Crunch time for council workers’ golden pensions

carolt

donaldtramp wrote: »

I'll repeat the question....for the public sector employees.

No guilt about living off the backs of other people???

This includes the hard working low paid private sector employees taxes

Why should they feel guilty? For the vast majority, they do important jobs that if we didn't pay for through our taxes, we'd just have to pay for directly everytime we wanted to use the service.

I don't think I'd feel a whole lot richer and happier if I had to pay for my own private militia in place of the police, private education for my children and healthcare every time any member of my family fell sick. I'm happy for the state to take of these things, paid for through my taxes.

Statistics back up that the happiest countries in the world to live are those with relatively high taxes and a strong welfare state, like Denmark. I don't want to go back to a world with no welfare state. Nor, it's clear from all polls, do most people in this country.

StevieJ

donaldtramp wrote: »

I'll repeat the question....for the public sector employees.

No guilt about living off the backs of other people???

This includes the hard working low paid private sector employees taxes

Hard working a bold assumption.

carolt

donaldtramp wrote: »

I'll repeat the question....for the public sector employees.

No guilt about living off the backs of other people???

This includes the hard working low paid private sector employees taxes

I think your argument would be a lot stronger if you focussed on those so-called non-jobs in the public sector - if they really do exist, then it would make sense to get rid of them.

By conflating them with those providing essential services, you weaken your own argument until it becomes unsupportable.

StevieJ

carolt wrote: »

However, when Cameron gets in I daresay your views will be in the ascendancy, re public sector pensions and pay - sadly, I think.

Maybe that will be the reason he will not get elected, it is a large block vote, public sector workers and the unemployed.

Andy_L

StevieJ wrote: »

Maybe that will be the reason he will not get elected, it is a large block vote, public sector workers and the unemployed.

the evidence seems to show that the unemployed don't get of their bums and vote, presuembly it interferes with watching trisha et al.

StevieJ

Andy_L wrote: »

the evidence seems to show that the unemployed don't get of their bums and vote, presuembly it interferes with watching trisha et al.

Maybe someone knocking on their door and outlining what 'call me Dave' has planned may shift them off their butts What do you think . Interesting election.

carolt

StevieJ wrote: »

Maybe someone knocking on their door and outlining what 'call me Dave' has planned may shift them off their butts What do you think . Interesting election.

No, I have no doubt that - failing another Falklands war or the revelation that Cameron's being having it off with small children or sheep or Mr and Mrs Wilson combined or something, the Tories will get in.

May as well get used to it.

Think it will be quite a dull election unless your idea of a fun time is watching the Tories win a landslide victory.

Old_Slaphead

m1ntie wrote: »

The average local government pension is presently just over £4,000 pa and the average employee is on a salary of approximately £13,000

http://www.cipfa.org.uk/panels/pensions/lg_pension_scheme_the_facts.pdf

Slightly out of date......that link relates to 2004.

The £13,000 would have included many part time workers so the average full time equivalent would have been significantly higher.

The current average pension for a private sector worker is currently estimated at LESS THAN £2000 pa

carolt

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Slightly out of date......that link relates to 2004.

The £13,000 would have included many part time workers so the average full time equivalent would have been significantly higher.

The current average pension for a private sector worker is currently estimated at LESS THAN £2000 pa

But you're not comparing like with like.

Teachers and nurses and doctors, for example, are all professionals with professional qualifications and graduates (or equivalent, in the cases of nurses). It's more use loooking at what else they could get with equivalent qualifications and post-grad training, in the private sector.

Also, as I pointed out, above, pensions are not something entirely separate from pay, they are part of the overall package when you take a job. If you choose to take a job in the private sector, with no pension, and then choose to contribute nothing, that's your choice.

I don't see why others who chose to take a low-paid job that instead gave them good benefits like pensions, should be penalised for this.

By all means, change the rules going forward, for new entrants - I think that has been happening gradually in the public sector for many years - but the fact that existing public sector retirees have better pensions is based on decisions they made many years ago, and it is not their fault times have changed.

And the amounts you're referring to - they're nothing, frankly.

If that's average, they're both meaningless - both public and private sector workers with pensions of 2-4 grand are going to qualify for means-tested top-ups.

You could ask where the incentive is for anyone in the private sector to bother saving for a pension with that system of means-testing and top-ups.

That's another area worth looking at.

Old_Slaphead

carolt wrote: »

But you're not comparing like with like.

I'm not comparing anything with anything.

Merely saying that
a) OP's posting is miles out of date
b) Average salaries does not relate to 2009 and is not a full time equivalent (therefore it is misleading)
c) Current private sector provision is woefully inadequate. The new 2012 National Pension Scheme is a scandal as it is effectively a stealth tax. Anyone accumulating a pension pot of under £40,000 is effectively saving for nothing. Even someone saving for 40 years...assuming an average wage of £20,000pa will only get a pension of around £3000pa