benefits and public sector pay

sheffield_lad

chucknorris wrote: »

That's right, I'm in the teachers' pension fund, the changes have come in various forms:

Increased contribution
2 years ago the contribution was 6.4% of salary, for me it went up to 8% last year, and I think (I did know but I've forgotten) that it is about to go to 10.1%. Next year it will most likely to go to about 12%.

Anyone still in a private sector pension has also felt this. Mine has gone from 5% to 9% for a 1/68th career average its poor but at least I am saving for one.

Average career salary
From final salary

Nice to see you in the private sector club

3% CPI inflation
From 3.5% RPI

Later retirement
For me it is now a year later when I can take the pension at 66, it is linked to the state pension now. It used to be 60 years old a few years ago.

and 60 was not too generous? Given the rest of us have to work to 68?

I know of plasterers, plumbers, carpet fitters etc who have ZERO pension provision yet via tax they contribute to someone Else's pension. How can that be right?

Don't also forget that everything previous is safe its just going forward that teachers need to live in the real world.

jem16

howee wrote: »

and 60 was not too generous? Given the rest of us have to work to 68?

No you don't. That's only the age you can receive your state pension. Your private pension can be accessed from age 55.

I know of plasterers, plumbers, carpet fitters etc who have ZERO pension provision yet via tax they contribute to someone Else's pension. How can that be right?

Just like the teacher who pays everybody else's basic state pension through their taxes too. If the plasterer, plumber, carpet fitters etc want to make their own provision they can do so as well just like the teachers.

Don't also forget that everything previous is safe its just going forward that teachers need to live in the real world.

Yep time to get real. We are being expected to make our own provision for retirement and not to rely on the state.

[Deleted User]

howee wrote: »

and 60 was not too generous? Given the rest of us have to work to 68?

I know of plasterers, plumbers, carpet fitters etc who have ZERO pension provision yet via tax they contribute to someone Else's pension. How can that be right?

Don't also forget that everything previous is safe its just going forward that teachers need to live in the real world.

If someone has no pension provision, that is their fault. I DID work in the public sector, (nearly right, OP!) and one reason was because of the pension provision and the other working conditions. My choice. Others didn't make that choice. Their choice. I pay tax for loads of things I don't agree with - trident, the Royal Family, the House of Lords, London weighting, the Olympics the Iraq war, tax beaks for millionaires, I could go on. You pay tax for things you don't agree with - tough.

One of the hints in the MSE-world view is "read the terms and conditions". I'm not going to apologise now for a sensible decision I made decades ago based on the options available at the time. It's not the fault of the public sector that workers in the private sector has shafted its staff over decades - and don't be fooled by the hype - when the private sector recovers, the workers there will do just fine - if they have the b@lls to fight for their share.

WR

sheffield_lad

jem16 wrote: »

No you don't. That's only the age you can receive your state pension. Your private pension can be accessed from age 55. And when can you access your PS pension?

Just like the teacher who pays everybody Else's basic state pension through their taxes too. If the plasterer, plumber, carpet fitters etc want to make their own provision they can do so as well just like the teachers.

but unlike a teacher they won't receive any tax payers help paying for their pension its just tax. You via the pension receive a rebate.


Yep time to get real. We are being expected to make our own provision for retirement and not to rely on the state.

There is no way that the previous pensions arrangements could stay in place. Even now I think they are still over generous.

Why should the tax payer shell out and be made responsible when many have no pension at all?

What should have happened on PS pensions is it should have reflected the average private sector pension available at the time.

chucknorris

howee wrote: »

and 60 was not too generous? Given the rest of us have to work to 68?

I know of plasterers, plumbers, carpet fitters etc who have ZERO pension provision yet via tax they contribute to someone Else's pension. How can that be right?

Don't also forget that everything previous is safe its just going forward that teachers need to live in the real world.

Don't mix me up with some complaining lefty, I merely stated the facts. You and the white horse are total commies compared to me.

But I'm sure not going to refuse the pension scheme on offer in the public sector, are you saying that you would?

sheffield_lad

Wild_Rover wrote: »

I'm not going to apologise now for a sensible decision I made decades ago based on the options available at the time. It's not the fault of the public sector that workers in the private sector has shafted its staff over decades
WR

but you expect the tax payer to subsidise your pension based on a decision made decades ago?

It's funny that if you look at the trouble makers who strike its nearly always PS workers or the old public organisations.

Royal Mail
BT
British airways
Railway workers

All in over paid (compared to the private sector), with pensions which no private sector company can afford.

I wonder how cheap rail travel would have been without the unions stranglehold on it?

jem16

howee wrote: »

There is no way that the previous pensions arrangements could stay in place. Even now I think they are still over generous.

I don't have any problem with the changes. They are necessary.

Why should the tax payer shell out and be made responsible when many have no pension at all?

If people have no pension provision they only have themselves to blame. What was to stop them contributing to a pension? Many simply say they cannot afford it. I couldn't afford it either to begin with. However I sacrificed other things to afford it.

What should have happened on PS pensions is it should have reflected the average private sector pension available at the time.

If the private sector cannot stick up for themselves, they only have themselves to blame. Why should it be a race to the bottom?

sheffield_lad

chucknorris wrote: »

Don't mix me up with some complaining lefty, I merely stated the facts. You and the white horse are total commies compared to me.

But I'm sure not going to refuse the pension scheme on offer in the public sector, are you saying that would?

No I agree I would snatch their hand off but I also recognise that the world and pensions have changed and teachers whinging about their pensions really should have a look at the real world and what others sometimes have to forfeit yet they subsidise PS workers.

What you have contributed in the past is safe but complaining about future contributions is crazy.

If teachers don't want the deal its simple go out and get a personal pension see how that figures in fact use it in a maths lesson lol.

sheffield_lad

jem16 wrote: »

I don't have any problem with the changes. They are necessary.

We agree so why have the NUTters claimed it as part of their strike action?

If people have no pension provision they only have themselves to blame. What was to stop them contributing to a pension? Many simply say they cannot afford it. I couldn't afford it either to begin with. However I sacrificed other things to afford it.

I agree and most won't know they contribute to yours (I bet they go past piping the picket line lol. but sit them down and say that although they won't have a pension they are not only contributing too much to someone else's they are also contributing more as no one dare adjust it for fear of strikes.


If the private sector cannot stick up for themselves, they only have themselves to blame. Why should it be a race to the bottom? .

Its not a race to the bottom its what can be afforded. What really makes me mad is you guys (teachers), are intelligent folk, don't tell me you think the old scheme was workable

chucknorris

howee wrote: »

No I agree I would snatch their hand off but I also recognise that the world and pensions have changed and teachers whinging about their pensions really should have a look at the real world and what others sometimes have to forfeit yet they subsidise PS workers.

What you have contributed in the past is safe but complaining about future contributions is crazy.

If teachers don't want the deal its simple go out and get a personal pension see how that figures in fact use it in a maths lesson lol.

I don't think that you could teach me anything about the value of the public sector pensions, my wife is an actuary and I can work it out without her help. I know what value it is, why do you think I am paying for additional contributions at the rate of over £25,500 per year.

I have worked in the private sector most of my life, but not only that I have built 3 businesses up from scratch (sold two of them). By the way I am a university lecturer (not school teacher).