300,000 jobs in public sector face the axe

lemonjelly

chucky wrote: »

thanks

doesn't this then skew the public sector salaries upwards as these are usually 'lower paid' staff that are now in the private sector which makes the average salary in the private sector lower...

Probably does. In fact, probably impacts in bigger ways too, as most of these posts will be part time, or even term time only etc (for example dinner ladies, or lollipop people).

kennyboy66_2

JasonLVC wrote: »

How can 26% of your council tax bill be put towards the pension payments of past council employees leaving only 75% for the Council to actually spend on stuff today - no wonder councils struggle?

It's not. Because of the way councils are funded (cental Govt. plus council tax), the Taxpayers alliance chose only to use the council tax as the denominator.

Now I appreciate eventually the cost lands on the taxpayer somehow, but it is a bogus use of statistics.

You then have made the leap to suggest all of the costs is for past council employees. It is not - the majority of pension costs are for existing employees (I think the average employer contribution is around 12% ish). It is not like the unfunded civil service scheme.

What we should be doing is forcing council employees to pay more or reduce some of the benefits (certainly discretionary additional years funding from the employer should be banned - as an example).

donaldtramp

marklv wrote: »

Nonsensical rubbish born of envy - precisely what you accuse the so-called 'lefties' of. If you envy the public sector pension, go and bl**dy well work there!! :mad:

Not envious in the slightest:p. I'm very happy with my remuneraration and pension.:beer:
I am sick of paying for others for doing non-jobs who recieve unfair pension contributions at the expense of others.
That is a HUGE difference.

CLAPTON

thescouselander wrote: »

I dont see that your example is relevant. Why have you picked someone who started before 1995 when this sort of arrangement would not be available to a starter today? There are plenty of private sector final salary pensions that are still available to employees who entered the system years ago.

Secondly I dont think the capital sum is that much and I dont think anyone should be surprised by it. A private sector worker (who would probably be paid more) investing 15-20% of their salary in a pension over their working life could end up with a capital sum equal or even greater compared with your example. What is the problem?

some-one saving 20% of their 30k salary for 40 years would end up with

20% x 30k x 40 = £240,000
you would need to add a bit for compound interest on the savings but equally its unlikely that some-one would start on 30k salary 40 years ago
so the total is likely to be a lot less
also Im not sure how many people save 20% of their salary each and every year of their life

donaldtramp

marklv

I really don't understand this vitriolic hatred that a lot of people have against the public sector. You see it here and also in the BBC 'have your say' forums etc. At the end of the day we are in the same boat - a sinking one! It's a myth that the public sector has been put in a protected bubble - it has never been the case. Public sector employees have never been immune to redundancy and their pension benefits have been greatly offset by lower benefits in other areas.

A myth that the public sector has been in a protective bubble??? Are you having a laugh???

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/horrible-dragon-threatens-council-worker-fantasy-land-201003012514/

A LARGE, terrifying dragon is threatening the magical kingdom of massive pensions where no-one ever gets fired.

'Let us cheer ourselves with the Tale of the Massive Golden Pension'

The fearful citizens of Council Worker Fantasy Land say they will surely be burned to a crisp by the fire breathing monster unless they receive urgent anti-dragon money from the people of the Real World that exists beyond the buttercup meadow and the four star country house hotel where the magical training days are held.

Since 1997 Council Worker Fantasy Land has been the happiest place in the world, where grade two fairytale princesses and thousands of badly educated left-wing elves live happily alongside magical dwarves who are not allowed to move your wheelie bin more than 38.3cm

Anyhoo all good things come to an end, and the end is nigh....

thescouselander

CLAPTON wrote: »

some-one saving 20% of their 30k salary for 40 years would end up with

20% x 30k x 40 = £240,000
you would need to add a bit for compound interest on the savings but equally its unlikely that some-one would start on 30k salary 40 years ago
so the total is likely to be a lot less
also Im not sure how many people save 20% of their salary each and every year of their life

I think you'll find compound interest over 40 years would be significant and more than just "a bit". The interest alone could be twice the value of the deposits at quite a modist rate of interest.

Also I belive 20% total contribution is realistic for a pension - I would expect an employer to contribute at least some towards this but it is still realisitc.

Harry_Powell

custardy wrote: »

obviously there are limits and Im not saying job cuts arent required
however to say 300K have to/will go doesnt mean its the right move
a lot depends on where these cuts hit and unfortunatly i expect it to hit the lower levels leaving tiers of management untouched
so many on this thread/forum seem to believe everyone not in the private sector lives the life of Reilly

I even saw a post in here stating that postal staff got a pay rise for no changes in working conditions recently
thats just 100% wrong,yet im sure the believe it for whatever reason

Well this has changed from your rather abrupt 'and where does the money come from to replace their spending?' post. You're now saying that some job cuts are required, so I assume that you also agree that financial savings will be made with these regrettable job cuts?

kabayiri

princeofpounds wrote: »

The thing is, the private sector adjusted so fast that it's largely done now. And so now it's time for that policy to be unwound (leaving aside the fact that we can't afford to continue it). This is nothing more than the public sector taking its fair share.

POP is right.

It's a matter of timing. The recession undoubtedly hit the private sector first. Ask anyone who worked for Woolies, or the plant closures at Honda, etc.

The public sector in some ways acted as a soak, to minimise the impact. But it was just a delay. Even Labour would have to make these cuts; it was always a question of timing.

kabayiri

marklv wrote: »

Sorry to be brutal, but your dad should have contributed 18-20% of salary instead, and don't begrudge what public sector workers get; most public sector workers get pay freezes and no fringe benefits other than the pension. No private health, no company car, etc.

Sorry to burst your bubble Mark but I have done work for the 2 largest fleet providers in the UK. Most company cars are sourced this way because it's tax efficient to do so.

I know the numbers involved, and the kind of pay-grades who get car perks.

The idea that a large chunk of the private sector get company cars is just not true.

lostinrates

kabayiri wrote: »

POP is right.

It's a matter of timing. The recession undoubtedly hit the private sector first. Ask anyone who worked for Woolies, or the plant closures at Honda, etc.

The public sector in some ways acted as a soak, to minimise the impact. But it was just a delay. Even Labour would have to make these cuts; it was always a question of timing.

It also ht the City of London and those greedy bankers and financial services. Which is personally horrid, but commercially just.

I find it difficult that those who bayed for the blood of the City and private sector now oppose the same in the public sector. and vice versa. There has been greed and reckless spending throughout the country: private, public, commercially and personally. I think we will almost ALL be feeling this in one way or another. Its a shame to turn this in to a public v private west side story that considered.