national strike

[Castello]

are you going to place some context around that, or just use an outlier to show a point that wouldnt stand up to closer examination? ie how much does the person getting 6k pension earn now, what are their contributions etc.

for one more typical example, someone on a final salary of 35k will get a pension of 22k. that would require a pension pot of about 600k if brought as an annuality, which you'd have to save 15k* a year for 40 years to bulid up. get the picture? we have to re-arrange public sector pensions and rise the retirment age to fix this, it is unsustainable as it is.

*actully thats a tad dishonest, it'll be about half that once some empolyer contribuion, say 5% and 40years asset growth is accounted for. but then theres a thing, the pensions will only be around if you have that asset growth, driven by those nasty bankers. quite a quadry for those anti-bankers without a nice public final salary pension.

once again you're ill informed. The NHS pension fund is not funded by investments. its totally funded by contributions which are taken by the government and spent as part of public expenditure. When the pension becomes due the pension is then repaid from public funds. Since the fund has made 2 billion surplus in 2009 2010 and more last year this is becoming a very cheap way of government borrowing money.

So rather than the taxpayer funding NHS workers pensions its seems its the other way around .

 

[drew]

i'm a private sector worker and

i do as much overtime as i can to get by.

i'm not going to take a day off to protest a pension which is completely fair for me.

in the same league, i respect everything a WORKING person stands for. I just can't stand freeloaders who think everything should be shared with them while they do f*** all. This wasn't aimed at public sector workers. AT ALL. I'll be damned if someone who can't be arsed tries to tell me what I do with my money makes me so bad and horrible.

I don't earn much at all but I'm happy with it, as i said, it gets me through, i can contribute to whoever I damn well please.

If they changed my pension? Who cares? I'm 19, and at the rate the boss is matching what i contribute pension wise, I won't be well off, but i'll be comfy.

19! What makes you think you will still be working for the same boss in the next 10 years, let alone when you retire.

i'd work for as long as i needed to to make sure i was near comfortable at best at retirement

And what if you thought that was the age of 65 only to be told as you get close to that age that you will work another 5 years just for the same pension or even less.

and how much of that additional years is due to age equality legislation?

and its nice that you think this can all be solved by cutting boardroom pensions (or indeed union leader pensions, which are none too shabby either). problem is the private sector has alreayd had to close most final salary pensions as they arent affordable, many in massive debt. some large company was sold last week for £2 pounds, sounds like a great deal but it came with pension fund black hole of hundreds of millions. long and short is putting a small fraction <10% into a pension for 30-40 years to take out 50%+ of salary for 20-30 years simply doesnt add up. its been the elephant in the room of all economics for decades, sadly not touched with the proverbial bargepole, so when the change comes its requires a sharper turn to steer us from the rocks.

How many of those final salary schemes closed because of mismanagement by companies and trustees? Companies taking pension holidays and the like and when the economy takes a downturn, finding they can't meet their liabilities and closing the schemes, (except of course to company directors). The other elephant in the room is of course how ftse directors have seen their salaries rocket over the last few years in a time that was supposedly a recession with the grafters at the bottom of the pile accepting redundancces, wage freezes crap pensions etc etc.

 

[beorhthelm]

Actually precisely none.

i stand corrected, though the ages rise to age suspiciously similar to those for state retirement.

once again you're ill informed. The NHS pension fund is not funded by investments.

I was refering to how private pensions were funded, with an illustration of how much such a pension would require to fund if done though a money purchase arrangment. know of anyone earning 30-35k contributing ~£500 or more every month into their pension pot? to labour the point, reverse the final salary calculation, 6k pension would be paid to someone on a final salary of just over 10k working 35 years, requiring a pot of just 135k, which could be achieved by saving ~£65 (probably waht a private pension would be)

However, the method of state backed pensions is flawed for exactly the reason you highlight, that the current contibutions are spent rather than set aside or invested, and future pensions rely on the new contributions. surplus now turns into deficit in the future, just like it has with many company pensions which "borrowed" from the fund (and even those that didnt).

i'm not having a pop at nurses, or teachers or whatever, just highlighting the real economics. the deal was offered, yes, but its unaffordable. ultimatly, if the country goes bankrupt because theres no money to pay out pensions in 2039, how does that serve the best interests of the pensioners? if dont believe that might happen, see Greece, their pensions are one of the reasons they need to borrow so much (along with poor revenue collection)

 

[BLOCK F]

I'm pretty sure, unless I've made a dramatic error, public sector workers also pay tax? And also, another potential misunderstanding on my part, but I believe we live in a democracy where the right to withdraw labour is a legitimate form of protest? Call me a whingeing limp-wristed soft liberal leftie if you like, but power to them. I'd be pissed off if I was in their position. They're lucky enough to have a union to join. :S[/QUOTE

Don't know whether you really are all the things you have described yourself,but it looks as if you may well be!

 

[sten_super]

However, the method of state backed pensions is flawed for exactly the reason you highlight, that the current contibutions are spent rather than set aside or invested, and future pensions rely on the new contributions. surplus now turns into deficit in the future, just like it has with many company pensions which "borrowed" from the fund (and even those that didnt).

This is the real issue, and it's a pity that it's one that neither side wants to tackle. The Local Government Pension Scheme is frequently mentioned as being 'fully funded', however that's not true - what they really mean is that currently incoming revenues are greater than expenditure. As age expectancy continues to increase, for as long as retirement age doesn't move with it more and more people will be claiming pensions from the same pot, so it's not a sustainable position.

If a portfolio manager were to use incoming payments to pay off previous investors, he'd be arrested and prosecuted for running a Ponzi scheme. Yet seemingly it's okay for the government to do it.

What I would like to see is, before any change in the level of public sector pension payouts, the schemes changed from defined benefits to defined contributions. Let's see just how much of an employer contribution is required to make these schemes viable - negotiations can then be on a much more transparent basis.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Michael Gove flipped his home, maxed out on expenses for three years running and earned £200,000 per year from news International when he should have been working as an MP.
And none of our MPs has suggested reducing their incredibly good pensions yet.

Everyone's still arguing with the wrong people.

Well done for mentioning this. People have very short memories don't they.

Lots of teacher bashing going on here. Wife is a teacher, she is not happy with the changes, but she is in work tomorrow because she feels she has a duty to the kids.

They where told that pensions where affordable a few years back. The teachers are not asking for a pay rise, all they want is to remain on the same conditions that they signed up to. They want proof from this government why it is not affordable, but this information is yet to arrive.

Who created the financial meltdown in the first place? And when people keep saying we need to do our bit, why? Someone somewhere owes the tax payer a lot of money don't they, and have got away. We are meant to live in a fair society are we not?

Blaming public sector workers is easy, it takes people attentions away from the real issues.

 

[m20gull]

once again you're ill informed. The NHS pension fund is not funded by investments. its totally funded by contributions which are taken by the government and spent as part of public expenditure. When the pension becomes due the pension is then repaid from public funds. Since the fund has made 2 billion surplus in 2009 2010 and more last year this is becoming a very cheap way of government borrowing money.

So rather than the taxpayer funding NHS workers pensions its seems its the other way around .

That's not how the accounts read. For 2010/11 the amounts are:
Employer contributions £5.5bn
Member contributions £2.5bn

Benefits payable £6.9bn

So, I agree at first sight it looks like more contributions are collected than benefits paid, but who pays most of the contributions?

 

[Gazwag]

Its all about arrogant selfish union bosses justifing their salary

For example

As of 2009, Bob Crow's basic salary at RMT was £94,747; a 12% increase from the previous year. His entire pay package with bonuses and pensions was £133,138; on top of this he claimed £9,989 in expenses and £2,376 in travel costs

The Welsh trade union leader who organised a mass public sector walkout has defended the £86,000 salary that has seen him dubbed a “fat cat” by opponents.

PCS leader Mark Serwotka, who 11 years ago was elected general secretary on a promise to take a wage much closer to the average member, said his salary reflected the seniority of his role.

 

[kano]

i work in the private sector and i say good luck to them.

just because we get screwed over and the majority of us don't have unions to protect us doesn't mean everyone should bend over and take it.

If you want to blame someone for waste in the public sector blame the government and the senior management not the plebs who just follow orders.

 

[Fur Cough]

I'm not a Public Sector worker and I do not support their strike.
I do however respect their right to strike, after all they are only trying to protect themselves, which in my view is a perfectly natural reaction.

 

[Uncle C]

These are supposedly intelligent people, like teachers, so which part of "there is not enough money to pay existing pensions" dont they understand?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

There are a lot of people working in the private sector who have no pension at all. Where is the money going to come from to pay for their benefits in their old age?

 

[BLOCK F]

Er, no it didnt. I work in the pension industry. The A-day rule changes attempt to catch the top-enders with massive taxation on benefits, and further rules have since come in to prevent abuse of rules by this same group including further reductions in tax relief for earners over £100k. Of course footbalers and the like have since looked to dodgy Jersey type schemes to use offshore rules to get round these new curbs. This shouldnt have been possible as good old Gordon threatened the offshore havens with the wrath of god if they didnt pack it in. So far nothing has been done, so once again the same group get away with it and I have to get clients to complete even more pointless paperwork that only affects 0.1% of the populaton lucky enough to have the sort of pension funds you are thinking of.

As for the Public Sector. They have got to wake up - the current pension schemes are unaffordbale and have been for the last 30 years. Successive governments have known this and burried it. Blair got conviction politican Frank Field to come up with a solution. When he got the answers, Field was sidelined and recomendations ignored. This is an unfortunate place we are now in. Unions know the truth but they will fight it as that is their job. The pensions as they stand are unaffordable - do not beleive a word of the unions and the vodoo economics they troll out on TV. The defined benefit schemes do not work with the rising mortality rates and the type of inflation linked incomes they provide are unsupportable in low inflation/low interest rate economies ( which we have had in the last 15 odd years ) and the low funding rate they receive from members ( in real terms ). The maths dont add up, so successive governments have hidden the real future libailities off of the national debt figs as they have got bigger and bigger each year. This has to stop, and at last a government has got the bottle to do it. I just hope they see it through.

Well said Gangsta!

 

[BLOCK F]

bunch of ungrateful wankers. As it is with these reforms they still have better pensions than most in the private sector. People atm want everything for nothing and are unwilling to make comprimises.

Not a moron at all............more or less spot on,I reckon.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Well done for mentioning this. People have very short memories don't they.

Lots of teacher bashing going on here. Wife is a teacher, she is not happy with the changes, but she is in work tomorrow because she feels she has a duty to the kids.

They where told that pensions where affordable a few years back. The teachers are not asking for a pay rise, all they want is to remain on the same conditions that they signed up to. They want proof from this government why it is not affordable, but this information is yet to arrive.

Who created the financial meltdown in the first place? And when people keep saying we need to do our bit, why? Someone somewhere owes the tax payer a lot of money don't they, and have got away. We are meant to live in a fair society are we not?

Blaming public sector workers is easy, it takes people attentions away from the real issues.

There's a lot of people that wish to "only" stay on their original terms that are now without any, they've no longer got a job.

Why should you do your bit? Because there is a financial crisis, who or how this happened is open to debate, why the last government allowed the public finances to explode, is open to debate. However simple accounting shows you can't spend what you haven't got. Therefore you have to do something about it. Blame the rich Tories all you like but the pensions issue has been brewing for years and whoever was in power now would have to do something about it.

The teachers may have been told that there money to pay for it some years ago but that was some years ago not now!

This isn't about bashing any particular sector but a realization that the current situation requires drastic action and to the majority it will be a bitter pill to take.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Good luck to them. It's their right and I always prefer to see people stand up for their rights as opposed to bleating and pointing fingers at others.

Is there enough money to pay their pensions? This is don't know for sure but what I do know is that the Tory government are ideologically hell bent on decimating public services, it's what they do remember, so I do not trust their figures one bit.

 

[Beach Hut]

i'm a private sector worker and

i do as much overtime as i can to get by.

i'm not going to take a day off to protest a pension which is completely fair for me.

in the same league, i respect everything a WORKING person stands for. I just can't stand freeloaders who think everything should be shared with them while they do f*** all. This wasn't aimed at public sector workers. AT ALL. I'll be damned if someone who can't be arsed tries to tell me what I do with my money makes me so bad and horrible.

I don't earn much at all but I'm happy with it, as i said, it gets me through, i can contribute to whoever I damn well please.

If they changed my pension? Who cares? I'm 19, and at the rate the boss is matching what i contribute pension wise, I won't be well off, but i'll be comfy.

I am awaiting news of my 5th manager this year !

Believe me managers don't stick around, certainly not where I work.

 

[Twinkle Toes]

Cue many pages of people arguing thereby distracting from the fact that both public and private sector workers have been shafted plenty over the years and will continue to be shafted. Unless you are a High Net Worth Individual in which case changes to pensions in 2005 took a couple of billion extra out the tax pot and into your pensions. Divide and conquer - oldest trick in the book.

Indeed it is.

ps My Sister (who's a teacher) is out on Wednesday - & fair play to her. The all-new pension rules that the Govt. are railroading are a f***ing disgrace. I bet they won't be attempting to introduce similar draconion measures for bleedin' MP's & their greedy mates in The City.

 

[Ralphingtonpuss]

your views please on the up and coming national strike of people that my taxes employ

My view is this, these people pay taxes as well!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU do not employ them because you pay taxes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!These people have a right to fight for their futures..................I am one of these people but will not be striking because I am exempt under the emergency AE rules.................Without these people the country we live in and surround might be a poorer place e.g. Teachers and life saving medics etc!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Twinkle Toes]

These are supposedly intelligent people, like teachers, so which part of "there is not enough money to pay existing pensions" dont they understand?

Well why isn't there enough money to pay for their existing pensions? A contract was signed & the employees have been paying into their pensions, so why should they now be forced into something they didn't agree to when they started their careers; work aditional years & then get a reduced weekly pension?? You might be happy to take such a hit if you were in a similar position, but I'm buggered if I would without putting up a fight. And why are the present Govt. obsessed with paying off the Deficit in 5 years instead of 10? Could it be something to do with a forthcoming General Election & the opportunity to win votes by cutting a number of taxes & rejoicing in their fiscal genius? I know what I think...