Hands off my pension

PasturesNew

ruggedtoast wrote: »

But you didnt want to do that then did you? Oh no, when jobs were plentiful it was all "Haha you public sector losers no one with a brain or any ambition would work for that salary."

I applied for many - and never got one. The reason always given was "You were the better candidate, but the person chosen has worked in the public sector before".

I even went for one 100 yards from my house and got: "You were by FAR the best candidate, but they feel they should give the job to somebody who is moving into the county from 300 miles away because they currently do that role up there".

And these weren't top of the tree jobs at all. Last one was just Office Manager for a small (2-3 room) Adult Ed section.

It's a well-known closed shop.

ILW

I did look at an application form for the CC about 2 or 3 years ago. It did say that if offered an interview you would need to demonstrate your commitment to diversity and equality. This was for a basic admin role.

PasturesNew

ILW wrote: »

I did look at an application form for the CC about 2 or 3 years ago. It did say that if offered an interview you would need to demonstrate your commitment to diversity and equality. This was for a basic admin role.

That rules me out - I don't even know what it means.

Public sector: All hoops, hurdles and insider languages.

Sir_Humphrey

ILW wrote: »

Still don't get the promotion freeze bit, are you saying that if anybody above the lowest grade leaves then that position is never filled internally?

Until the recruitment freeze/promotion freeze are lifted, unless the minister agrees (i.e. exceptional cases) then that is right.

However in the context of a headcount reduction of 25%, that is not a mega issue...yet. That is because for the time being, a vacant post can be filled by someone on the same grade with the right skills whose post gets the chop. (I simplify the process somewhat).

It is not intended to be a permanent state of affairs, but there is a deathly silence as to when this might be lifted. That would involve Francis Maude actually knowing what he is doing.

Mr_Mumble

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Well, the report the coalition published shows that public sector pensions are sustainable.

Or to put it another way: the report from a Labour politician using GAD estimates of wages outstripping inflation by 2.6% pa (!) over the next 40 years makes it feasible public sector pensions are sustainable if you cut even more resources from elsewhere.

I'm no fan of the coalitiion and their old trick of getting a moderate from an opposition party to draw up a fudge has backfired beautifully.

Even Jeff Randall thinks you're wrong.

I showed Jeff Randall was talking nonsense yesterday.

PasturesNew

I used to love Randall & Hopkirk (Deceased)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Randall

FATBALLZ

They should stick them all on money purchase pensions of up to 8% matched contributions and be done with it.

The reason I didn't go into the public sector to get an over generous pension is because I was smart enough to realise they were unrealistic and would be cut back.

dave4545454

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I pay for it out of my taxes, that I pay from my earnings, that come from the value that I bring to the country as a team leader for a 'Promotion of the Enjoyment of Equality and Diversity' unit in a vibrant London borough.

unbelievable! you have a complete non job. you pay nothing, every penny you have belongs to taxpayers not you. you don't deserve a wage let alone a pension.

benefit scroungers >>>>>>>> you

torontoboy45

The_White_Horse wrote: »

they should just sack all these cretins in the public sector. i didn't even notice they were gone yesterday until i saw a load of swampies walking through birmingham on the news with their incorrectly spelled banners and placards. they are all vastly overpaid. they create NOTHING. private companies that create wealth can pay any bonus they like from their own profits but public sector workers have no place getting bonuses or massive pensions. they should get the state pension and that is all - unless they pay into a private one themselves - there should be no employer contribution (or if they have to 5% is more than enough, maybe rising to 7.5% when they hit 50).

until the public sector learn the value of money, they will always be the jokers they are.

boo hooo hooo they want to change my pension. i didn't agree to that.

i bet you don't say that when you get your undeserved payrise.

the public sector is too big for its useless boots. just privatise it all except the a&e, police, roads and army.

thank God for white horse; I swear he's really richard littlejohn after a heavy night in the boozer.

any chance of you changing the cd and slagging off the politico's, who will receive pensions funded by the taxpayer, unaffected by the cuts?

work with me on this one?

Davesnave

dave4545454 wrote: »

unbelievable! you have a complete non job. you pay nothing, every penny you have belongs to taxpayers not you. you don't deserve a wage let alone a pension.

benefit scroungers >>>>>>>> you

You had to edit that?

Dave, calm down dear, he's winding you up!