Unions and Pensions

Devon_Sailor

Thicko2 wrote: »

Armed forces, when will the details on shifiting them from 0% contribution to something be coming forwards.

QUOTE]

Just for info,

Armed Forces pension contribution and benefits are calculated at source, and taken into account when deciding salaries. ie, salaries are lower by x%, because it already uses the difference to help pay for the pension pot.

So, whilst it looks like there is a zero % contribution, wages are x% lower than they would be otherwise (I think i recollect a figure of 6/7% being bandied about by the pension scheme guy...but that was a couple of years back and memory fading fast lol).

From what I am led to believe, there are (very infrequent, admittedly), cases where some serving personnel have forsaken a forces pension for an increased salary. Madness, im sure most on here would agree, but each to their own! :-)

So many schemes, so many different structures...perhaps there should be one, simple to understand, defined benefits/contribution "Public Worker" pension. That way, there is no "trade bias" or union-specific jerrymandering or horse trading. Easy to understand, everyone able to walk into it with their eyes open, no "keeping up with the Joneses" pension skirmishes between teacher, firefighters, NHS etc.... we all serve in our various ways...ah, cloud cuckoo land beckons lol.

As for the current Pensions row, well, I came into armed forces having worked int he private sector for a while. It does grate a little with all the moans about pay freezes. How about the 10-15+% pay CUTS that private sector have had to face? I recognise, appreciate and am truly grateful that I am now in the scheme that I am. If it changes and I have to pay more...fine. I know that it still beats anything that I would have got "outside" so im not going to kick up too much of a fuss. I know a good thing when its about...even though I get dragged away from family for 6-8 months a year and shot at!

Anyhoo, just some random morning musings....its 45 degrees outside and sandy...nothing else to do for a moment but put the world to rights! lol :-D

D_S

Devon_Sailor

Moby wrote: »

Its back to the 80's ......social unrest and huge youth unemployment!

Yup, because yet again a Government has had to come in on the back of a Labour administration that has bankrupted the country and brought it to its knees.

Perhaps rather than blame the current incumbents, you should be asking what the last lot did with their overwhelming ability to change the country? From 1997 Blair could have done anything he wanted. ANYTHING - his majority was a parliamentary steamroller. But no. He spend all his time in office paying off various interest groups and wasting time on Foxhunting and foreign wars playing Statesman. Where was the work on social justice? Pension reform? Heaven forbid...balance the budget or paying down our national debt so that we COULD afford good pensions for everyone rather than a lucky few?

All that money wasted just with one goal - to keep them in power. Not because they wanted to use it (because they didnt when they had it!), but just because they wanted to HAVE it. BEcause it was personally very profitable and lucrative.

Labour the saviours of the working class? Rubbish. Social mobility took massive backward steps under them. Now chickens have well and truly come home to roost. The coffers are empty, and yet again it is others taking the flack for making hard choices that the last lot didnt have the moral courage to take.

End of rant lol :-)

antrobus

Devon_Sailor wrote: »

....

So many schemes, so many different structures...perhaps there should be one, simple to understand, defined benefits/contribution "Public Worker" pension. That way, there is no "trade bias" or union-specific jerrymandering or horse trading. Easy to understand, everyone able to walk into it with their eyes open, no "keeping up with the Joneses" pension skirmishes between teacher, firefighters, NHS etc.... we all serve in our various ways...ah, cloud cuckoo land beckons lol....

Perhaps there should be one, simple to understand, defined benefits/contribution 'worker's pension' full stop. You know, the very kind of thing that you'd expect the Trades Union movement as a whole to be promoting. Apparently not though.

Moby

Devon_Sailor wrote: »

Yup, because yet again a Government has had to come in on the back of a Labour administration that has bankrupted the country and brought it to its knees.

Perhaps rather than blame the current incumbents, you should be asking what the last lot did with their overwhelming ability to change the country? From 1997 Blair could have done anything he wanted. ANYTHING - his majority was a parliamentary steamroller. But no. He spend all his time in office paying off various interest groups and wasting time on Foxhunting and foreign wars playing Statesman. Where was the work on social justice? Pension reform? Heaven forbid...balance the budget or paying down our national debt so that we COULD afford good pensions for everyone rather than a lucky few?

All that money wasted just with one goal - to keep them in power. Not because they wanted to use it (because they didnt when they had it!), but just because they wanted to HAVE it. BEcause it was personally very profitable and lucrative.

Labour the saviours of the working class? Rubbish. Social mobility took massive backward steps under them. Now chickens have well and truly come home to roost. The coffers are empty, and yet again it is others taking the flack for making hard choices that the last lot didnt have the moral courage to take.

End of rant lol :-)

Absolute tosh!....So there is only a financial crisis in the UK is there.....no actually... its happening all over the world. Its an international crisis. Also before the crash of 2008 Labour's economic policy was successful....with high growth...relatively low unemployment, sustained low inflation, minimum wage introduced etc. Sure there was corruption and personal featherbedding and that needed sorting out but it hasn't has it.... its continued...Liam Fox and a Home Secretary that is not in control of the Border's Agency.... but of course we are all in it together aren't we. Like I said watch unemployment rocket in the coming years. That's the big issue....I repeat back to the depression of the 80's...especially for anyone living above the Watford gap!Talking about social mobility....look at the financial background of the current cabinet:(Its full of millionaires imposing cutbacks and reducing the pensions on people who are really struggling!

Devon_Sailor

I think you are forgetting Moby that the growth of the early Blair years were as a direct result of a) keeping to Conservative financial planning and spending policies that were implemented in 1996/early 1997 and essentially reaping their rewards, and b) massive public borrowing to encourage a vastly bloated public sector....more people on the New Labour payroll....

As for corruption, scheming, trough-guzzling - well, the new lot have only been in a couple of years. Still a LONG way to go to match Labour excesses..or have you forgotten the long litany... Mandelson (twice), Blunkett (twice), Vaz...etc, etc...etc...

Anyhow, my principle point, and as a Union supporter, it would be interesting to get your thoughts, is surely we would all be in a much better place if one union represented all public sector workers (more bargaining power..which they like?!) rather than each idividual special interest thrashing it out to cut their own deal, causing the next to want to emulate, and so on and so forth, until you have a succession of unsustainable deals that turn public opinion against their (in most cases) very justifiable demands for better working conditions?

In a wierd and perverse way, we kind of want the same thing - but for very different reasons! :-)

I would rather see one Pulic Sector Pension scheme, that everybody can understand, that is affordable and sustainable...rather than the firefighters going on strike for 5%; or the Nurses on strike for an extra 3% or whatever. As I said, everybody serves in their own way. So why not one pension scheme for all?

Or are there too many vested interests within the Union structure itself for that to become feasible? Too many Regional Officers on £45k and General Secretaries on £140k, who havent been near the coalface for decades...?

D_S :-)

Devon_Sailor

Moby wrote: »

Talking about social mobility....look at the financial background of the current cabinet:(Its full of millionaires imposing cutbacks and reducing the pensions on people who are really struggling!

Personaly, I dont care who is in the cabinet as long as they can do their job and, to the best of their ability, run the country in the national interest. It says a lot that you are judging them on their bank balance rather than their ability to do the job they were elected to do.

I would rather have a cabinet full of millionaires who were at least honest about the state of affairs, and do something about it than a bunch of hypocrites. Esp on social mobility. Look at the past Labour benches. How many went to Grammar schools? Lots. Who abolished the Grammars -perhaps the best tool for social mobility this country has ever seen? How many of them went to university? Most. On free grants. And then introduced, and then raised tuition fees? How many of them scorned, derided and vilified parents who took the decision to pay for schooling to try and do the best for their children where local education was failing? And then sent their OWN kids to the Oratory and other top end public schools?

I admire and respect politicians of all shades who have the courage of their convictions. Yes, even those on the Left. Those who slogged away as miners, teachers, public servants... and then became MPs because they wanted to change the world for the better. There are plenty like that on the Right too! What I cannot abide are "do as i say, not as I do" hypocrites who milk every advantage that the State and system has to offer, and then pull the ladder up behind them as soon as they reach the top. How DARE they! Politics changed for the worse in this country when it became a career rather than a calling. Look at ALL the leaders we currently have - All wet University to policy wonk to aide and advisor to MEP/MP to Leader. What REAL experience have any of them got?

D_S

Moby

Devon_Sailor wrote: »

I think you are forgetting Moby that the growth of the early Blair years were as a direct result of a) keeping to Conservative financial planning and spending policies that were implemented in 1996/early 1997 and essentially reaping their rewards, and b) massive public borrowing to encourage a vastly bloated public sector....more people on the New Labour payroll....

That underestimates what Blair did. He did keep to Conservative spending limits but this couldn't last...... if you remember the country was in a terrible mess regarding the run down condition of our infra structure, (condition of our schools and hospitals, waiting lists etc) and the money had to be spent to make up for this and to be fair... bring public sector salaries in line with their private sector equivalents.

As for corruption, scheming, trough-guzzling - well, the new lot have only been in a couple of years. Still a LONG way to go to match Labour excesses..or have you forgotten the long litany... Mandelson (twice), Blunkett (twice), Vaz...etc, etc...etc...

Ah yes.... but this lot promised to be different!

interesting to get your thoughts, is surely we would all be in a much better place if one union represented all public sector workers (more bargaining power..which they like?!) rather than each idividual special interest thrashing it out to cut their own deal, causing the next to want to emulate, and so on and so forth, until you have a succession of unsustainable deals that turn public opinion against their (in most cases) very justifiable demands for better working conditions?

Totally agree...but don't forget UNISON is an amalgamation of different unions... so things have been moving in this direction.

In a wierd and perverse way, we kind of want the same thing - but for very different reasons! :-)

I would rather see one Pulic Sector Pension scheme, that everybody can understand, that is affordable and sustainable...rather than the firefighters going on strike for 5%; or the Nurses on strike for an extra 3% or whatever. As I said, everybody serves in their own way. So why not one pension scheme for all?

Or are there too many vested interests within the Union structure itself for that to become feasible? Too many Regional Officers on £45k and General Secretaries on £140k, who havent been near the coalface for decades...?

This goes back to another point I made earlierand explains why I hate this Government so much. They have not been negotiating in a genuine way. They have no intention of seeking a concensus. In my role I have been close to people involved in the 'negotiations' and I have been told that the Govmt are cynically, tactically exploiting the differences between disparate groups involved in the negotiations. Whatever the colour of your political opinion.....I would hope that you could expect higher standards than this from an elected Government. The last thing we need now is social unrest but the way we are going.......?:(

Personaly, I dont care who is in the cabinet as long as they can do their job and, to the best of their ability, run the country in the national interest. It says a lot that you are judging them on their bank balance rather than their ability to do the job they were elected to do

.

I don't think they are running the country in the national interest though. They coined the phrase 'we are all in this together'....does that mean they think we are all millionaires?;)

I would rather have a cabinet full of millionaires who were at least honest about the state of affairs, and do something about it than a bunch of hypocrites

.
They are not though are they. Our economy is flatlining, there is little growth and unemployment is soaring!

Esp on social mobility. Look at the past Labour benches. How many went to Grammar schools? Lots. Who abolished the Grammars -perhaps the best tool for social mobility this country has ever seen? How many of them went to university? Most. On free grants. And then introduced, and then raised tuition fees? How many of them scorned, derided and vilified parents who took the decision to pay for schooling to try and do the best for their children where local education was failing? And then sent their OWN kids to the Oratory and other top end public schools?

There is hypocrisy evrywhere...even in the Labour Party! Granted!
Talking of tuition fees are you happy to see them at 9K?

I admire and respect politicians of all shades who have the courage of their convictions. Yes, even those on the Left. Those who slogged away as miners, teachers, public servants... and then became MPs because they wanted to change the world for the better. There are plenty like that on the Right too! What I cannot abide are "do as i say, not as I do" hypocrites who milk every advantage that the State and system has to offer, and then pull the ladder up behind them as soon as they reach the top. How DARE they! Politics changed for the worse in this country when it became a career rather than a calling. Look at ALL the leaders we currently have - All wet University to policy wonk to aide and advisor to MEP/MP to Leader. What REAL experience have any of them got?

Totally agree!

Devon_Sailor

Moby wrote: »

Ah yes.... but this lot promised to be different!

Yes, but I believe Mr Blair is still the way ahead of the field here - he made "Tory Sleaze" the core rallying call of his election. To be honest, I think many politicians of all colours are seduced by the trappings of power, especially if they have been in opposition for a long time. I expect every election in history has had "better than the last lot" in there somewhere....


Totally agree...but don't forget UNISON is an amalgamation of different unions... so things have been moving in this direction.

And it should be welcomed and encouraged...as long as it is not just to create a super union for the sake of being more powerful. Power (see point 1!) does funny things to people. They should look more closely at what they want to acheive in the long run (common pension across the board) rather than just "more power and influence".

This goes back to another point I made earlierand explains why I hate this Government so much. They have not been negotiating in a genuine way. They have no intention of seeking a concensus. In my role I have been close to people involved in the 'negotiations' and I have been told that the Govmt are cynically, tactically exploiting the differences between disparate groups involved in the negotiations. Whatever the colour of your political opinion.....I would hope that you could expect higher standards than this from an elected Government. The last thing we need now is social unrest but the way we are going.......?:(

Been told or witnessed? A major difference. Heresay is the lifeblood of these sorts of things. One side vilifies the other with tales of how obstinate and unreasonable the other side are being. And as im sure you will agree, dodgy negotiation is not necessarily the preserve of the Govt. How many times have unions rejected offers that workers would ahve accepted, just because they feel they can do better, or because it would limit their own power/influence? It is, unfortunately, the nature of the beast....negotiation is always messy, and one just has to hope that out the other end comes something workable to both parties. Two sides to every story and all that...

Agree totally with your last point about social unrest. Far and away the last thing we need...esp as it scares of investors, tourists, and many others who should be helping to pump such badly needed money into this country.

As I say, I think we are both in general agreement, but not necessarily about what has caused us to get there, or the reasons behind it.

D_S

Moby

Devon_Sailor wrote: »

Been told or witnessed? A major difference. Heresay is the lifeblood of these sorts of things. One side vilifies the other with tales of how obstinate and unreasonable the other side are being. And as im sure you will agree, dodgy negotiation is not necessarily the preserve of the Govt. How many times have unions rejected offers that workers would ahve accepted, just because they feel they can do better, or because it would limit their own power/influence? It is, unfortunately, the nature of the beast....negotiation is always messy, and one just has to hope that out the other end comes something workable to both parties. Two sides to every story and all that...

Point taken ...it is heresay on my part but.....the Tories don't exactly cover themselves in glory do they...when it comes to industrial relations...and the cynical timing of these latest 'concessions' is indisputable!

Devon_Sailor

Apologies for the over bolding of last post...! lol

Without wishing to divert this thread off topic, I have absolutely no problem with the principle that people should contribute to their further education.

I believe it is should be a fundametal right to be provided with a quality, free at the point of delivery, education for all children up to 18. Without question, constraint or hindrance.

After that, it should be for the individual to decide where they see their talents lying, and how they wish to take their life. Not everyone is suited to, or will benefit from, University.

The aspiration to send 50% of people to University was headlining, but didnt reflect whether it was actually of benefit to society, or the individuals involved.

I was in the first batch to pay tuition fees. As per my comments on my pension scheme earlier, i recognise that getting a degree has led to me qualifying for a good job, which will pay more over the course of my life. Should I therfore demand that i get that benefit for free, at the expense of the guy who has left school at 16/18 and worked all his life to pay taxes since then? No. I got something from it, so I feel it right and socially responsible to pay for it. That way, I can help ensure that universities are around to help educate those that follow me.

Would I have chosen this new system? Perhaps not. I might have gone down a graduate tax or other such contribution, but a long term loan payable only when you earn a pretty okay working wage, isnt exactly the worst option that could have been offered up.

I didnt come from a well off background, far from it. Do i resent having student loan deduction coming out of my pay packet? No. Do I get cross it will take probably another 10 years to clear it? Not really. I accept it as par for the course, for the wage that I now earn, which is more than I would have got without it.

I had the privilege of living in beautiful Yorkshire for 6 years where "you dont get owt for nowt" is virtually the law. I think if more people took on this attitude, with pensions, education etc, we would all be more aceptable to funding changes that need to be made.

D_S