'Do you support Wednesday's strike?' poll

Jennifer_Jane

pandora_ann wrote: »

I'm a member of one of the striking unions but, as my employee pension is private and not public, my pension is not affected so I am not able to strike. However, I'm fully behind those who are taking part in the strike.

Why are so many people so keen to race to the bottom; "I've got it bad therefore so should you"? Instead of telling people to live in the real world (really, they're not in a bubble!) why not question why private sector pensions are so dreadful? Does it not make more sense to focus on the financial institutions and ask them about the enormous fees they charge on private pension funds? I prefer to focus on making my life (and pension) better, rather than insisting that others lower their expectations or quality of life.

The phrase 'Race to the bottom' is a clever, trite, memorable, little line which is constantly being used by the Labour party, especially in Parliament and in interviews.

The reason why private sector pensions are so dreadful, is that the private sector realised quite long ago that people were living longer and that pensions were unaffordable. I think it was in 1996 or so that my company changed from defined benefit to defined contribution. There wasn't a choice.

The point is that the public sector pensions just simply too generous, not just now that, as Liam Byrne said 'There is no money left', but anyway.

The truth is that Labour should have realised this during their government, and simply didn't or refused to. In addition, in case no-one has noticed, Europe is in turmoil, and the UK is probably about to go into another recession.

If the public sector are interested in 'fairness' (which they don't seem to be), then they should keep contributing what they currently do, and that money should be used to buy an annuity, in the same way that the private sector does.

No-one can simply 'magic up' equality in private sector pensions to match public sector ones - just not possible. Unless, of course, you would like the cost of your food, clothes, Tvs and so on to increase to make up the difference. Would that suit you?

bexster1975

sorry cattie1 but have no idea why you have quoted that part of my post.

What I am saying is if you want people who are not able to obtain jobs in the private sector to be teaching your kids and looking after you when you are sick, this is the way to do it.

If you wanted the right to strike, maybe you should have taken work in the public sector. Many professions in the public sector are looked upon with disdain by the public at large. It is fascinating to see how important these professionals are (if only as babysitters) for people when they might lose a days pay.

By the way, I work in the private sector - so no personal agenda.

suzydiamond

pensions were adjusted in 2007 to make sure there was sufficient funding and our contributions went up significantly. Now we're being asked to pay an additional 3% on top of THAT increase (taking our contribution to around 10%) - that might be ok to ensure we get what we expect - but at the same time we are going to get LESS and on top of that we have to work longer to get it. If we are really expected to swallow this one, perhaps we should start with MPs leading by example!!!

cattie1

/

bexster1975 wrote: »

sorry cattie1 but have no idea why you have quoted that part of my post..

It was quoted because you said maybe if they consider those best suited/qualified to teach their children/look after them when they are sick etc. etc. they might take a different view

bexster1975 wrote: »

What I am saying is if you want people who are not able to obtain jobs in the private sector to be teaching your kids and looking after you when you are sick, this is the way to do it...

You have basically just insulted the majority of public sector who have had to work hard to get qualified for their positions.
By striking they are encouraging more money into the private sector as many of us will be using and paying for childcare while we work or the lucky ones of us will be spending the day out with our children.

bexster1975 wrote: »

If you wanted the right to strike, maybe you should have taken work in the public sector....

I never said I wanted the right to strike, I merely stated the fact that we aren't given that opportunity, mainly because it achieves nothing, just wastes a day, and wastes money. I have many friends in the public sector, they aren't particulary bothered about the strike, just happy they get an extra day off work!

bexster1975 wrote: »

It is fascinating to see how important these professionals are (if only as babysitters) for people when they might lose a days pay..

:rotfl:haha yes that's EXACTLY why I send my children to school and EXACTLY the point I was making. well done..........

bexster1975

Oh dear cattie! Now I can see why you only earn £40 a day!

cattie1

bexster1975 wrote: »

Oh dear cattie! Now I can see why you only earn £40 a day!

Excellent use of argument.......rather than resorting to petty b*tchiness

Lifes_Grand_Plan

cattie1 wrote: »

You have basically just insulted the majority of public sector who have had to work hard to get qualified for their positions.

I think you'll find what she actually meant (and said) was that if public sector pensions get obliterated and the pay and other benefits are worse, then everyone will sod off to the private sector... the only people then left to teach and fill other public sector positions will be those who aren't good enough to get a job in the private sector.

Hope that helps.

cattie1

Lifes_Grand_Plan wrote: »

I think you'll find what she actually meant (and said) was that if public sector pensions get obliterated and the pay and other benefits are worse, then everyone will sod off to the private sector... the only people then left to teach and fill other public sector positions will be those who aren't good enough to get a job in the private sector.

Hope that helps.

I clearly misunderstood the meaning,and apologise as I thought she was saying only people who aren't qualified for anything and aren't very intelligent will be employed by public sector. At least you chose to explain politely, thank-you.

However I think you will find that the majority of private sector pensions and benefits (with the odd exception) are much worse than public even after the cuts, and part of the taxes we pay still go towards public sector benefits.

kezzy36

I was brought up in a household/area of the country unused to strikes and the reasoning behind them and I have never voted to strike before. But the changes proposed to our pensions - over and above the increases in contributions that already took place in 2007 - go well beyond what could be called a reasonable adjustment in these troubled times. A triple whammy - Another increase in contributions in order to get a smaller pension and not until 68.
In reality this means me retiring at the same age - but losing £5300 a year OR Working until I'm 68 - which brings a few other issues, how great are these secondary schools of the future going to be with (nearly) 70 year olds disciplining, teaching and relating to teenagers? Really? And primary schools? How many people at 68 have the energy to cope with 30 foundation stage children all day every day? Maybe we'll have to reintroduce 'naptimes' for both pupils and staff?!

Jiser

savvy06 wrote: »

I have worked for almost 40 years, in the private sector as a VERY low paid nursery nurse.
I could never afford a private pension, or even to save. I paid towards my state pension, assuming I would be eligible to collect it at 60, I now have to wait until I am 64.9. (and I am not even sure it will be enough to live on!)
I am only one of millions, in similar positions, shall we all go on strike!
PS. I was made redundant too!

I sympathise with you but I also blame your lack of ambition or get up and go :money:!

If you didn't like it why didn't you do something about it?

There aren't really enough exuses for 60 odd years of life for not achieving...