Fire Brigade pension or private pension

FLAPJACK

Don't forget that as a fireman (and thanks for doing that job btw!) you can retire at 50, on a full pension providing you have accrude 25 years service, I don't know how long you have been in the service, but if you started at your age of 28 you could retire with a full pension at 53. Only drawback is that a early fire service pension does not increase annually until you get to 55.

No private pension would pay a full pension at 50 thats for sure...and remember in the high risk profession you are in there is a chance that you would retire early due to ill health (hope not) and again I'm sure a private pension provider would be more "sticky" about providing a full pension then than the fire service pension would be.

Stick with the employers scheme.....as everyone else here says if not only to take advantage of their contribution to your pension pot.

Good luck .....and be careful out there!!

BobQ

howee wrote: »

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.

Well lets face it the new government has not exactly got a track record of keeping its promises on pensions or anything else. The CPI indexation of public and private schemes was not part of either coalition partners election pledges.

ViolaLass

Just_landed wrote: »

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.[

If someone goes on strike without knowing WHY they are doing it, is that necessarily/solely the union's fault?

Unions are for collective bargaining power but that doesn't mean you should stop thinking for yourself.

atush

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.

1- going forwards unaffordable. Completely

2- yes PS workers are taxpayers. But paying to themslves. We are speaking of the rest that have to pay in and dont benefit.

3- Possibly cr*p. They are unaffordable going forwards no possible about it. People are living longer, and the number of pensioners claiming is rising hugely.

4- Typing in whatever case doesnt make your argument any more true. it is false. Ask any economist.

atush

ViolaLass wrote: »

Just_landed wrote: »

If someone goes on strike without knowing WHY they are doing it, is that necessarily/solely the union's fault?

Unions are for collective bargaining power but that doesn't mean you should stop thinking for yourself.

unions actively discourage thinking for yourself. What will they call you if you 'think' yourself and don't strike? They will spit on you and call yiou a scab. That is NOT actively encouraging private thinking. That is bullying.

CLAPTON

atush wrote: »

1- going forwards unaffordable. Completely

2- yes PS workers are taxpayers. But paying to themslves. We are speaking of the rest that have to pay in and dont benefit.

3- Possibly cr*p. They are unaffordable going forwards no possible about it. People are living longer, and the number of pensioners claiming is rising hugely.

4- Typing in whatever case doesnt make your argument any more true. it is false. Ask any economist.

the Hutton report gave the cost of current public sector pensions as just less than 2% of GDP and that by 2030 that would fall to about 1.4% of GDP
but never allow facts to get in the way of a good story

PS. these fugures are documented in the Hutton report so you can at least check them out. (search on Hutton report and you will find it.)

vax2002

I do see your concerns, they are chipping away bit by bit at the schemes and it is plain to see that if they keep going the pension wont be worth the salt you paid in.
You do wonder if they are borrowing in to your pension pot as a future debt and slowly dripping the bad news in.
One must wonder, are you better off sticking 8% under the bed in gold sovereigns , at least it will still be there in 30 years.

Koicarp

howee wrote: »

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

They haven't "agreed to strike action", they've decided to take strike action! It would be better if they knew more about their own pensions and pensions in general before making that decision but they do not.
We as public service workers have never had to think about pensions until now, because we were promised we would be looked after in retirement. Now we are having to think about it we have lots of questions, and some of them will seem daft to those who have always had to plan pensions for themselves.

Moby

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.

Nicely put!

dshart

Koicarp wrote: »

They haven't "agreed to strike action", they've decided to take strike action! It would be better if they knew more about their own pensions and pensions in general before making that decision but they do not.
We as public service workers have never had to think about pensions until now, because we were promised we would be looked after in retirement. Now we are having to think about it we have lots of questions, and some of them will seem daft to those who have always had to plan pensions for themselves.

If what you say is true then it shows how protected from the real world the public sector workers have been for all this time.

So now some one has come along to inject a bit of reality into the situation and people are up in arms and wanting to strike. And who can blame them when they are given it in terms of "the government want you to pay more, work longer and get a lower pension at the end", of course anyone would be up in arms at this. But as you said they don't really have the information about their pensions and how they are funded. Maybe instead of being so quick to go out on strike they should have first looked a bit more into how their pensions are funded and why the new proposals are required.

To the OP, stick with the pension you are being offered you would struggle to get anything remotely as good in a private pension even with the changes being proposed. But read up and learn about the pensions and try and understand why it is wise to stay where you are.