Strikes to go ahead

Generali

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

Sorry chief,

The teachers are on a bit of a hiding to nothing really, but I feel a lot of sympathy towards them at the moment as they are demonised by the Daily Mail tendency.

Daughters teacher (primary school) this year has been outstanding, truly inspirational - one of those teachers she will remember for the rest of her life.

Mum, Auntie and FiL are all teachers and I have a lot of sympathy with teachers generally as they are an easy target in many ways.

Teachers going on strike makes me pretty uneasy though. My education suffered as a result of teachers striking in the 1980s.

The point I made above wasn't really aimed at teachers specifically. I guess it's a general point about people striking against the policies of the Government. It could be seen as one group trying to better themselves against the wishes of the people via their elected representatives.

Or not of course.

Really2

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

Sorry chief,

The teachers are on a bit of a hiding to nothing really, but I feel a lot of sympathy towards them at the moment as they are demonised by the Daily Mail tendency.

Daughters teacher (primary school) this year has been outstanding, truly inspirational - one of those teachers she will remember for the rest of her life.

I don't think anyone disagrees that many teachers do a great job.

The disagreement is in that they are reasonably paid, and in the modern world with life expectancy increasing by 3 years every 10 years is it fair for their pensions to be heavily subsidised by the tax payer.
The reality is many people in the private sector will have to pay more and retire on less and work longer to support the public sector pensions at their current rate.

People may feel that that the changes are unfair? but do they really think they are currently fair to those without public sector pensions?

kabayiri

I'm not sure how a strike will increase the money pot, and hence ensure that there is money around to pay for these future pension demands, but I'm sure someone will be along shortly to explain it to me (to 'teach' me).

Otherwise, I will continue to see it as one group looking after their interests at the expense of the other groups out there.

"We're all in it together"....codswallop. What numpty said that?

Really2

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

Labour are hardly in the vaguard of protesting against the changes.

Mostly it is pretty hard working, normal people, doing jobs that often must be fairly tough - just wanting to have a reasonable retirement to look forward to.

Be nice if politician and the judiciary showed the lead and reformed their pensions first.

You could argue sorting out the mess of public sector pensions will enable that to be redressed.

The less the tax payer is on the hook for the less tax they have to pay or the more tax income that will be available to be redistributed.

CLAPTON

pensions are complicated and generate strong feelings, which means many people don't understand the issues

but if a significant number of state employees decide to leave the pension scheme or maybe new employees refuse to join then there will the usual unintended consequences.

that is the increase in subscriptions from the employees (variously 0, 1.5, 3% less tax) may well be cancelled out by the fall in total members of contributors. This of course may well be a good thing for the countries finances looking 30 years ahead but may well worsen the deficit in the short term.

Maybe as well thought out as changes in student fees and changes to the loan system. now seen a budgen on the tax payer at least for the next 20 years; it gets better after that

michaels

I know we shouldn't let the facts get in the way of a good rant but if some one could confirm - are the teachers being asked to accept a reduction in the value of the pension rights they have already accrued or is it just that going forward the rights they will be accruing will be less valuable?

One way of looking at it is that as life expectancy increases more quickly than anticipated the value of existing pension rights increases (in a manner that does not happen with defined contributions schemes) and there is a question about whether all this gain should accrue to the teachers at the expense of taxpayers as a whole or whether the benefit and cost should be shared.

Similarly going forward the money cost of providing a final salary pension increases sharply as life expectancy increases so the 'value' of the pension increases from say 10% of salary to 20% of salary and thus the teachers have received an effective 10% increases in total remuneration without any change in terms and conditions. This is what makes their total employment costs unaffordable at a time when economic growth has stalled and thus either they will receive a larger share of national output or have to accept less generous pay and pensions.

kabayiri

Really2 wrote: »

You could argue sorting out the mess of public sector pensions will enable that to be redressed.

The less the tax payer is on the hook for the less tax they have to pay or the more tax income that will be available to be redistributed.

I know I am a simple type, but the wider picture still seems simple to me.

In the private pension arena, annuities have effectively halved over the first decade of the 21st century. In effect, those with private pensions are sharing the pain of a contracted economy and rising life expectancy dictating the need to eke out the pots.

So why should the public sector pensions be immune to these same forces?

Just as government MPs vote for their own ultra generous pension entitlements, the teachers are fighting to defend their own slice of the pie.

They should not therefore be surprised when other sectors of society use any tools at their disposal to defend their interests. I suspect more income will disappear into the black economy in future as people who deal in cash seek to hide their real incomes.

There is no 'together' concept here whatsoever.

System

These aren't proper strikes, just minor one-day irritations. No confident resolute government need be bothered by them. They work in the government's interests anyway, by demonstrating to everyone that public servants have an inflated view of their value in the real economy.

If they wanted to put real pressure on then they should go on strike and stay out until they bring the government down.

jonnyd281

Masomnia wrote: »

That's exactly what Scargill said. In fact I think he went as far as to say he wanted to bring down the capitalist system all together.

The strikes are undemocratic in every way. The ballot only had something like a 30% turnout, and of those only something like 60% wanted the strike. So they don't even have a majority of the members voting for it. How they get away with that I have no idea.

This is the PCS Union - the majority of those who did vote, voted for action short of strike action (some 80%). I don't see the PCS as having a strike mandate at all, it would be interesting to see the results if it ever went to court.

I can see the goverenment changing the rules on strikes so at least 50% of members in a work place have to vote for strike action before it is legal, maybe a good thing, maybe a bad thing. Personnally I don't believe in strike action, work to rule can be much more effective since your employer still has to pay you.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

I know we shouldn't let the facts get in the way of a good rant but if some one could confirm - are the teachers being asked to accept a reduction in the value of the pension rights they have already accrued or is it just that going forward the rights they will be accruing will be less valuable?

This is what the Teachers Pension Scheme has to say on the matter:

The Government remains committed to the protection of accrued pension rights. Lord Hutton recommended that the pension promises that have been accrued by scheme members should be honoured, and additionally that the rights individuals have built up to date should remain linked to their final salary until the point they leave the new scheme, or retire. Similarly the linking of Normal Pension Age (NPA) to the State Pension Age would apply to future service only, so benefits built up to date would still be payable at the current NPA in those schemes.



Lord Hutton has recommended that a new career average salary scheme be set up for future pension accrual

http://www.teacherspensions.co.uk/bulletin/bulletin1.htm#a24_06_11