Public sector wellcome to the real world

Koicarp

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Massively accruing liabilities = cost of paying for pensions current employees.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12819538

Fall relative to GDP - who says?

GDP forecast for next 12 months has already been reduced (after just 4 months) from 1.8% to 1.4% and we are told growth will be below expectations for next decade - what gives you any faith in GDP estimates for next 50 years.

Hutton expects cost to be reduced to year 2000 level but only after 50 years so, relative to GDP, cost is going to be higher than average for next half century.

Your BBC link is interesting but says nothing about pensions and suggests that staff numbers have peaked and are going to fall, which would result in reducing liability. Hutton allowed for a 0.25% annual staff growth in all long term predictions.
It's obvious that I'm quoting Hutton's predictions in relation to GDP, but what would you rather do? Perhaps Hutton should have employed a daily mail headline writer to come up with predictions?
Hutton expects cost to reduce to year 2000 level around 2040 and to below that level by 2049 (just below 1.4% as opposed to 1.5% in 2000).
The government has already announced that (NHS) staff contributions will rise by around 6% of pay (contributions will double for nurses) over the next two years, this does not appear to have been taken into account in Huttons predictions.

paparossco

The NHS scheme has in 62 years always had a higher income relative to its expenditure. The surplus going to the govt of the day. My understanding is that if the scheme was not going to 'wash its face' then the employees would be liable not the employers.
Source: UNITE

Thicko2

Koicarp wrote: »

Your BBC link is interesting but says nothing about pensions and suggests that staff numbers have peaked and are going to fall, which would result in reducing liability. Hutton allowed for a 0.25% annual staff growth in all long term predictions.
It's obvious that I'm quoting Hutton's predictions in relation to GDP, but what would you rather do? Perhaps Hutton should have employed a daily mail headline writer to come up with predictions?
Hutton expects cost to reduce to year 2000 level around 2040 and to below that level by 2049 (just below 1.4% as opposed to 1.5% in 2000).
The government has already announced that (NHS) staff contributions will rise by around 6% of pay (contributions will double for nurses) over the next two years, this does not appear to have been taken into account in Huttons predictions.

Well said KOICARP. Again on the basis of the curent in year net conrtibution back to the treasury of £2bn per annum on the NHS pension scheme. The extra contributions requested by the government should not be called pension contributions, they should be called public sector employee national debt tax.

We had already agreed in 2008 that any necessary increases would fall on the employees of the NHS schemes not the employer. Indeed the employer contributions are capped at 14.2% i believe.

This agreement/contract has been broken for no reasons of affordability. Opportunistic defecit reduction opportunities with a view of it will have public acceptability due to the destruction of private sector pensions over the last years back to the Lamont era.

Thicko2

NAR wrote: »

Well what about the teachers pension fund. Why is the government still refusing to publish the figures?
My theory is that the government are trying to be even-handed to all public servants despite the fact that they know the teachers fund is in a lot better shape than the rest of the public service.

The government is hardly be even handed at all as the pension schemes with the biggest public funding support and rising costs are the armed forces. Unlike most of the other schemes, LGPS, NHS, Fire, Police, Civil service, employees do not make contribiution at all to the armed force scheme.

Ironically they are not being asked to pay increased contributions over the next 3 years. Is this fairness or is it political decision making process. Armed forces would be in revolt if they have to pay more whilst we are fighting wars in 3 countries at the moment.

Andy_L

Thicko2 wrote: »

The government is hardly be even handed at all as the pension schemes with the biggest public funding support and rising costs are the armed forces. Unlike most of the other schemes, LGPS, NHS, Fire, Police, Civil service, employees do not make contribiution at all to the armed force scheme.

Ironically they are not being asked to pay increased contributions over the next 3 years. Is this fairness or is it political decision making process. Armed forces would be in revolt if they have to pay more whilst we are fighting wars in 3 countries at the moment.

They make no direct contribution but there pay is abated to reflect a personal contribution

"You make no direct contributions towards your basic benefits under
AFPS 05, although the value of your pension is taken into account when your pay is set by the Armed Forces Pay Review Body."

http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/60B4099D-EB02-4512-B946-72C532CDB306/0/afps05booklet.pdf

Thicko2

But they are not being asked to pay any increases on their current contributions compared to the rest of the public sector.

The £30bn cost of public sector schemes this government continues to talk about is signficantly influenced by the increasing cost of armed forces pensions.

Andy_L

yes, both,as you say, as a political decision and because the AFPS will become more valuable than other pensions (as they become more expensive for employees) and thus be reflected in the deliberations of the pay review body

cyclonebri1

roysterer wrote: »

What is happening today regarding Public Sector Pensions and contributions is what has already happened in the Private Sector.
Final salary Pensions are now gone forever!!!!!!! as much as we all dislike it.

2 years ago I went from a 5% Contribution 1/60th Final Salary scheme to a 10% Contribution 1/60th Career Average Pension.
This was non negotiable take it or leave it. So I guess the proposals put forward today are not so bad after all.

The feeble argument that Public Sector workers sacraficed higher earning potential by working in the Public Sector for greater Pension benefit is complete Bulls*** . If that's the case then wellcome to the private sector for those of you who think you can command far higher salaries, I think you will get a nasty surprise?

My contribution has doubled for less benefit. I am not prepared to pay higher income tax to subsidise public sector pensions as well.

I can guarantee that you will not receive any support if you choose to strike from the vast majority of private sector workers and private sector Trade Unionist.

Give it another few years and Career average will be taken away from us all, only for Defined Contribution rip off Annuity type Pensions to be left on the table.

I guess we have all been shafted by incompetent past and present governments. I feel sorry for the young people coming out of University in 4 years time with £50 - £60,000 of debt, they have got no chance of getting any good pension provision. Did the Public Sector Unionist consider them?
Answer:- a big fat NO. The Public Sector Metropolitan Police were hell bent on dealing with them as we all witnessed.

Sorry chaps to burst your little private bubble but this was the original post.

Maybe future posts could have some comment or relevance to what was originally put forward????

Thicko2

Andy_L wrote: »

yes, both,as you say, as a political decision and because the AFPS will become more valuable than other pensions (as they become more expensive for employees) and thus be reflected in the deliberations of the pay review body

a little redundent for the next two years as the government as already announced pay freezes hence no need for the pay review bodies to waste time deliberating!

cyclonebri1

Thicko2 wrote: »

a little redundent for the next two years as the government as already announced pay freezes hence no need for the pay review bodies to waste time deliberating!

You know the 1 thing you guys are prooving is that as per the original post, you are alien to to the real world. Wake up and smell the