Message for strikers

pimento

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

The public sector workers have the right to a decent pension and the unemployed have the right to a decent job.Ideally everybody should be supportive of each others struggle.

Yup! Divide and rule seems to be the order of the day with the bosses and government.

ohreally

wantsajob, you appear to have been bred from a very shallow, polluted gene pool which has impinged your cognitive capacity.

Approaching the clouded issues from a different perspective, the pension provision is deferred pay and is contractual (reflect on this one a little).

If one doesn't like an aspect of the job you fight to improve it, you don't run away with your tail between your legs. Realise this is an attack on predominately low paid women workers to fund banking/ economic catastrophes.

The way forward is not to race towards the lowest common denominator for all (in dedicated public service).

In solidarity, brothers and sisters.

attila_

Stylehutz wrote: »

But these people have been lied too by their employers or in effect the current Tory government.They were promised a decent pension in return for taking low paid jobs which no-one at the time wanted to do .The employers have moved the goalposts:mad:

The Tory's manifesto in 2010 on public sector had no mention that unsustainable public pension schemes would remain untouched.

This is Labour's fault for luring people into the public sector. The idea of public sector jobs being 'badly paid' is long gone:

"Since 2002 the public sector wage bill has increased three times faster than the private sector wage bill, growing by 33% in real terms, or £67 billion."

This is a result of a very bad Government. I am no fan of Torys but they have been left in the...

starnight_2

attila_ wrote: »

Hear Hear!

In 1998 the Labour Government relaxed regulations on banking and other financial activities...Who put them in power? The same who were demanding Cameron to leave today during the strikes....

Bottom line - we've had it good, too good. We all have to pay through unemployment, loss of pension and no pay rises...

Again, I may be wrong, but I do believe it was more than just the strikers who got Labour into power, actually if I remember correctly it was the electorate, and that includes YOU and a lot of other private and public sector workers.

starnight_2

attila_ wrote: »

The Tory's manifesto in 2010 on public sector had no mention that unsustainable public pension schemes would remain untouched.

This is Labour's fault for luring people into the public sector. The idea of public sector jobs being 'badly paid' is long gone:

"Since 2002 the public sector wage bill has increased three times faster than the private sector wage bill, growing by 33% in real terms, or £67 billion."

This is a result of a very bad Government. I am no fan of Torys but they have been left in the...

I believe this was help bring it in line with private sector pay. It's not like we're getting paid more money than you, it's just more of us happen to pay into a pension, and one that provides a liveable income in old age. If you can call £4k liveable in 40yrs time (what my pension is expected to be and when I can expect to retire under the new terms, having already paid into the scheme for 6yrs.)

FATBALLZ

SarEl wrote: »

I would remind you that

(a) the millions of workers who are on strike today are amongst those paying for the unemployed and everyone else who isn't working (like you I guess from your user ID), and whilst some people want to work, there seems to be a fair few who also don't want to.

So if they are willing to fight to stop their conditions from being eroded then good luck to them.

(b) Since they are not getting paid for today, they also won't be paying any taxes for today either - so that'll be another reason to cut benefits as there won't be quite as much money in the pot to pay for them. I presume you will be willing to take the hit to help the country out?

Lol, good one. Public sector workers making net tax contributions. Comedy.

jonnyd281

I have kept out of this argument in the most part, I work in the public sector, I have looked at the new pension, and I will still be paying less than I was 11 years ago when in the private sector, and will get a better pension. I don't believe the strikes are right (personally I don't believe in strike action), but the union leaders have ignored the fact that more people voted for industrial action short of strike action than voted for strike action.

Mistral001

SarEl wrote: »

You are correct - the average isn't a useful figure. The median is a much more useful figures and that is the one used by Lord Hutton in the government commissioned independant inquiry into public sector pension. The median public sector pension is actually £5,200.

No problem with Lord Hutton's report. Did not think it was one commissioned by anybody else but government. The substance of my post was that pensions like mine (£200 a year )are included in the figures and must have a substantial effect on the figures whether median or average figures.

The impression that I got when I first saw the figures a few weeks ago was that the average public worker will be getting those £5 to £7k pensions quoted in the press.. I bet others thought that as well.

It is the median/average of all pensions including pensions of what must be many millions of people over the last maybe 40 years or so who have worked only a short time in the public sector and also people who joined late in their 40's and 50's or 60's and will get small pension's because they have quite short length of service.

I would like to see the average/median for people who have say 30 years or more service.

browneyedbazzi

In Local Government the median basic pay for full time staff last year was £22956 and for part time staff £15442 last year. (nearly 500k local government staff, mainly women, work part time)

Pension calculations for members of the funded lgps is years of service x 1/60 x final pay

So the average full time worker with 30 years of service retiring now would receive a pension of £11478
The average part time worker with 30 years of service would receive a pension of £7720

I don't think that's gold plated. It's also a funded scheme and the extra 3% of salary George Osborne wants us to pay isn't going into the pension scheme (which is already funded), it is going directly to government. If the money was going to help fund the scheme people wouldn't be nearly as upset as they are!

Aspiring_Writer

Public sector workers are paid reasonably well these days, and, until recently and even now comparatively, have secure jobs.

Labour recruited massively in the public sector, why? to build the client state of course, like they always do. A large client state is good for a Labour Govt, it adds to the Tax purse, and its subjects reward the people who gave them jobs with things called 'votes'. Voila! Labour Govt buys votes! Shocker

I do not agree with today's strikes. Pension Funds have been dwindling for years thanks to better health care, better standard of living and consequently, people living longer. That all contributes to a need for increased contributions and a longer shelf life/policy term. Ask any pension actuary or IFA who knows his pensions inside out.

And Gordon Halfwit Brown introduced tax laws some years back that decimated pension funds so he didn;t help either.

I'm sorry, but the public sector need to wake up and realise the economic reality for once. The people I know who work in the public sector really do not have a scooby doo about how the real world works and the challenges facing the private sector who are constantly having to balance the books.

Get back to work and stop whinging.