We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Efficiency in the public sector
Comments
-
But the conditions have to change as we all living longer. look at yours (and mine), state pensions. I was told retire at 65 now 68 and I know as I get closer it will/may be 70+ I accept it as I know that's how it might have to be.
Your lucky in a way as anything accrued so far is safe and you have had a 5yr bonus when Labour bottled it in 2008, but you cannot defend sticking with something unaffordable just because that's what you signed up to years ago.
You have been lucky for many years and have pension which very few not in the public sector will ever get so why not take what you have acquired and accept a new deal which will still be far better than the rest of us.
But it is changing.
The NHS for instance went through reform , started by labour, which first reduced terms and extended the retirement age - 2008 scheme. Employee contributions up to 10%.
Subsequent to that employee contributions have increased, payments starting this April again with terms being reduced.
On top of which their have been very limited , sub 1% increases for something over 6 years, for many, and this moratorium is being extended for 3/3(?) years from this point. So the actual pension payment liability is being eroded at the same time.
I don't see things abating either and I am sure that another bite will be taken by future governments."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »But it is changing.
but its a bit like the cuts its just not enough there needs to be a far bigger change or we end up with the taxpayer shelling out £14 billion to subsidise it.
Clapton, fair play to you for defending the PS then but I can't see how you see it rational to subsidise pensions to one part of the working population at the expense of workers who may have no or a very poor pension.0 -
but its a bit like the cuts its just not enough there needs to be a far bigger change or we end up with the taxpayer shelling out £14 billion to subsidise it.
Clapton, fair play to you for defending the PS then but I can't see how you see it rational to subsidise pensions to one part of the working population at the expense of workers who may have no or a very poor pension.
We shell out money in lots of different ways. We subsidise and waste money. I don't like the fact we guarantee to spend money on aid for instance or wars such as Afghanistan.
The fact that employees have contractual rights may have something to do with it."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »We shell out money in lots of different ways. We subsidise and waste money. I don't like the fact we guarantee to spend money on aid for instance.
The fact that employees have contractual rights may have something to do with it.
So why is different for PS workers? I worked for a company over 10yrs final salary scheme and when they told the workforce they could no longer afford it we understood. Not one strike, petition or anything it was obvious almost every final salary scheme has closed or had to change. We all knew the day was coming. No brainer.
I cannot understand why when its the tax payer its allowed to continue with muggings UK as the provider. Of course the reason is the PS is unionised and believes they are 'owed' a better pension than the rest of us.0 -
So why is different for PS workers? I worked for a company over 10yrs final salary scheme and when they told the workforce they could no longer afford it we understood. Not one strike, petition or anything it was obvious almost every final salary scheme has closed or had to change. We all knew the day was coming. No brainer.
I cannot understand why when its the tax payer its allowed to continue with muggings UK as the provider. Of course the reason is the PS is unionised and believes they are 'owed' a better pension than the rest of us.
All I said was it may have something to do with it.
No doubt successive governments have decided that the overall pay and rewards are justified in the round. They don't get any other benefits such SAYE share options, bonus schemes etc
They may be unionised but they get pitiful support when it comes to voting with low turnouts.
I don't know what the figures are but maybe the government couldn't sustain the outflow of up to 10% of employees funds, plus an employer contribution, to be taken out of the chancellors cashflow, if it were placed into a DC system outside the public purse.
I do not and have not worked in the PS BTW."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
but its a bit like the cuts its just not enough there needs to be a far bigger change or we end up with the taxpayer shelling out £14 billion to subsidise it.
Clapton, fair play to you for defending the PS then but I can't see how you see it rational to subsidise pensions to one part of the working population at the expense of workers who may have no or a very poor pension.
A pension is part of one's contract of employment. It's legally binding.
The public sector pensions are no more 'subsidised ' than is their salary: they are both part of the same salary package.
I respect the rule of law.
If the government wants to change the way pensions are earned in the future then fair enough; but to change the already accrued pension is unreasonable.
And, your specific suggestion is an ill thought out rant with no redeeming features.0 -
Maybe as private sector employees they may not feel they can throw sickies as easily?
What is the situation with the pensions do we rid the tax payer of having to subsidise these employees if so I hope they crack on and swap more out of the public sector.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297871/Cost-gold-plated-pensions-public-sector-workers-jump-60-years.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
But this figure is set to rocket to £14.1billion five years later in the year 2017/18, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility.
This is an increase of 58 per cent.
To make matters worse, this is not even the full cost to the taxpayer of paying the pensions of all retired public sector workers.
This maybe so but the PQ is about 2200 public sector employees being made redundant and then being re-employed in the same area of the public sector with redundancy pay and a continuing accumulation of pension as public sector employees.
There are others taken back as private sector contractors to do a similar job.
Neither really makes economic sense.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
A pension is part of one's contract of employment. It's legally binding.
The public sector pensions are no more 'subsidised ' than is their salary: they are both part of the same salary package.
I respect the rule of law.
If the government wants to change the way pensions are earned in the future then fair enough; but to change the already accrued pension is unreasonable.
And, your specific suggestion is an ill thought out rant with no redeeming features.
Difference is that if a private company fails, so does the pension. With public sector the taxpayer is forced to pick up the tab.0 -
Difference is that if a private company fails, so does the pension. With public sector the taxpayer is forced to pick up the tab.
wrong.................
http://www.pensionprotectionfund.org.uk/About-Us/Pages/About-Us.aspx0 -
Difference is that if a private company fails, so does the pension. With public sector the taxpayer is forced to pick up the tab.
True, but it is the taxpayer (through the Governments it has elected) that chose to fund its occupational pensions (and for that matter its state pension) out of current revenue. Had they created a fund as they did for the LGPS there would not be a problem. But why is it fair to blame existing and future pensioners for this liability?Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards