Public sector pensions nearly over?

perplexed.com

I just hope I don't die at 65 like my mother did.

marklv

bigheadxx wrote: »

I am not changing my argument, I am adding to it becaause you dont understand it. Final salary pension schemes are a collective pot and companies have had to make up massive shortfalls and make increasing contributions because of longer life expectancy and a shortfall in funds due to the financial crisis. BPs contribution to its FS scheme was £360million last year

FS schemes that have been closed to new entrants ie BP, are currently run for the benefit of staff that have already retired. In BPs case the scheme is 115% funded at present so there are no current funding issues but research suggests soaring liabilities in the future. BP will still have to make contributions to this fund even though there will be no new members so the funds to pay a pension are NOT in place before a FS pension is drawn so your argument makes no sense.

The contributions are made from BPs big fat profits! :rotfl:No new members are necessary. You see, the key thing is for companies to consider the retired employees as employees, not as pensioners - get it?

bigheadxx

marklv wrote: »

The contributions are made from BPs big fat profits! :rotfl:No new members are necessary. You see, the key thing is for companies to consider the retired employees as employees, not as pensioners - get it?

Yes profits! The public sector does not make a profit so it is the taxpayer that foots the bill. The private sector is doing what needs to be done and the public sector will have to do the same at some point. Dont forget that it is those big fat profits that create the revenue that funds the public sector.

TMFTP

TIme to get the Tories back in.

Nothing quite like privatisation rumours to get the public sector to get their finger out.

Imagine - WORKING for a living!

;-)

marklv

TMFTP wrote: »

TIme to get the Tories back in.

Nothing quite like privatisation rumours to get the public sector to get their finger out.

Imagine - WORKING for a living!

;-)

You know where you can stick your privatisation - !!!!!!! :mad:

Primrose

I think if we had a situation where public service pensions were ringfenced years ago it would have been a lot easier years ago to see this deficit building up. As it is, it has now reached a stage where no politician who wanted to be elected dare propose it moving public service pensions to a defined contribution scheme. But going forward, this is what is needed and half hearted trimming and tweaking at the edges won't cure the problem. But if all public servant could retain their benefits for the next 3 years and then moving forward, all switch to a defined contribution system for the remainder of their public service employment, at least the economists would be able to forecast a date when this huge drain on the taxpayer would start to sort itself out. A lot of people don't realise that at least 20% of their Council Tax actually goes towards the funding of index linked pensions in local government. If that cost penalty were to be removed, Council Tax would be an awful lot cheaper for everybody.

marklv

Primrose wrote: »

I think if we had a situation where public service pensions were ringfenced years ago it would have been a lot easier years ago to see this deficit building up. As it is, it has now reached a stage where no politician who wanted to be elected dare propose it moving public service pensions to a defined contribution scheme. But going forward, this is what is needed and half hearted trimming and tweaking at the edges won't cure the problem. But if all public servant could retain their benefits for the next 3 years and then moving forward, all switch to a defined contribution system for the remainder of their public service employment, at least the economists would be able to forecast a date when this huge drain on the taxpayer would start to sort itself out. A lot of people don't realise that at least 20% of their Council Tax actually goes towards the funding of index linked pensions in local government. If that cost penalty were to be removed, Council Tax would be an awful lot cheaper for everybody.

Sorry - this is nonsense. The problem is not the defined benefit pensions that public servants have, the problem is excessive and wasteful spending in the public sector. Lots of examples here: using management consultants at rates of up to £2,500 a day, massive IT projects that are not really necessary, schemes like ID cards that most people don't want, etc. Public sector pensions have already been trimmed through various measures already implemented, and more will follow, but what you advocating, which the destruction of all public sector pensions will cause huge resentment and unrest in a workforce that already suffers from low morale. There are manifold ways to cut public spending - attacking pensions is unnnecessary, vindictive and plainly barmy.

bendix

LOL, poor old mark. He knows deep inside he's on a hiding to nothing and that his pension is under threat, despite his protestations to the contrary.

I wonder how he feels about hearing today that the Conservatives had already denied him a payrise in 2011. :-)

peterg1965

peterg1965 wrote: »

Another bête noire of mine. NO ONE in the public sector should be paid more than the Prime Minister - absolutely no exceptions. CEs of NHS Trusts, BBC Director Generals (and other assorted overpaid luvvies including 'celebs' contracted to the Beeb), Judges, Heads of Quangos (various).

I do like it when the Tories 'steal' my ideas! I do hope they extend this to the BBC which IS a public body.

With the Tory announcements today, they have partially seized the pensions 'nettle' - stopping MPs final salary scheme, capping public sector pensions to max £50,000 (presumably for new scheme entrants), raising the retirement age and increasing state pensions. They get my vote - but then again they had it anyway!

marklv

bendix wrote: »

LOL, poor old mark. He knows deep inside he's on a hiding to nothing and that his pension is under threat, despite his protestations to the contrary.

I wonder how he feels about hearing today that the Conservatives had already denied him a payrise in 2011. :-)

Funnily enough, I'm not bothered by this. Even Osborne and Cameron are aware that sticks need to be accompanied by carrots; if there is a freeze in 2011, pay rises will need to be substantially above inflation in future years, to catch up. It's the only way the unions will accept this.