Public Sector Pension Strikes – A JOKE !

Backbiter

jamesd wrote: »

There's little reason for public sector people to be worried about private sector pensions because the modern private sector ones adjust to life expectancy changes without the need for great fuss and strikes to get the job done.

A fair and equitable scheme is easy enough - migrate to fully funded and defined contribution schemes for everyone. Will take a while for the public sector ones that aren't currently fully funded but now's a better chance than there will be for a while because the relatively large baby boomer generation is still working and able to pay the higher costs for a while longer yet. Would probably take some splitting of benefits so part can be defined benefit and part defined contribution to avoid a big transient bulge in current year spending. The private sector has already mostly done this for new employees and has been that way for a while now.

The problem with this 'migration' from the State as pension provider to the Private Sector as provider (which is what this administration yearns for - mega bucks for the pensions industry, big juicy commissions and bonuses for the top brass etc.) is the 'half-way house' that will occur. Given the 'pay as you go' nature of the Teachers' scheme, in which the pensions of today's retirees are met by the contributions of those still working, how will the pensions of the retired teachers be paid for when the 'migration' has taken place and the teachers are no longer paying into the Teachers' Scheme? Won't there be a huge hole in the public finances for the taxpayer to fill?

ILW

jamesd wrote: »

There's little reason for public sector people to be worried about private sector pensions because the modern private sector ones adjust to life expectancy changes without the need for great fuss and strikes to get the job done.

A fair and equitable scheme is easy enough - migrate to fully funded and defined contribution schemes for everyone. Will take a while for the public sector ones that aren't currently fully funded but now's a better chance than there will be for a while because the relatively large baby boomer generation is still working and able to pay the higher costs for a while longer yet. Would probably take some splitting of benefits so part can be defined benefit and part defined contribution to avoid a big transient bulge in current year spending. The private sector has already mostly done this for new employees and has been that way for a while now.

Sounds reasonable, but you are not allowing for the fact that the public sector are somehow special and expect everyone else to pay for their pensions.

WhiteHorse

'Public sector workers' have forgotten their true job title ... public servants.

Time for a reminder.

J_i_m

So much for less childish bickering...

The_Angry_Jock

Backbiter wrote: »

The problem with this 'migration' from the State as pension provider to the Private Sector as provider is the 'half-way house' that will occur. Given the 'pay as you go' nature of the Teachers' scheme, in which the pensions of today's retirees are met by the contributions of those still working, how will the pensions of the retired teachers be paid for when the 'migration' has taken place and the teachers are no longer paying into the Teachers' Scheme? Won't there be a huge hole in the public finances for the taxpayer to fill?

I laughed at this in the Union link up above, eventually someone's going to lose out, in order for the current/future pensions to be paid would you not have to replace workers with an ever increasing number of workers until the end of time? There will be a generation(s) who will have to pay for this migration. Might aswell be this one as the people who created this mess can still contribute a little.

ILW

Could any public sector striker please explain to me why I should be forced to pay for your pension, from which I receive no benefit whatsoever.

atush

JohnB47 wrote: »

Oh this is great. But we need more anger against public sector workers! Morer hatred! More angst!

Look - just over there. Polititians and bankers are just peeping their heads out from their cushioned bunkers, wondering if we're really distracted enough to let them get away with their own generous pension uprating rules or yearly bonouses, but they wonder if we're distracted enough. Perhaps they need to stoke the hate boiler a bit more - "you must all hate public sector workers! Strikes are all the fault of workers! Remember we're all in this together, (as long as my pension or bonous is OK that is)".

So come on public sector worker haters, you can do better than this - more personal insults, more bias, more childishly over simplified arguments. The polititians and bankers are almost there!

complete hogwash/idiocy.

we don't hate PS workers. You have been coop-ted by your union mate. We love Public service workers and we value their work (and we always advise they stay in their PS pensions even if it costs us as it is the best thing for them).


Where you lose us is in striking.

AS we thew private sector may lose money and perhaps our health after your strike. WE might have to take holidays or even a day of w/o pay when you strike as we have to stay home. We might lose our life if our cancer treatment (not considered 'Critical' by the Unions so they are suppoesed to strike) if innitial or current treatment is sacrificed for even one day- but f your chemo is cancelled next wednesday, you wont get it thursday- you will be lucky to get it the next week.

I am appalled that though many like me are actually sorry for public sector workers that they have to now face the music left to us by the previous govt, but realise the economic situation, we are all lumped in by the militant PS workers 'them vs US' thing.

It isn't the private sector thinking 'them vs us' but the public sector showing us how much they dont care about us, the taxpayers/private sector, who dont have nor ever will have a guaranteed pension of any kind. To insist we demand one, only shows their lack of the understanding of basic economics.

Debbie_A_3

ILW wrote: »

Could any public sector striker please explain to me why I should be forced to pay for your pension, from which I receive no benefit whatsoever.

The pension is part of my remuneration package that I agreed to when I became a teacher. The logical extension to your argument is "why should I be forced to pay for your salary?" I'm sure that you don't think teachers, nurses, etc should give up our time for free. Or do you?

Debbie

ILW

Debbie_A wrote: »

The pension is part of my remuneration package that I agreed to when I became a teacher. The logical extension to your argument is "why should I be forced to pay for your salary?" I'm sure that you don't think teachers, nurses, etc should give up our time for free. Or do you?

Debbie

I am happy to contribute to your salary whilst you are working productively, cannot see why should go on paying when you stop.

If the pension is so affordable, why not just have a standard pension like everyone else?

CLAPTON

jamesd wrote: »

There's little reason for public sector people to be worried about private sector pensions because the modern private sector ones adjust to life expectancy changes without the need for great fuss and strikes to get the job done.

A fair and equitable scheme is easy enough - migrate to fully funded and defined contribution schemes for everyone. Will take a while for the public sector ones that aren't currently fully funded but now's a better chance than there will be for a while because the relatively large baby boomer generation is still working and able to pay the higher costs for a while longer yet. Would probably take some splitting of benefits so part can be defined benefit and part defined contribution to avoid a big transient bulge in current year spending. The private sector has already mostly done this for new employees and has been that way for a while now.

the current situation is

a person can save in a DC scheme all their working life: i.e. doing all the right things

through no fault of that person they might retire in the current situation
i.e. low stock market prices so their pension 'pot' is very low and due to government QE they have a very low annuitiy rate.

they have done everything right but government policy (for the greater good) has screwed them.

You clearly see this as fair, I consider this very very unfair and needs changing.


we will have to disagree