Fire Brigade pension or private pension

DirtyDick

I think some PS workers are concerned that they (and their employers) pay, essentially, additional 'voluntary' income tax of 6-8% into a Government scheme that may or may not offer them, upon eventual retirement, what they have been told they'll receive.

It's not clueless PS workers not realising how lucky they are.

Just_landed

howee wrote: »

These posts keep coming up, public sector staff who seem clueless on how good a deal they get.
----

I also know a member of I think unison always pays his dues. A year or two ago was told to go on strike he did, they did'nt tell that he was striking to have his wages cut by thousands of pounds a year, which happened to him and others.



I think this may well be the fault of the unions, I have a feeling plenty of PC workers will be out on strike come the 30th but they won't really have a clue why or how good their schemes compared to the rest of us are.[

Koicarp

howee wrote: »

So why are NHS, fire brigade staff etc coming on here and start threads suggesting they are thinking of starting a private pension? The only reason is because they are misinformed over what they are actually going to have even after the changes.

You are incorrect. The reason is that we are UNinformed! Our unions do not offer pensions advice (despite all the right wingers here knowing somebody who knows somebody who says otherwise). Our employers don't tend to offer pensions advice either, my own pensions officer answers every question with "I'm not allowed to give advice". I only actually found my own pensions website by reading about it on here. Many of us joined the schemes when they were "opt out" schemes, and when I started you couldn't opt out before your first pay day- the only input I was given was, "it's a great pension scheme nobody should opt out" during my induction- then nothing for 20 years.

sheffield_lad

DirtyDick wrote: »

I think some PS workers are concerned that they (and their employers) pay, essentially, additional 'voluntary' income tax of 6-8% into a Government scheme that may or may not offer them, upon eventual retirement, what they have been told they'll receive.

and how is that any different to millions of private sector workers?

It comes down to, is the current deal affordable? NO

Is it fair to the tax payer (many who don't have a pension),? NO

Can the country afford not to change pensions? NO

sheffield_lad

Koicarp wrote: »

You are incorrect. The reason is that we are UNinformed! Our unions do not offer pensions advice (despite all the right wingers here knowing somebody who knows somebody who says otherwise). Our employers don't tend to offer pensions advice either, my own pensions officer answers every question with "I'm not allowed to give advice". I only actually found my own pensions website by reading about it on here. Many of us joined the schemes when they were "opt out" schemes, and when I started you couldn't opt out before your first pay day- the only input I was given was, "it's a great pension scheme nobody should opt out" during my induction- then nothing for 20 years.

So why have a majority of those who replied to the ballot agreed to strike action?

worried_jim

Kev83 wrote: »

I'm trying to find out whats best I am on a new firefighter 40 year pension scheme which we pay 8.5% and the bragde pay 12.5% i think.
With all the changes coming in were we pay more in and get less out, would it be worth me pulling out of the fire brigade pension and sourcing a private pension from somewhere, I hear the Virgin Money pensions are a good bet.

I don't think the Fire briagde pensions provides a lump sum payment on retiring. I'm 28 so have a few years to go, any help or advise would eb greatly appreciated?

Kev stay with your current employee scheme. it's great deal you have, and thanks for doing a great service to the community you and your colleagues are really appreciated especially tonight!

DirtyDick

howee wrote: »

and how is that any different to millions of private sector workers?

It comes down to, is the current deal affordable? NO

Is it fair to the tax payer (many who don't have a pension),? NO

Can the country afford not to change pensions? NO

1 - Is the current deal really unaffordable? That's up for debate. Certain sections, at least, such as for teachers', are self-sufficient. Others, such as the armed forces, far less so.

2 - PS workers are also taxpayers. Most everyone in the private sector does not generate any more income than a PS worker; in many cases there is little discernable choice for customers and far less accountability in the private sector. Why shouldn't the government offer pensions that are better than the dire pensions system foisted upon most private sector workers? It is purely envy; should one indulge in the politics of envy, we'd be taxing everyone earning a good wage at 90%.

3 - Can the country afford to keep pensions as they are? Possibly, or possibly not. Depends on government priorities. If PS workers ended their contributions the shortfall in government coffers would have to be spread across all taxpayers.

4 - Typing in capital letters does not make it any more or less true.

RichandJ

worried_jim wrote: »

Kev stay with your current employee scheme. it's great deal you have, and thanks for doing a great service to the community you and your colleagues are really appreciated especially tonight!

+1

There is virtually no way, OP, that you could provide the same benefits you will get from the NFPS by saving yourself. It provides a benefit based on your length of service and final salary, the amount you or your actual brigade pay in does not correlate to the amount of benefit you will get out and, as others have said, if you opted out you would not receive any further employer funding.

You may also lose death and serious injury/ill health benefits if you opt out.

Basically, don't.

dunstonh

If you are thinking about doing this you need to seek independent financial advice.

And the response is a no brainer. Join the firefighter's scheme. No alternative will beat it and any attempt by an adviser to set up an alternative would be a mis-sale.

sheffield_lad

DirtyDick wrote: »

1 - Is the current deal really unaffordable? That's up for debate. Certain sections, at least, such as for teachers', are self-sufficient. Others, such as the armed forces, far less so.

2 - PS workers are also taxpayers. Most everyone in the private sector does not generate any more income than a PS worker; in many cases there is little discernable choice for customers and far less accountability in the private sector. Why shouldn't the government offer pensions that are better than the dire pensions system foisted upon most private sector workers? It is purely envy; should one indulge in the politics of envy, we'd be taxing everyone earning a good wage at 90%.

3 - Can the country afford to keep pensions as they are? Possibly, or possibly not. Depends on government priorities. If PS workers ended their contributions the shortfall in government coffers would have to be spread across all taxpayers.

4 - Typing in capital letters does not make it any more or less true.

Well you got the 4th point correct lol,

While the teachers pension is currently affordable it won't be in only a couple of years time, but that's not really the point why should workers who are not in pensions subsidise someone Else's pension?

Would a public sector pension equivalent but no better than the average private sector pension be fairer?

Come on which public sector workers are actually that daft to leave the scheme (despite union attempts), I hear this all the time if they didn't it would be worse for everyone but only 1 in 4 private sector workers have a pension. Can you not see a huge disparity which is going to grow as the years pass.

I don't think Hutton went far enough, the number one piece of legislation I wanted to see from a new government was a fairness in pensions. Despite the changes they are still unfair to millions.