's only the top bods who get theirs for free.

Secondly, there are also loads of failed pension schemes from the private sector bailed out by public funds. Do you think this should stop too, and those poor ripped off pensioners should go and live in the real world aswell?

Finally, when the private sector moved from defined benefits to money purchase schemes, they did not retrospectively change the t+c's for existing members without agreement- this would have been unlawful.

Without the teachers, nurses, coppers, soldiers and others employed by the state, your life would quickly become pretty shitty. Yesterday I was having a drink with a para who had suffered a permanent disability via head wound in Iraq. Perhaps you would like to explain to him he needs to live in the real world.

This.

So it is ok for me to have to provide all my funds for my own pension pot?

So it is ok for me to have to work to 66?

So it is ok for me to have to suffer redundancies/job losses etc. since Autumn 2008?

I am a normal (private sector) worker and I have suffered this.

What is the situation for Public sector workers?

It has got nothing to do with right wing media, I don't need any newspaper to tell me what my (and my friends) situation is and I am sure an awful lot of other people that work in the private sector are in exactly the same boat as I am that have never worked for a bank.

Wake up from your university lecture and join the working world.

I've worked in the private sector all my life and up until I left in 2007 all my various employers contributed towards the relevant pension scheme, normally 10% of salary. What on earth makes you think the public sector are immune to redundancies? Perhaps you should read the papers and you see that even under labour there were 'efficiency' savings resulting in job losses. Most redundancies will be at the sharp end and you will see a drastic decline in services. This crap about back office staff only going is a joke. Who's going to do those jobs? Take the Police, do we really want qualified police doing HR jobs or running their accounts depts or maintenance depts. Or are you suggesting that is all outsourced to a 'private' company which will come in with the flash SLA's and then fail to perform as they want to take too much out in profit!!!!

Maybe if a certain Chancellor of the Exchequer, namely Mr Gordon Brown, hadn't raided pension funds in 1997 to raise money when Labour first came into power, most pension funds today would be sustainable.

Maybe if the banks hadn't fooked up the economy.
Maybe if the World Com and Enron had caused a massive downturn in markets.
Maybe if the CIA had stopped 9/11 (controversial conspiracy theory maybe)
Maybe if corporations had jumped on the pension holiday bandwagon during the 80s and 90s
All of which did more damage to the value of pension funds than Brown's raid.

Also, do you have any facts to suggest that most final salary funds would be sustainable now if it hadn't been for Brown. I am assuming you speak from knowledge rather than spouting right wing propoganda!

Absolutely. I can't imagine doing my full nursing job when I'm in my 60's. Nursing is a tough, physical job, and that's just on basic wards, let alone in intensive care, or even when you're doing CPR. With the population getting older and more sick, nursing is going to get tougher, not easier. It's going to be horrendous working 12 hour shifts at that age and being up-to-date with the changes. It's mentally exhausting too.

Nurses et al shouldn't be punished for the job they do when we become older.

My wife is a nurse in an intensive care unit. In fact, she is the senior nurse in charge of said unit. She is responsible for 36 members of staff and all the employee issues that entails. I know from my own experience of working in the finance sector that her pay is considerably less than the equivalent in the private sector, ie for someone responsible for that many staff. Having worked in insurance, my line manager who was responsible for about half that amount of staff was probably earning at least 50% more than my wife. He didn't have to deal with patients on the brink of death, have to advise and counsel their families, have to deal with increasing demands on the unit with the resources to fund it. Idiots who think the public sector is a cushy number need to get a life. Perhaps work in an environment where failure to deal with the pressure means someone dies rather than not meeting some managers self imposed deadline for getting an email to him or the like.

There are people milking it in the public sector at the top just as there are many more milking it in the private sector at the top and to greater reward.

 

[beorhthelm]

I also don't relish the thought of some 70 year old fireman carrying Me down 6 flights of stairs with flames licking at My arse!
Once again successive Governments do what they do best ,turn worker against worker an leave the shysters that dropped us in this pile of shit get away with robbing us all blind.

i dont expect for a minute there will be 70 yo firefighters, there will be exceptions to retirement age for certain professions. as for anyone turning worker against worker, im sure it was only recently the unions where calling for (and got) an end to the compulsory retirement age "our members are being thrown on the scrap heep in their 60's...". seem to want it all their own way.

 

[Buzzer]

Drew - Can I please nail this pensions holiday tale that you frequently cite, once and for all.

All final salary schemes are periodically valued by independent actuaries and the funds (with projected returns) are compared with the projected liabilities. The reserves are measured as a percentage of liabilities so a fully funded scheme would be at 100%. Many schemes in the 80s and 90s enjoyed huge surpluses in their funds (some as big as 120%) yet companies were expected to keep pouring money into these schemes.

The Government allowed companies to stop making contributions where the value was something like 105% or more of liabilities. The reasoning being that the companies were being responsible and maintaining a fully stocked up pension pot and then some. As soon as the levels dropped below this magical figure then the company had to top the fund up again. At no time did the government allow the companies to be excused from their responsibilities of maintaining a full pension pot.

What is important is the company was being a model employer and ensuring the pension pot was full. What they were asking back was the excess that they had paid in.

.....And then along came Gordon Brown and wiped out 20% of annual future earnings overnight.

 

[shaun_rc]

A It might even be the case that, over the years, public sector pay has been held down in comparison with private sector pay and the beneficiaries of secure public sector pensions have taken that as an alternative to the higher pay available (with higher pension risks) in the private sector.

Sorry, this is not true. Where I work, in a Government Department, the Civil Servants have higher salaries as well as better pensions than the outsourced staff.

That said, the main people who really don't seem to have to pay for this is the Banks. The way society is going at the moment is decidedly as predicted by Marx. The rich are getting richer, the poor poorer. The only thing that's missing is any class consciousness at all, that's why it's possible to get workers angry with each other, because people are ultimately most interested in their own position..

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Sorry, this is not true. Where I work, in a Government Department, the Civil Servants have higher salaries as well as better pensions than the outsourced staff.

I've no doubt that is the case. Outsourcing always delivers a deal that cuts pay. But the point I was making was that public service workers traditionally enjoyed better conditions but relatively lower pay than mainstream workers in the private sector who had worse conditions but better pay. As a career choice, there was a trade-off between the two.

The outcome of outsourcing public service work is the worst of all worlds for the workers - poor conditions AND lower pay.