worst pension ever

whitesatin

atush wrote: »

Ok, at least you admit you are happy with your pension. That is the main thing.

Sounded to me like you were complaining about it?

Do enjoy your retirement, and maybe visit the staff room and tell them how happy you are. Maybe more will stay in the pension, or even join it if they have not.

The teachers my boys had in primary school all retired at 55, but were still at the school teaching immediately after on contract as supply/temporary replacements. So they were still in the staff room.

Anyway, this has been entertaining as usual.

I am off to mark papers lol

I really do enjoy retirement and being able to spend time on hobbies etc. My grandchildren came along shortly after my retirement and I moved house to be near them. I look after them a lot and enjoy teaching them things now. I really miss the students with special needs and when my grandchildren start school, I will probably do some voluntary teaching. Because I moved from one area to another, I no longer have contact with my old schools.

hyubh

atush wrote: »

Why is it funny exactly?

Surely an educator of the educators doesn't need things spelt out? You commented 'I think we can already assume it is not Maths nor Economics. Is there Socialist studies now lol?' I suggest Googling for what the acronym LOL stands for if you don't actually know.

Dragonista

rob404uk wrote: »

I would still be a teacher if I had to pay 20%, but really in my eyes it is a stealthy pay cut.

I choose to pay more than 20% of my income into a pension and I earn less than a newly qualified teachers salary. I see it as an investment in my future, though that 23% would be greatly appreciated day to day!

It does suck that they changed the retirement age though!

GhIFA

I would still be a teacher if I had to pay 20%, but really in my eyes it is a stealthy pay cut.

You're putting a bit more money away to give yourself a comfortable standard of living when you retire. The cost of being able to do this has increased though, so you need to pay a bit more towards it, both in terms of the contributions now, and the way you take the benefits later.

If I put some in another pension could I be guaranteed a payoff at the age of 60 where the only way I would not get it would be if the provider defaulted?

Well, you can use another pension where you will be able to take benefits at any point after the age of 55, but there will be no guarantees other than you won't get the same level of benefit for the contribution you are paying as you do now.

Probably posted out of annoyance but it does seem unfair, it was part of the deal. Nothing stopped others to become teachers or other professions with well regarded pensions

That's very true, and many did - but a lot of those schemes in the private sector have now disappeared as they have become less and less affordable for the sponsoring employer (In 1997, just under half of all employees were in Final Salary schemes, by 2010 this had fallen to less than a third of employees).

Everyone here Must read the sun

No, we just have an understanding of pensions and how they work.

Nobody likes to see their benefits change, and I can understand the frustration, but you will still have a very good pension when you retire, and certainly better than many.

tony4147

My wife is a Teacher, and quite frankly when it comes to pensions they don't know how lucky they are, it might not be as good as it once was but it is way, way better than what the average person can get in the private sector.
I put hundreds into a pension every month and have absolutely no guarantees as to what it will eventually pay out, and if the stock market crashes then so does my pension.

There was an article the other day in a paper where a Police Officer retired at 48 after 30 years of service and was getting a pension of 2/3 of his final salary which was £40K, not bad after 30 years and only 48 y/o is it?
The article pointed out that a person in the private sector would have needed to contribute £3K/month for 30 years to get the same payout at 48 y/o.
would love to have a spare £3K/month to put into a pension

GillyR-J

atush wrote: »

How refreshing Gilly.

But we really do understand and are not w/o sympathy how those not at or near retirement can be upset their pensions are not quite as gold plated as before. I realize it is upsetting, but we do expect educators to have a basic grasp of the reason behind the changes.

Look the issues of pensions in teaching and public sector has always been somewhat controversial. I was not happy to see colleagues leaving the profession at aged fifty in good health (in 1990s) with enhanced pensions which they used to buy houses in France and go off on extended cruises.It just seemed so unfair to those who had no proper pension and was at great cost to our national coffers.
Equally there are women sat in school staff rooms now in their late fifties who expected to retire at 60 and are embittered that they must work on until they are 67.
I decided that rather than seeing this extension to my working life as a drudge I would see it as an opportunity and go and retrain for something completely different releasing some of my lump sum to pay for it and I consider myself extremely fortunate to be able to do this. Age is now no barrier and providing I keep in good health I would like to work part-time and not claim state pension until my mid seventies.
How ever for those who have just entered teaching and other public sector jobs they need to be making provision for their retirements now. The younger you are when starting AVCs or other additional plans the cheaper it is and the more you get...the difference is you will have to be a little less reliant on the state to goldplate pensions in future and in our current economic climate ..that is how it has to be.

hyubh

tony4147 wrote: »

There was an article the other day in a paper where a Police Officer retired at 48 after 30 years of service and was getting a pension of 2/3 of his final salary

That'll be the 'old' 1987 scheme that was closed to new recruits in 2006 - the 2/3 after 30 years is there by design (the final ten years involves a double accrual). On the one hand employee rates have always been high for the 1987 scheme (curently they are 13.5%-14%); on the other hand though, nowhere near do they even approach covering the benefits earned.

The article pointed out that a person in the private sector would have needed to contribute £3K/month for 30 years to get the same payout at 48 y/o.

While it's still generous, the 2006 police scheme definitely isn't as absurdly so as the 1987 one (see here: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/homepage-police.htm).

wakeupalarm

tony4147 wrote: »

There was an article the other day in a paper where a Police Officer retired at 48 after 30 years of service and was getting a pension of 2/3 of his final salary which was £40K, not bad after 30 years and only 48 y/o is it?
The article pointed out that a person in the private sector would have needed to contribute £3K/month for 30 years to get the same payout at 48 y/o.
would love to have a spare £3K/month to put into a pension

This was the article I think you were referring to http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/blog/2013/apr/27/pensions-system-failed-what-answer

To enjoy the same good fortune in a DC scheme you would have had to somehow save around £1.5m between the ages of 18 and 48 – or about £3,000 every month. Do you know any 18-year-olds doing that?

Sadly, the median amount of money held in a pension fund is just £53,000, only enough to buy an income of £2,700 a year at 65.

Perelandra

wakeupalarm wrote: »

This was the article I think you were referring to http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/blog/2013/apr/27/pensions-system-failed-what-answer

That's quite a low growth-rate assumed there- £1.5m after 30 years would imply about 2% real growth per year. Increasing it to 4%, for example, would reduce the monthly investment needed to a little over £2,000.

Admittedly, still a large sum!

wakeupalarm

The 2% is the percentage in addition to inflation suggesting a return of above 5% per annum. What was the average inflation rate over the last 30 years? and what is it likely to be over the next 30 years?

5% seems realistic under the current low inflation environment, 4%+ inflation should be achievable over the long term but with the wild swings we have seen over the last 10-15 years, the certainty of a FS scheme is still worth its weight in gold compared to hoping the stockmarket achieves 7%+ per annum over 30 years. You need a safety cushion just in case the market tanks in the last few years.

The article makes a good point about needing a middle way were up to a certain amount is Final Salary or Carer Average and the rest is dependant on how your contributions perform.