Osborne loses his nerve in the face of Union solidarity

ruggedtoast

dunstonh wrote: »

Again, thank you for confirming the typical wage range of a bank worker and verifying my figures.



Again, you are not using the correct figures. I suggest you educate yourself rather than criticise those that do know the information.

The job I linked to was an entry level customer service position in a high street branch outside of London, the entry requirements basically being, a sunny disposition.

As you are well aware, this is not a "typical wage" of someone working in Finance.

This is a more normal starting wage for someone without a degree doing admin in London:

£20k pa - plus they would get whatever year end bonus the company offers.

http://www.cityjobs.com/job/investment-admin-assistant-941520178?src=search

The public sector equivalent of this job would require a graduate qualification. When I was doing this level job 5 years ago for a government department I got less than 8 quid an hour.

Shortly after I left for a better job they made half the department redundant and froze the survivors wages.

If you think the public sector is some gravy train to easy street for the majority of people working for it you are sorely mistaken.

As far as my employers contribution for my pension goes, my employer contributes. Money goes into their account and has to go out again to the LGPS to fund my pension. If I withdraw from the scheme they will then have that money to spend on other things.

This is what an employer contribution is. Why can't you understand?

dunstonh

The job I linked to was an entry level customer service position in a high street branch outside of London, the entry requirements basically being, a sunny disposition.

Which accounts for most bankers. If you want to start taking low management then you move towards £20k. If you want middle management then you move towards £24k. Senior management and graduate roles or increased qualification roles can go higher and in some cases a lot higher but that is what qualifications and experience bring you. Directors and top level are overpaid and shareholders need to do something about it. However, that is a global issue and needs global action.

This is a more normal starting wage for someone without a degree doing admin in London:

£20k pa - plus they would get whatever year end bonus the company offers.

http://www.cityjobs.com/job/investme...178?src=search

Still only 20k though which is the figure I gave in my example (15k to 20k if you cannot recall). Plus, that role has nothing to do with banking.

The public sector equivalent of this job would require a graduate qualification.

No it wouldnt. The job makes it clear that it is an administration role. The fact it requires no FSA authorisations verifies that.

If you think the public sector is some gravy train to easy street for the majority of people working for it you are sorely mistaken.

I have never said that apart from the significant increase in middle management jobs that was seen in public sector boom which saw a lot of new administration jobs being called management roles but were nothing of the sort (the private sector has done that from time to time as well).

As far as my employers contribution for my pension goes, my employer contributes. Money goes into their account and has to go out again to the LGPS to fund my pension. If I withdraw from the scheme they will then have that money to spend on other things.

This is what an employer contribution is. Why can't you understand?

What you dont understand is if a private sector worker wanted to buy the same level of benefits you have, it would cost them around 30% of their salary. It is nothing to do with the employer contribution. We are looking at comparative cost.

Is it fair that a public sector worker is paying around 4.8% for a benefits package that would cost a private worker 30% if they wanted the same?

My answer to that in some cases may well be yes but in the majority of cases, the answer is no. It isnt as if the increases are significant either. in most cases, the increase is lower than a typical annual increase a private sector worker has to pay by default each and every year. The lower earners in the public sector are not seeing any increases.

ruggedtoast

dunstonh wrote: »

Which accounts for most bankers. If you want to start taking low management then you move towards £20k. If you want middle management then you move towards £24k. Senior management and graduate roles or increased qualification roles can go higher and in some cases a lot higher but that is what qualifications and experience bring you. Directors and top level are overpaid and shareholders need to do something about it. However, that is a global issue and needs global action.



Still only 20k though which is the figure I gave in my example (15k to 20k if you cannot recall). Plus, that role has nothing to do with banking.



No it wouldnt. The job makes it clear that it is an administration role. The fact it requires no FSA authorisations verifies that.



I have never said that apart from the significant increase in middle management jobs that was seen in public sector boom which saw a lot of new administration jobs being called management roles but were nothing of the sort (the private sector has done that from time to time as well).



What you dont understand is if a private sector worker wanted to buy the same level of benefits you have, it would cost them around 30% of their salary. It is nothing to do with the employer contribution. We are looking at comparative cost.

Is it fair that a public sector worker is paying around 4.8% for a benefits package that would cost a private worker 30% if they wanted the same?

My answer to that in some cases may well be yes but in the majority of cases, the answer is no. It isnt as if the increases are significant either. in most cases, the increase is lower than a typical annual increase a private sector worker has to pay by default each and every year. The lower earners in the public sector are not seeing any increases.

So to summarise:

• The average wage in the banking industry is £15k a year
  
• Pretty much everyone in the public sector who isnt a junior admin makes much much more than this (including the ones on minimum wage), and receives a pension, so are therefore much better off than impoverished bankers
  
• Its impossible that any public sector worker should receive a pension, even though the existence of a pension was used as an incentive by their employer to hire them
  
• Any public sector worker who is found earning a comparable amount to a private sector counterpart should be immediately fired, as all public sector workers are useless slackers bleeding the country dry who provide no value whatsoever
  
• No employer should, by extension, offer match funded, or non contributory pensions, even though these are offered as perks and incentives in the private sector, for companies that actually want the best staff they can afford, not just the cheapest
  
• Soup kitchens this Christmas are stocking up on record amounts of minestrone to cater for the influx of the needy leaving their offices in the financial services on Christmas Eve

Does that just about cover all of your assumptions or have I missed anything off?

dunstonh

Does that just about cover all of your assumptions or have I missed anything off?

Do you always take extremes and present them as the norm?

no wonder the public sector is a mess with people like you on board.

tartanterra

ruggedtoast wrote: »

So to summarise:

• The average wage in the banking industry is £15k a year
  
• Pretty much everyone in the public sector who isnt a junior admin makes much much more than this (including the ones on minimum wage), and receives a pension, so are therefore much better off than impoverished bankers
  
• Its impossible that any public sector worker should receive a pension, even though the existence of a pension was used as an incentive by their employer to hire them
  
• Any public sector worker who is found earning a comparable amount to a private sector counterpart should be immediately fired, as all public sector workers are useless slackers bleeding the country dry who provide no value whatsoever
  
• No employer should, by extension, offer match funded, or non contributory pensions, even though these are offered as perks and incentives in the private sector, for companies that actually want the best staff they can afford, not just the cheapest
  
• Soup kitchens this Christmas are stocking up on record amounts of minestrone to cater for the influx of the needy leaving their offices in the financial services on Christmas Eve

Does that just about cover all of your assumptions or have I missed anything off?

...............................and the endless, inane, potty throwing rant continues on, and on, and on........and on.............

chewmylegoff

ruggedtoast wrote: »

This is a more normal starting wage for someone without a degree doing admin in London:

£20k pa - plus they would get whatever year end bonus the company offers.

http://www.cityjobs.com/job/investment-admin-assistant-941520178?src=search

except that it specifies that previous financial services experience is required therefore this is not an entry level position.

discoass

tartanterra wrote: »

Is that really what our Public Servants think?

Lets take the example of a level 4 Officer (OF4) in the Armed Forces (Commander/Lt Colonel/Wing Commander)

An OF4 retiring this year at the age of 54 having completed 30 years service will receive:

A lump sum in excess of £100 000.
An index linked yearly pension of £33 000

These people (and there are currently over 4000 of them serving - I have no idea how many are already in receipt of their pension) realise they are onto a good thing and would be unlikely to receive anything like this in the private sector.

I'm sure someone better than me will be able to calculate how big a pension fund you would have to accrue to receive this level of pension in the private sector, but you get the picture.

Public Service pensions were excellent before the changes and they remain excellent (and something most people can only dream of) after the changes.

Your constant "woe is me" isn't really cutting any sympathy with the majority of people who have no access to pensions like this.

Coincidentally, I used the Armed Forces as an example as I myself am in receipt of an Armed Forces pension and realise how lucky I am.
Working in the construction industry now, I actually receive more through my pension (and I wasn't a commissioned Officer!) than many are able to earn at the moment. It's certainly a subject I don't mention at work when I see how much others are struggling (and paying tax to fund my pension payments).

Do I think I have earned a pension?
Yes. My life wasn't my own for 24 years, I've been shot at and bombed, and spent almost half of that time at 48 hours notice to go anywhere in the world.

Do I think my pension is too generous?
Looking around my colleagues in the private sector, most definitely - Yes.

Ironically, I am the only person at my company who can afford to save into a private pension at the moment.

Think they should look at military pensions first tbh.how can u justify getting a pension at the age of 40 in somecases ,why not make it payable at 60 this would save a hell of a lot of money .

chewmylegoff

tartanterra wrote: »

A lump sum in excess of £100 000.
An index linked yearly pension of £33 000

These people (and there are currently over 4000 of them serving - I have no idea how many are already in receipt of their pension) realise they are onto a good thing and would be unlikely to receive anything like this in the private sector.

I'm sure someone better than me will be able to calculate how big a pension fund you would have to accrue to receive this level of pension in the private sector, but you get the picture.

£100,000 for the lump sum

Annuity rate for 55 year old man, index linked is currently well below 3%. Even if you assume 3%, then you need another £1,100,000.

So total money purchase pension pot needed to achieve that pension = £1,200,000.

FTBFun

discoass wrote: »

Think they should look at military pensions first tbh.how can u justify getting a pension at the age of 40 in somecases ,why not make it payable at 60 this would save a hell of a lot of money .

Excuse the pun, but armed forces pensions are effectively bulletproof - it'd be one heck of a PR gaffe to take these away from "Our Boys/Girls".

FTBFun

ruggedtoast wrote: »

So to summarise:

• 
  
• The average wage in the banking industry is £15k a year
  
• Pretty much everyone in the public sector who isnt a junior admin makes much much more than this (including the ones on minimum wage), and receives a pension, so are therefore much better off than impoverished bankers
  
• Its impossible that any public sector worker should receive a pension, even though the existence of a pension was used as an incentive by their employer to hire them
  
• Any public sector worker who is found earning a comparable amount to a private sector counterpart should be immediately fired, as all public sector workers are useless slackers bleeding the country dry who provide no value whatsoever
  
• No employer should, by extension, offer match funded, or non contributory pensions, even though these are offered as perks and incentives in the private sector, for companies that actually want the best staff they can afford, not just the cheapest
  
• Soup kitchens this Christmas are stocking up on record amounts of minestrone to cater for the influx of the needy leaving their offices in the financial services on Christmas Eve

Does that just about cover all of your assumptions or have I missed anything off?

Are you just making points up now? Good grief.