Police pension can i cash it in

The_Angry_Jock

billchecker1 wrote: »

Most people that are non-job really wont understand the stresses and pressures that 30+ years can bring. Yes I know other jobs are just as stressful and dangerous but one thing that kept people going through it was the promise of a retirement where you were looked after.

I'm always amazed at how humble PS workers like yourself are, it must be a real burden looking after all of us knuckle dragging morons who live in a wonderful fantasy land of drifting into work when we please and standing round the water cooler all day yakking about Eastenders...let's not forget that these people produce the food you eat, the clothes on your back, the house you live in, the roads you drive to work on, the computer you use to post on forum etc etc.

Wilkins

billchecker1 wrote: »

It is a promise that has been broken by the government. Simple.

It is still a good pension, no doubt but whos to say it wont change again?

Governments have broken many "promises" re pensions over the years and until recently this has affected principally the private sector. Millions have had their FS schemes replaced by DC ones.

The pension changes in the public sector are comparatively minor and in nearly all cases they remain DB.

People live longer. The laws of arithmetic don't change. Governments break "promises". Get over it.

Perelandra

billchecker1 wrote: »

There is so much envy on the topic of public sector pensions. It is palpable.

The people who complain had the choice to join.

They shouldn't moan because they didn't.

It is a promise that has been broken by the government. Simple.

It is still a good pension, no doubt but whos to say it wont change again?

and it probably will change again- the final salary schemes remain unaffordable in the long term.

Pension provision has simply become far more expensive to provide over the last few decades. Everyone who entered the workforce 10-30 years ago (private or public) had better pensions on "offer" when they started working than they do now. Everyone is now being told that the pension they could expect to get when they started working is now not affordable, and that they will have to accept a lower pension, or pay more.

However, the private sector has been much, much harder hit by these changes, to date, than the public sector. As a result the gap between the pensions available has widened considerably.

At some point, I can only see the benefits of public sector pensions reducing again. The longer that is delayed, the greater the impact will be. Which is better, a soft or a crash landing?

haras_nosirrah

deepseadiver wrote: »

Do you work shifts?

Have you ever saved anyone's life (or tried and failed)?

Have you ever been the subject of a malicious allegation?

Have you ever witnessed tragic death?

Have you ever been spat at, punched or had threats made against your family?

Do you have any restrictions on your homelife?

etc etc etc etc.............................................

I might swap if you fancy any of the above?

I am not saying you don't have a dangerous job and should be rewarded accordingly. We are all thankful for what those in the emergency services do and rightly so. What I am saying is that people can't expect to work for 30 years and then spend 30-40 years in retirement earning similar to what they were earning before. When the pensions were planned people were expected to spend 10-15 years in retirement and that time has doubled. some of us will spend 50 years working and retire on significantly smaller pensions. I am saying that you still have a good deal and while it is not as good as it is what was promised originally short of enforced suicide at age 70 for all those recieving these pensions it is not affordable to continue to pay them. Something has to give.

billchecker1

How's the investigation into the Police Federation's conspiratorial role in all this going by the way?

What investigation? What are you on about? I dont beleive in conspiracies.

I do believe in vested interests however.

Well, you might not be, but we know of policemen who retired at 49 with over 100K lump sums and and over 20K pensions. Some live in france without a care, others here. Some have other new jobs on top, others are living the life of riley.

Those were too generous, maybe you feel the new ones aren't generous enough. the ones in between were probably still generous. So maybe the problem was the old ones were too generous and you have to pay the piper now for your older members.

The real problem is, that in that time, the world changed and people started living longer, and the finances got too tight to afford even todays PS pensions. the choice is to cancel them all to new entrants and ongoing, or to keep them in a more affordable state. I would be happy if I were you to keep them in a more afordable state. But you tell your MP what you think?

If that is the deal that was offered at the time then I am happy for them. I dont begrudge them this. They have earned this and paid every month from it too. Remember public sector workers have to also pay tax?

I have actually spoken to my MP. They have shown no interest at all.

Governments have broken many "promises" re pensions over the years and until recently this has affected principally the private sector. Millions have had their FS schemes replaced by DC ones.

The pension changes in the public sector are comparatively minor and in nearly all cases they remain DB.

People live longer. The laws of arithmetic don't change. Governments break "promises". Get over it.

Just because they do break promises doesnt make it OK. By passively accepting this you really are part of the problem. Agreement is actually worse.

I'm always amazed at how humble PS workers like yourself are, it must be a real burden looking after all of us knuckle dragging morons who live in a wonderful fantasy land of drifting into work when we please and standing round the water cooler all day yakking about Eastenders...let's not forget that these people produce the food you eat, the clothes on your back, the house you live in, the roads you drive to work on, the computer you use to post on forum etc etc.

I have worked in private industry for a number of years. I never said they were valued less but did say the pressures of work were aliviated by the thought of good pension provision.

The continual categorisation serves to expand the divide and conquer ethos that pervades this forum. And its a real shame. Because those same people are delivering babies, saving people from house fires....etc. But I wont harp on in case I am seen as being anything less then humble.

jamesd

billchecker1 and others in this scheme, just plan for retiring when you want as those of us not in the public sector do. It's not particularly hard, just takes some planning and putting money away to cover the years until work and state pensions start. Plenty of help here for anyone who wants to do that and at least it will achieve a useful end result, retiring when you want to.

real1314

From what I can see regarding the police pension reforms, everything you have accrued up to 2015 will still be payable at the same retirement age of 49 (the case studies only use an age of 50 rather than 49 though) so in fact you have not yet had anything at all taken away from you.

At 49 (or 50?) you will be able to retire and will receive a pension reflecting your service between starting and 2015, based on your pay at retirement.

The only thing that is being changed is the way you will accrue pension from 2015 onwards, and this was announced 2 years ahead of the change. You've been given good notice of the changes from 2015 so now have the opportunity to decide how you will deal with those changes.

It's not really valid to expect a deal that was set 20 years ago to continue forever on the same basis regardless of changes that affect it.
On the other hand it would not be reasonable to reduce the value of contributions you have already made, but as has been demonstrated, that is not happening. :cool:

atush

There are LOADS of investigations going on that the moment, from Hillsbourough still, to the Hacking scandal (where police sold details to the tabloids) to the Andrew Mitchell affair. We await the results.

This doesn't mean we think all police are corrupt or engaged in dodgy practices. Most I am sure are honest and have integrity. But there are still a few bad apples out there that need to be picked out of the barrell, even the high rank ones.

Wilkins

billchecker1 wrote: »

Just because they do break promises doesnt make it OK. By passively accepting this you really are part of the problem.

Yes it does, when it is forced by a reality which you foolishly imagine you can reject. Just because someone promised you that 2+2=5 does not entitle you to believe it to be true.

FatherAbraham

billchecker1 wrote: »

There is so much envy on the topic of public sector pensions. It is palpable.

Yes, I should hope it is palpable, because those pensoin have become unjustifiably generous as the demographic situation has changed. Take heed of public anger!

billchecker1 wrote: »

The people who complain had the choice to join.

Let's see, the last recruitiment for ten constables I heard about in a North Eastern English county, late last year, had two thousand applicants. In any industry, if the ratio of applicants to jobs is running at 200 to 1, the post is seriously over-compensated, either by immediate pay or deferred pay (i.e. pensions).

It's impossible to join the police: the competition to get to the fat, bloated pensions is too great. There are even rumours that recruitment is biased in favour of relatives of serving offices, which is hardly unexpected when a precious resource is hoarded by a few.

billchecker1 wrote: »

It is a promise that has been broken by the government. Simple.

Simple? It's not even true.

You have received everything that was promised. You were never promised that future terms and conditions would not change.

Your deep sense of injustice comes from believing nonsense, not reality.

Warmest regards,
FA