Public Sector Pension Strikes – A JOKE !

dshart

howee wrote: »

I hope Unison members are a 'tad' embarrassed to be in that union after the hysteria over Jeramey Clarkson's opinions over the strike lol

I really don't think he meant all the Public sector workers, just the one's with the loudspeakers & banners lol

I wish people would ignore what these so called "celebrities" say and I wish these so called "celebrities" would keep their mouths shut.

I have no problem with Clarkson and I take most of what he says with a pinch of salt, but what he should remember is that his over inflated wages are paid by the tax payer through the TV licence, and although I disagree with the strikes and feel changes are required to public service pensions, I also can see why people feel aggrieved with the changes. But I also feel that these overpaid so called "celebrities" need to be brought into the real world too and have their conditions adjusted. I am sure if that happened he would not be best pleased and would high tail elsewhere.

dunstonh

When people say that their wages pay for my wages, can I ask, what happens to the tax I pay?

Your remuneration package is about 130% of what you are paid. So, the tax you pay covers around 28% and the 102% is covered by the taxpayer.

However, are these same people responsible for all that ails us in this society?

Nobody is making that claim on this thread or any other. However, they have some responsibility for some of the issues, as do everyone.

don't feel that they are and that the Govt's intention is to pit private against public. I say, people need to stand up for the public sector without whom, life would be very much different and not for the better

See you are at it now. You are pitting your public sector against the private sector.

I believe that paying more would be reasonable but wonder where the additional money is supposed to come from with wage freezes - I can't see any way out of it

How about larger than private sector increases that occurred in the decade previous?

Any option is going to hurt. You have private sector suffering declines in income and worse pension provision and you have public sector getting increases still or pay freezes and pensions that most can only dream of.

The option is to hit the private sector harder by passing more of the cost of the public sector on to them or get the private sector to accept some of the pain that is going around.

There was a teacher striker on the news who was complaining that his teachers pension was just £4000 a year and that is why he was striking. However, he had only been in the pension scheme a couple of years and will only have around 10 years service. What right does he have for more? (btw, in the private sector, £4000 pension over 15 years service would cost around £675pm. That compares to the £150pm he would be paying).

It is not public sector vs private sector. It is unions vs reality and idiots put in front of the cameras making foolish statements that wind people up.

Personally, I see it more as a return to left vs right wing politics.

but what he should remember is that his over inflated wages are paid by the tax payer through the TV licence

I think you will find that Clarkson brings in more income than his cost. He could earn an awful lot more on ITV or Sky. That said, I do feel that the income levels of many celebrities are far removed from reality as is the fascination that the bottom end of society looks up to some of them as role models.

Andy_L

fluffymovie wrote: »

When people say that their wages pay for my wages, can I ask, what happens to the tax I pay?

It abates the cost of employing you, its not new money. We could pay Public Sector workers less but then not deduct NI & Tax and it would have the same effect, however its easier alround to charge them to avoid difficult calculations over, eg, Tax credits, ISAs/Pensions etc

dshart

dunstonh wrote: »

I think you will find that Clarkson brings in more income than his cost. He could earn an awful lot more on ITV or Sky. That said, I do feel that the income levels of many celebrities are far removed from reality as is the fascination that the bottom end of society looks up to some of them as role models.

Its this fascination that people have with them and how people treat them as role models that make me say they should keep their mouths shut on these issues. Yes they are allowed to have their opinions like anyone else and I may agree with his opinions, but using his "celebrity" status and access to the public to air his views is wrong.

WhiteHorse

Jeremy Clarkson? Well, he's entitled to his opinion, and so is anyone who says he's a jerk.

However, when an organisation like UNISON tries to stop an individual from voicing an opinion, no matter how ridiculous, that is a matter for concern.

J_i_m

Well plainly people should learn to take whatever Jermery Clarskson says with a gallon of salt. Deliberately offending people is what he does, I doubt he either believes or means much of what he says.

dunstonh

J_i_m wrote: »

Deliberately offending people is what he does, I doubt he either believes or means much of what he says.

He would make a great Union leader on that basis.

I believe in real life he is not at all like his media personality. Not quite as extreme as Keith Lemon but similar principle and one that many comedians follow. Some of his documentary programmes have been very good and you get none of the silliness there.

Credit-Crunched

Injection of humour is needed I think,he was joking do you honestly believe that he meant what he said!

He does a lot of good for this country, helping to raise over 100,000,000 for our wounded soldiers. If any one should be complaining then it is them, however they just get on with their jobs.

Talk about unfair deals, try getting shipped to a desert warzone with jungle boots that melt on the tarmac, or having to buy your own goggles as the ones provided by the army do not cater for a radio headset. Or even buying your own body armour as the standard issue does hot have a side impact panel.

Trust me when you have faced that an extra 3 years in a school will be a doddle

Gracchus_Babeuf

Who gives a toss about that millionaire hack? He is less important than a flea on a stray dog as far as I'm concerned.

worldwheeler

dunstonh wrote: »

You have to be blinkered beyond belief if you just point the blame at the banks.

And you are suffering Stockholm syndrome if you do not realise the banks are parasites on the economy. The money system that they run where all money is borrowed into existence and has to be repaid with interest, which all has to be repaid from the original loan. Mathematically impossible, bankruptcy is built into the system.