Incensed again

lidlest

julieq wrote: »

Anyway back to pensions. Someone said that the public sector pensions were sustainable but that the money was siphoned off. Rubbish. But if it's true there's a simple solution which is to take all contributions and invest them, i.e. a private pension scheme. If you're right it'll be sustainable and give you the same benefits. You'd be mad to try it though.

Brilliant argument lol - i'd be for that, the surplus has been used by the govt for many years (talking teacher pensions) and there is no set pot put aside even though we pay into it. The pensions were also rejigged a few years ago to make them sustainable, which is why new teachers have a different deal to old teachers.

lidlest

afc80 wrote: »

Your 9,000 predicted pension is you pension as at the end of the last financial year and is what you what get, yearly increases aside if you left your job at that point.

If you work till retirement you will have a pension comparable to 2 thirds of your salary in your last year of work (under the current arrangements)

You will also have a state pension (which is getting more generous) and you will have a lump sum.

You will have a comfortable retirement and be much better off that the vast majority of the public whatever the result of the latest pension stand off imo.

This is such an ignorant post I don't know where to start

1) she has been working for 24 years so wouldn't be on the new arrangements
2) if she was on new arrangements she wouldnt get a lump sum unless she chose to salary sacrifice
3) as she is on the old scheme , to get 2/3 of her salary as a pension she would have had to work 53.3 years. I am pretty sure I don't want my child taught by (at a minimum) a 74 year old

Stop arguing from a point of ignorance

Gracchus_Babeuf

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Been listening to the news again today, re the new offer to avert any further upset due to public sector kicking off due to pension issues.

A couple of figures hit me. They referred to the pension that a public service worker would recieve under the new offer.

A teacher earning £35K would get £25k pension

A nurse earning £30k would get £20k

What the f888????????????



To start, I consider a teacher or a nurse to be an able employee that is worthy of a decent salary.
In the present day private sector that equates to £20 per annum, not 30/35:(

Does anyone in the public sector actually realise what a similarly paid private secter worker would have to pay/sacrifice for the same return?, well no, I don't think you do. From my own situation after 38 years with the same company and a finishing salary as a chief engineer of £30k+ I retired (early) on £8k per year.

Please accept the governments latest (generous) offer, again it favours it's "flock" whilst stuffing the workers, and you are piecesing us off.

Enjoy your sour grapes. Would you like single or double cream with them? :rotfl:

For a start, why should a public sector worker give a !!!!!! about your particular circumstances? Do you care about theirs? No, so why are you pontificating about who deserves what? Public sector workers have enjoyed good, solid retirement benefits since the year dot and now they are seeing not only pay cuts but also requests to cough up more money towards reduced pensions benefits! In the private sector it's the law of the jungle, due to the government never having wanted to impose a regime on private sector organisations. But the difference is that in the private sector if you don't like what you get paid you can !!!!!! off elsewhere, not the case in the public sector where pay is pretty much standardised throughout. If you have only been earning £30k after 38 years in engineering (the blue collar type I take it) then either (1) you weren't much good at your job or (2) you were too lazy or unambitious to look for opportunities elsewhere. And you also forget one of the important causes of the dispute: the government's wicked and underhand decision to replace RPI indexation with the lower CPI, that doesn't reflect true cost of living.

dshart

Gracchus_Babeuf wrote: »

Enjoy your sour grapes. Would you like single or double cream with them? :rotfl:

For a start, why should a public sector worker give a !!!!!! about your particular circumstances? Do you care about theirs? No, so why are you pontificating about who deserves what? Public sector workers have enjoyed good, solid retirement benefits since the year dot and now they are seeing not only pay cuts but also requests to cough up more money towards reduced pensions benefits! In the private sector it's the law of the jungle, due to the government never having wanted to impose a regime on private sector organisations. But the difference is that in the private sector if you don't like what you get paid you can !!!!!! off elsewhere, not the case in the public sector where pay is pretty much standardised throughout. If you have only been earning £30k after 38 years in engineering (the blue collar type I take it) then either (1) you weren't much good at your job or (2) you were too lazy or unambitious to look for opportunities elsewhere. And you also forget one of the important causes of the dispute: the government's wicked and underhand decision to replace RPI indexation with the lower CPI, that doesn't reflect true cost of living.

You would be right in what you say if the public sector pensions were funded out of the members contributions only. But as others have pointed out even the contributions made by public sector workers dont go into a pension pot directly, they go into government coffers. The problem is that the government still have to meet their obligations to these pensions by finding the money from elsewhere and this is from higher taxes or as Gordon Brown did by raiding private pensions.

If a private company with such a pension scheme used the money for other purposes and then could not meet their pension obligations the whole scheme folds and everyone who has contributed loses out but there is no recourse for them to get government funds to ensure the pension obligations are met.

This is why private sector workers care about how the public sector pensions are funded and want a level playing field.

The_Angry_Jock

MoreOn wrote: »

no race to the bottom? No increase in wages, reduced pension, increased contributions... where does it stop?

It stops when there's a balance.

MoreOn wrote: »

I can't agree PC are to stubborn, some private sector works need to walk a mile or 10 years in some of our shoes.... In fact i'll go further and say someone taught and create the systems that you rely on... Things like the world wide web, the internet, what do we get in return.....

Everything.

Moby

longleggedhair wrote: »

What complete and utter drivel! Of course life was so much better under Labour,immigration running into the HUNDREDS of thousands per year putting schools, hospitals and housing under pressure. Benefit claiments given money hand over fist, and all paid for by taking out loans future generations will have to suffer for and pay back. The last government was possibly the most irresponsible in British history.

As for Thatcher, she was a leader with guts and courage. She knew some of the things she was going to do would in the short therm prove unpopular, but they were for the long term good of the country, then enter stage Left, Brown & Blair-and look how its ended up.

Dont you think it would be easy for Cameron to say yes we will keep benefit claiments in the lap of luxary, keep the inflated pensions for public sector staff-keep spending money that does not exist just like Labour. He would be really popular but it would ruin the country, as I said in a previous post look at Greece. I dont want to go there-do you?

Pressed those Daily Mail buttons didn't I.:rotfl: Its all the fault of the immigrants and the benefit claimants.;)


Bring back hanging, national service, corporal punishment and the Empire and destroy the unions while we're at it.....so predictable. Cartoon views, I'm afraid!;)
By the way up until the world crash in 2008 the economic record of Labour was actually very good.....but don't let the facts get in the way of your views!

sheffield_lad

Moby wrote: »

Pressed those Daily Mail buttons didn't I.:rotfl: Its all the fault of the immigrants and the benefit claimants.;)


Bring back hanging, national service, corporal punishment and the Empire and destroy the unions while we're at it.....so predictable. Cartoon views, I'm afraid!;)
By the way up until the world crash in 2008 the economic record of Labour was actually very good.....but don't let the facts get in the way of your views!

Yes your right selling our gold & robbing the private sector pensions pot were Gordons finest hour. Not forgetting all the money he put away while we were in the good days grrrr

2sides2everystory

Air traffic controllers.

One recent post from their neck of the woods contained this nugget:

"On my 65th birthday last month my pension dropped to £35148 as the VPO finished, I'd like more but have nothing to show for my first 10 years of work before CAA, so 'C'est La Vie'. Old age pension for both (the missus) and me kicked in, so that's another £9000 approx - still better off than most people in the land!

My advice - if you can afford to go 2 or 3 years early, do it. Why people work beyond 60 amazes me - remember (poor old so an so)? Worked to 65, boasted that he was the highest paid ATCO in the job ( ATCO1 pension and salary) and died before he was 66! Very sad.

All funded from the public purse from the CAAPS which astoundingly is still the source of most of their pension funding 10 years after their public private partnership "privatisation".

Wonderful chaps and chapesses though. Great fun to be with.

cyclonebri1

stedwell wrote: »

Going back to the original post - no teacher earns £37k for 40 years that is impossible as it is the top end of pay scale..

But your pension will be based on final salary;)

Old_Slaphead

stedwell wrote: »

Going back to the original post - no teacher earns £37k for 40 years that is impossible as it is the top end of pay scale. I have been teaching for 24 years and I now earn 37000. My latest predicted pension was 9K and not 25k a year.

I think you should have your pensions people check those figures.

I thought TPS pre 2007 accrued 1/80th pa + 3/80th tax free lump sum.

Your entitlement should therefore be (assuming that your salary is consistent) 37000 x 24/80 = £11,100pa + tax free sum £33,300, which, if annuitised, would add another £1,100pa.

Another 16 years will see the entitlement increase to £18,500pa with tax free cash of £55,500.


Ignoring inflation during those 40 years employment you will have paid in around £80,000 net of tax. Immediately you get £55,000 returned. So for a net outlay of around £25,000 you get a pension of £18,500 (index linked) for next 25 years (or however long you live for). Not a bad deal, eh?


To get comparable benefits, someone with a private pension would need a fund of well over £0.6million.