Public Sector Pensions Reform - About friggin time..

[Norman Potting]

After taking early retirement from the public sector (and receiving a - reduced - pension as a consequence), I'm now working in the voluntary sector, where pay levels are hardly excessive. Reading this thread, it strikes me that quite a lot of my current work colleagues have a similar employment history. Enough of us, in fact, for me to put forward a claim that it's a positive BOON TO SOCIETY that public sector pensions (and the options for early retirement that go with them) can ensure that voluntary sector organisations are in place to deliver what Call Me Dave thinks will transform the lives of millions - The Big Society!

Marvellous.


Water down public sector pensions, make folk stick with their jobs until they are approaching 70, and who knows what might be lost?

Precisely Lord B. A bit OT but I am one of the ones likely to be affected by The Big Society/Localism (hopefully in a good way). I wonder, and so do many others I feel, where the volunteers are going to come from to make it work. The ethos now seems to be "work until you drop". In the past there appeared to be an abundance of early retirers with comfortable pensions able to give something back to organisations such as the Citizens Advice Bureau on a regular basis, who probably still struggled to get volunteers prepared to make a regular commitment.

I was at a presentation recently and one of the speakers raised the thought that, whilst people are usually willling and able to give up a little bit of time for "nice" things such as the odd bit of litter picking or helping clean the village duck pond, are they going to be williing/able to volunteer to cover services previously provided by the Govt. out of our our taxes?

 

[Skintagain 1983]

Newsflash..........................................

National Audit Office Report confirms .................

Public Sector Pensions are Affordable and Sustainable


So guys do your research before jumping on the "Bash the public sector workers not the billionaire tax dodgers" bandwagon

 

[Yoda]

Only read this thread for the first time but this is one thing that always makes me laugh:

longer life expectancy

Give it a further 10-20 years and they'll be a pension surplus due to people dying younger due to cirrhosis of the liver/liver failure and there not being enough for transplants. All this due to the binge culture there has been in this Country for the past 10-20 years.

 

[beorhthelm]

Newsflash..........................................

National Audit Office Report confirms

Public Sector Pensions are Affordable and Sustainable

really? do you care to share the source of this, i dont believe the NAO would express this either way. they present the data and research for others to make such claims. their report a year ago shows pensions might be affordable if you look at % of GDP (as the TUC liked to pick up on at the time), but at a hefty cost of £78billion, about 4x up on now, by 2050 - not accounting for any inflation. GDP and inflation are subject to variation under/over estimates, while pensions liabilities are fairl well known and fixed. so on that basis we have to rely on expected increase in GDP and manageble inflation (no zero, as would increase GDP to a degree) for that "affordablity". while it might be technically affordable now, we also have to assume that the private sector will continue to be willing for their increased taxes to fund the employers contibutions (~20%), while they dont get similar deal themselves.

 

[fork me]

This is of course true; it is the people at the bottom that are much more dependent upon their public sector pension on retirement. However that doesn't mean that they should be afforded pensions that are beyond the reach of workers in the private sector.

The problem is, when you compare like with like, public sector proffessions tend to get paid less than their counterparts in the private sector. The better holidays and better pensions are seen by many in the public sector as their payoff for this.

I'm a qualified science teacher (no longer in the public sector - I've emigrated) and with my degree I could earn a lot more money outside the teaching proffession. However, the better holidays and pension scheme counterbalance this. Now if those are eroded, and the pay stays shit, how are you going to keep people in the proffession?

It wouldn't be so bad if this hit EVERYONE in the publlic sector. However, it only hits low to middle paid workers. The judiciary, who get huge pensions with NO payments at all during their working life are not being affected by this at all.

 

[fork me]

The fact is that on average public sector workers are better paid, have better working conditions, better job security still and vastly better pensions

This is NOT fact at all. When comparing like for like, public sector workers are usually lower paid.

 

[Greyrun]

Not much difference between Public sector pensions and a Ponzi scheme and sadly the same outcome.

 

[beorhthelm]

This is NOT fact at all. When comparing like for like, public sector workers are usually lower paid.

really though, are they? its difficult to compare like for like between companies, even within a company. i wonder if there's even any proper studies on the matter, of just alot of acedotal and mythical basis. i read this week (and dont know the source) that the average public sector pay is £467 p/w while the average private sector is £446 p/w. if true, that turns alot of perceptions on their head. (i hate averages like this, because they can hide all sorts of detail).

take your teaching role, what could you do with a science degree (presumably)? earn £25-35k as a lab tech in a pharmaceutical? i think theres alot of perception in the public sector that wages are higher in the private because of the focus on high end jobs, i dont think the reality matches. does an admin assistant earn much more at Shell than in working in the Department for Business?

 

[drew]

really though, are they? its difficult to compare like for like between companies, even within a company. i wonder if there's even any proper studies on the matter, of just alot of acedotal and mythical basis. i read this week (and dont know the source) that the average public sector pay is £467 p/w while the average private sector is £446 p/w. if true, that turns alot of perceptions on their head. (i hate averages like this, because they can hide all sorts of detail).

So why quote them then? The private sector will include vast numbers of people on the minimum wage doing jobs now outsourced by the Public Sector such as hospital cleaners. What you need to do is compare like for like. I know what my wife earns in the public sector running a specialist dept of 36 people and if I compared it to my boss at my previous job in the City who was in charge of only about 18 people, I know he was earning considerably more plus annual bonuses (I would hasten to add not the type of bonuses bankers earn though). And people's lives didn't depend on him!

 

[severnside gull]

That's not the public sector that I recognise. The quality of management and administration has plumetted in recent years, as experienced people have left, to be replaced (if at all) by young, hopeful graduates and school leavers who can't do the job and can't survive the stresses.

I agree entirely. My point is that headline reductions in staff engaged in direct service provision will be at least offset in the longer term by increases in administrative/support roles (even where there is little or nothing left to support) and certainly NOT that the standards of those employed would be the equal of those replaced.

 

[shaun_rc]

Why is the private sector so jealous of our pension ? I can retire at 55, but I would have severe penalties. I need to work for 40yrs to obtain a final pension of 50% of my salary. I know that this is a good pension but the money I can retire on is insignificant compared to the 20K extra per annum with the same qualifications can earn.

I have heard this argument at work from people who I assure you would be on less money in the private sector, not more. That pension is amazing, often accompanied by a higher salary than those in the private sector to boot. Am I jealous, yes, I am!

 

[Mileoakman]

I have heard this argument at work from people who I assure you would be on less money in the private sector, not more. That pension is amazing, often accompanied by a higher salary than those in the private sector to boot. Am I jealous, yes, I am!

Now you've lost me. The people at your works would be on less money in the private sector so presumably your in the public sector. Why are you therefore jealous when your already getting your perceived higher salary and pension?

 

[Marshy]

well i will be jacking in my nhs job then, no point staying if the pension goes, i can earn more elsewhere.
The nhs will have no one left if they knock the pension benefits on the head. Or no one any good.

 

[Buzzer]

So, the actuaries stuffed up with their advice and the companies couldn't see further than the next profit announcment.

Jesus wept, you're hard work. The actuaries are definitely not to blame. They have an unbelievably large source of data to feed into their algorithms but you can't build life assurance models around every possible legislation change and they had no reason to suspect that the incoming Labour chancellor would be irresponsible enough to wipe out 20% of pension income at a stroke.

I also despair with your attitude regarding the companies. They were maintaining fully funded pension schemes that were returning healthy profits. These were all responsible employers. I'd say it's bordering on onerous to have demanded they maintain their contributions if the actuaries were predicting that the money wasn't needed.

I quite enjoyed reading that article in the Guardian. The biggest moaners about the pensions holiday seems to be the TUC. Surprise, surprise. Yet they, like you, seem unable to understand that the pensions were being maintained at 100% and the companies were fulfilling their obligations in full. It was only when Gordon Brown stepped into the picture that everything went pear-shaped.

There's some wonderful quotes later on in that article:

..but it's not just the opposition who have attacked the chancellor over his abolition of dividend tax credits. Mr Spencer, adviser to economic forecasting group the Ernst & Young Item Club, says: "It was an error of historic proportions. It may not sound very much but it's the difference between a rate of return on your savings of 4%-5% and 7%-8%."

Many other commentators also believe it was a bad move. The National Association of Pension Funds, representing company pension schemes, says that with the downturn in stock markets and an ageing population, losing around £5bn a year, which could be used by pension funds to help out their members "is obviously not going to help matters at all".

Not exactly a ringing endorsement is it?

 

[beorhthelm]

So why quote them then?

its called disclosure, i read the info in City AM and the source wasnt stated, and know its extremly right wing economically. i also knock use of stats elsewhere. but im sure its not invented and its an interesting view on the subject, the common assumption public sector workers earn less may not be true.

... What you need to do is compare like for like.

quite. so why do you compare someone who manages 36 in life and death decisions with someone who earns 18 people who doesnt? are you suggesting pay be directly proportionate to the number of people managed? you do highlight the problem in this debate, the focus is always on the extreme cases, the manager of a team in a private company earning 60k + bonus or the senior local council offcier earning 50k and their "gold plated" final salary pension (which lets be honest will be very nice thank you). in either case theres hundreds of normal average earners, part timers, minimum wagers for each high earner, in both sectors. hey, some people in the private sector get paid amazing amounts for doing f*** all, while some in the public sector make vital decisions and get paid relativly little. its not fair, but shouldnt distract from a broader picture.

well i will be jacking in my nhs job then, no point staying if the pension goes, i can earn more elsewhere.
The nhs will have no one left if they knock the pension benefits on the head. Or no one any good.

i wonder if people will indeed take this view. in the worse case you lose the good talent and the deadwood is left behind. but i ask, are there really better paid similar jobs elsewhere? would they be 20% better pay and similar conditions? i suppose in private hospitals there is direct like for like comparisons to be made, for office roles not so much.

 

[nicko31]

really though, are they? its difficult to compare like for like between companies, even within a company. i wonder if there's even any proper studies on the matter, of just alot of acedotal and mythical basis. i read this week (and dont know the source) that the average public sector pay is £467 p/w while the average private sector is £446 p/w. if true, that turns alot of perceptions on their head. (i hate averages like this, because they can hide all sorts of detail).

take your teaching role, what could you do with a science degree (presumably)? earn £25-35k as a lab tech in a pharmaceutical? i think theres alot of perception in the public sector that wages are higher in the private because of the focus on high end jobs, i dont think the reality matches. does an admin assistant earn much more at Shell than in working in the Department for Business?

Yes, its been widely publicised that the average public sector pay has now overtaken private pay. Wack on the the extra 25% it costs to fund the pension and there you have it, no wonder the country is going bankrupt. Even with the planned average salary pension its still a good deal and underwritten by the rest of us. Anyone who strikes in protest should be immediately transferred to a money purchase scheme...

 

[Spearritt of the Albion]

Having read the first three pages of this thread I thought i'd skip the rest and go straight to the end before my blood pressure went through the roof.

I do wish that uninformed people that have not been public workers would get their facts right before spouting their mouths off. Some of you are level headed and understand but, sadly, most of you don't.

I joined the Civil Service from the banking industry back in 1978. I took a pay cut to do so but, with slightly better job security, I accepted that. On more than one occasion I had the opportunity to be poached by the private sector and could have doubled my salary but I had a young family at the time and decided that I wanted to be closer to them and see them for longer periods in the day. My decision.

In 1980 I joined the IT department and eventually we were contracted out. No choice there it was take it or go but I was given the choice of taking terms and conditions that mirrored my civil service T's and C's or switch to the company T's and C's and earn more money. (My redundency rights would have been diminished if I joined the company scheme so, again with a young family I chose the mirror T's and C's). I have colleagues that earn 20k more than me for doing the same job but I don't quibble as it was my choice. They pay a higher %age towards their pension scheme but they are far better off. Sadly, if we left, we could all earn even more outside.

So please don't go on about Civil Service pensions. They accept much lower salaries, in many cases, and in return their jobs (in the past, at least) were slightly more secure and their pension benefits cost a bit less. Big deal!!!!

Local government is even worse. By the time she retires, my wife will have worked a 25 hour week at her local school for around 35 years and in return her pension is predicited to be around £3k per annum!! And she works ten times harder than most office workers.

Unfortunately only teachers are salaried so, she is only paid 5 weeks holiday and the remainder of the school holidays she goes unpaid. Fair enough to some degree but she is expected not to take up full-time employment during the school holidays as she is being payed for part of them. Not sure they could enforce that now but it was written in to her original contract.

Of course, the last two governments have seen fit to make sure that the sensible (not greedy) pensions of the public servants are eroded just because the private sector cannot keep it's own house in order. The current government even appear to have got the opposition to do their dirty work for them. How brave is that!!

And don't even talk to me about school sports partnerships!!!!!

 

[Castello]

Having read the first three pages of this thread I thought i'd skip the rest and go straight to the end before my blood pressure went through the roof.

I do wish that uninformed people that have not been public workers would get their facts right before spouting their mouths off. Some of you are level headed and understand but, sadly, most of you don't.

I joined the Civil Service from the banking industry back in 1978. I took a pay cut to do so but, with slightly better job security, I accepted that. On more than one occasion I had the opportunity to be poached by the private sector and could have doubled my salary but I had a young family at the time and decided that I wanted to be closer to them and see them for longer periods in the day. My decision.

In 1980 I joined the IT department and eventually we were contracted out. No choice there it was take it or go but I was given the choice of taking terms and conditions that mirrored my civil service T's and C's or switch to the company T's and C's and earn more money. (My redundency rights would have been diminished if I joined the company scheme so, again with a young family I chose the mirror T's and C's). I have colleagues that earn 20k more than me for doing the same job but I don't quibble as it was my choice. They pay a higher %age towards their pension scheme but they are far better off. Sadly, if we left, we could all earn even more outside.

So please don't go on about Civil Service pensions. They accept much lower salaries, in many cases, and in return their jobs (in the past, at least) were slightly more secure and their pension benefits cost a bit less. Big deal!!!!

Local government is even worse. By the time she retires, my wife will have worked a 25 hour week at her local school for around 35 years and in return her pension is predicited to be around £3k per annum!! And she works ten times harder than most office workers.

Unfortunately only teachers are salaried so, she is only paid 5 weeks holiday and the remainder of the school holidays she goes unpaid. Fair enough to some degree but she is expected not to take up full-time employment during the school holidays as she is being payed for part of them. Not sure they could enforce that now but it was written in to her original contract.

Of course, the last two governments have seen fit to make sure that the sensible (not greedy) pensions of the public servants are eroded just because the private sector cannot keep it's own house in order. The current government even appear to have got the opposition to do their dirty work for them. How brave is that!!

And don't even talk to me about school sports partnerships!!!!!

lol how about mentioning PFI!

This post seems to sum up what I read from all public servants on this post and generally. A sense of betrayal compounded by annoyance at others for calling us greedy for wanting what we have worked and paid and made sacrifices for.

I dont call others greedy for taking their wages and terms and conditions. I dont see why public servants are getting such abuse.

Oh and were so greedy were on a 2 year pay freeze after a below inflation increase of 1% the year before.

 

[fork me]

really though, are they?

Yes, that's why I said it.

its difficult to compare like for like between companies, even within a company. i wonder if there's even any proper studies on the matter, of just alot of acedotal and mythical basis. i read this week (and dont know the source) that the average public sector pay is £467 p/w while the average private sector is £446 p/w. if true, that turns alot of perceptions on their head. (i hate averages like this, because they can hide all sorts of detail).

Yes. like the fact that, on average, a higher proportion of public sector jobs are post graduate..

take your teaching role, what could you do with a science degree (presumably)? earn £25-35k as a lab tech in a pharmaceutical?

I could earn a lot more than that in research.

i think theres alot of perception in the public sector that wages are higher in the private because of the focus on high end jobs, i dont think the reality matches. does an admin assistant earn much more at Shell than in working in the Department for Business?

I think on very low end jobs there's probably little difference, an unqualified ward clerk probably earns a similar amount to an unqualified office worker. It's higher up you really see the difference.

 

[beorhthelm]

... I have colleagues that earn 20k more than me for doing the same job but I don't quibble as it was my choice. They pay a higher %age towards their pension scheme but they are far better off. Sadly, if we left, we could all earn even more outside.
...
Local government is even worse. By the time she retires, my wife will have worked a 25 hour week at her local school for around 35 years and in return her pension is predicited to be around £3k per annum!! And she works ten times harder than most office workers.

i have friends in IT that earn nearly 20k more than i, for more or less the same role. yep, i get to switch off at 5:30, they are tied to their blackberry even on holiday. its not just between public and private sectors such differnces emerge. i'd wonder what salary your wife is on after holiday and 62% hours to end up with such a low pension, and how do you know she works 10x harder than most ofice workers, have you carried out time and motion study? the problem with the issue is its all too emotional, personal and acedotal.