Public Sector Pension Strikes – A JOKE !

dizzie

...and the chap going on about an ex-teacher finding a job at the age of 65 must definitely be on Planet Zogg! For goodness sake, for someone aged 65, most of their pension will be based on their protected benefits! The reforms only affect future contributions! So what, tell me, will be the net effect of reforms on that 65 year-old person's public sector pension? Almost diddly squat, I'm sure.

Get a grip!

J_i_m

Just to add to my link to RCN about NHS pay scales. I'll give a brief outline of which bands apply to which roles. It won't be a completely comprehensive expianation because I don't really know the bands above my manager.

I'm not aware of anyone on band 1, I assume it may be domestic staff (cleaners etc) though those are often contracted out. I'm on band 2 as a care assistant. Band 3 is basically an advanced care assistant. I basically do band 3 work but am paid band 2. Band 4 tends to be for assistant therapists (occupational, sports etc) staff nurses are on band 5, charge nurses get band 6, whilst qualified therapists net either band 5 or 6. Ward/unit managers would be band 7. Above that I'm not sure though I'd imagine regional managers may be band 8 and CEO's would be top whack.

J_i_m

dizzie wrote: »

...and the chap going on about an ex-teacher finding a job at the age of 65 must definitely be on Planet Zogg! For goodness sake, for someone aged 65, most of their pension will be based on their protected benefits! The reforms only affect future contributions! So what, tell me, will be the net effect of reforms on that 65 year-old person's public sector pension? Almost diddly squat, I'm sure.

Get a grip!

Are you talking about someone who is already in their 60's or someone yet to hit 30?

You see you guys are very ready to question the planet people live on, yet you're cherry picking your points just as much as you may think we are.

jem16

dizzie wrote: »

...and the chap going on about an ex-teacher finding a job at the age of 65 must definitely be on Planet Zogg! For goodness sake, for someone aged 65, most of their pension will be based on their protected benefits! The reforms only affect future contributions! So what, tell me, will be the net effect of reforms on that 65 year-old person's public sector pension? Almost diddly squat, I'm sure.

Get a grip!

I think it's you that needs to get a grip and calm down.

I'm not referring to the now 65 yr old having to fund the difference until 67/68 because as you say they will not be affected.

I am referring to the 21yr old entering teaching now whose pension, post reform, will only be paid when he/she reaches 67/68.

Pleas try to read the posts before jumping in with all guns blazing.

roysterer

There appears to be very little support for Public Sector Workers on this issue.
Many Trade Unionist in the private sector will give ZERO support towards them.
I have yet to hear one person who feel they have a legitimate case.
SMELL THE COFFEE AND WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE ARE ALL FEELING THE PAIN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SECTOR ALIKE.
YOU WILL NOT WIN ON THIS ISSUE SO WHY LOOSE MORE MONEY BY GOING ON STRIKE.

TAX PAYERS WILL NOT FOOT THE BILL.

jem16

dizzie wrote: »

ThI think most people wouldn't because they know that their benefits package in the public sector far outweighs anything the private sector has to offer.

Teachers in independent schools usually have better salaries/benefits PLUS are also members of the Public Sector Teachers' Pension scheme.

dizzie

Well that 21 year-old has a choice don't they? And they are young and fit enough to decide on that now. If they don't like what the path ahead has to offer then they can chose another route. As I said in my earlier post, there are plenty of people who have to do that, even though they have no choice in the matter.

Sorry, but I don't think the public sector owes anyone a job for life just because they've trained to do it. That doesn't happen in the private sector and I don't think PS workers should be treated as a "special case"!

jem16

dizzie wrote: »

Sorry, but I don't think the public sector owes anyone a job for life just because they've trained to do it. That doesn't happen in the private sector and I don't think PS workers should be treated as a "special case"!

I haven't mentioned public sectors being treated as a special case so why repeat this claim ad nauseam?

dizzie

I haven't repeated it "ad nauseum" actually! Perhaps someone else has. But why mention this at all if the situation is no different for any employment - be it public or private sector? What relevance should this have to the debate?

The_Angry_Jock

jem16 wrote: »

I'm not referring to the now 65 yr old having to fund the difference until 67/68 because as you say they will not be affected.

I am referring to the 21yr old entering teaching now whose pension, post reform, will only be paid when he/she reaches 67/68.

2 points.

- A 21 year old (or anyone in their 20's/30's) has 40+ years to prepare for their retirement, if they feel their provisions aren't enough there's nothing really stopping them making up the short fall with savings - as has been the advise I've read on here regarding increased retirement ages.

- In 45+ years there will probably be loads of jobs for people in the transition period between career and retirement to look after the increasing numbers of (what will be) existing pensioners - just a suggestion.

Ultimately though, none of us can predict what's going to happen over that length of time, we could be under the sea by then :eek: