Civil Servant for 23+ years yet no pension?

mgdavid

[QUOTE=Tromking;64937389......._slash_and_burn_doesn't_get_the_job_done.[/QUOTE]

perhaps it gets rid of the jobs that don't need doing ;-)

kidmugsy

hugheskevi wrote: »

(b) Higher paid/more senior public sector workers are remunerated far below private sector comparable positions

(c) Lower paid/more junior public sector workers are remunerated above comparable private sector positions.

I have lately seen just the same conclusion advanced for Federal employees in the US.

When you get to the level of employees of some US cities, the scale of the rip-off of taxpayers by such outfits as Police and Fire is jaw-dropping. They even make the BMA look like poor negotiators.

jac29

To all of you who at the beginning of this thread who were kind enough to offer me help... I just wanted to let you know that I received an email from mycsp today saying i was on 'penserver' but that DWP HR had not sent the form EF430 on my resignation. Mycsp will contact them and once the necessary form has been submitted I will be posted details of my preserved entitlement. This is a huge weight off my shoulders and to those of you who were there for me, a sincere thank you.

atush

Excellent news!

Let us know the final situation when you finally hear.

I am sure the first page or so will help anyone else in your situation in future.

xylophone

This is a huge weight off my shoulders and to those of you who were there for me, a sincere thank you.

Glad to hear the news :j- it shows the value of a forum like this!

Neasy

jac29 wrote: »

To all of you who at the beginning of this thread who were kind enough to offer me help... I just wanted to let you know that I received an email from mycsp today saying i was on 'penserver' but that DWP HR had not sent the form EF430 on my resignation. Mycsp will contact them and once the necessary form has been submitted I will be posted details of my preserved entitlement. This is a huge weight off my shoulders and to those of you who were there for me, a sincere thank you

I am so glad - I have been thinking about you.

BobQ

bigadaj wrote: »

No, just want a fair and transparent system.

Like gadget my experience of public sector working has been quite depressing, there are very good and committed people but there are also huge numbers working inefficiently with the knowledge that however useless they are there is no possibility of their job being threatened.

As I've said before I don't understand why all jobs aren't quoted stating the value of all benefits included, transparency and openness is the best disinfectant. There would be debate about exact valuations but the true value of defined benefit pensions would be more easily explained and acknowledged hopefully by public sector workers. Many appear not to realise the true cost or benefit, and being told they are actually paid say 25% more than they thought might be a nice surprise!

Why can't people help the poster rather than make political points like this in para 1?

To be fair to the OP, in the days when she worked as an AA the employers contribution to the pension was nominally calculated to be about 8%. True, over the years the % has increased an 25% is a fair value today. My point was that at the time nobody in work knew that.

I recall that in those days when I worked in the public sector, my private sector friends often told me I was stupid to work for a lower salary when their jobs not only paid more but had a better pension based on an ever growing pension fund (albeit with it requiring more of contribution) I was stupid enough to believe them, and had I needed to rely on occupational pensions in retirement I would not be a happy bunny.

That raises another point. In those days, the nominal 8% was roughly the difference between the lower civil service pay and the private sector equivalent. I accept that public sector salaries are now similar to private sector ones (in a true like for like comparison of similar skills).

You make a valid point in the second paragraph, but surely this is true of any job, that you must consider the wider benefits of working for the firm apart from pay (leave, pension quality, pension contributions, sickness policy, flexible working, company car, subsidised purchases from the employer, etc). There may be people never do this but I have always considered this. I recall when I was paying 12% mortgage my friend had a mortgage of 3% from his employer.

But the OP should not have to apologise for taking the pension that was on offer. The Government thought that it was so efficient to pay for civil service pensions from employing people at lower salaries and saving the administrative costs of having a real pension fund.

Criticising civil servants as malingerers (as some have done) is so unfair. There are many dedicated people in the public sector (as there are in the private sector) who work very hard. Equally there are still some jobs in the public sector that are of dubious value, but this is also true of the private sector.

BobQ

Tromking wrote: »

I joined my area of the public sector as a 21 year old and akin with most others I knew the pension was good but probably didn't comprehend how good it has turned out to be, especially when you compare it with those on offer in the private sector I guess. Although not true in every case I think you need to factor in the stressful nature of some public sector professions and the fact that unless the terms and conditions are decent then recruitment and more importantly staff retention becomes problematic.The big test of your argument and the recent reforms to public sector pensions will be when large-scale recruitment begins again. I have a fear that the package on offer to would-be public servants in the future will not be sufficient to sustain the quality of public services we`ve been used to. Only time will tell.

Your final point is important. Efficiency comes from employing good quality senior managers to set the tone. The retiring Sir Humphreys of this world are still being spurred on by having a low salary (by industry standards) but an exceptional FS pension based on that salary that encourages loyalty and commitment.

In 10 years time an unexceptional career average salary pension scheme will see high flying middle ranking civil servants leave for really well paid executive roles in industry. They will be replaced by those executives who cannot make the grade in industry, or who want a little experience of the public sector. They will not be impressed by the career average pensions without much higher salaries.

Annie1960

jac29 wrote: »

To all of you who at the beginning of this thread who were kind enough to offer me help... I just wanted to let you know that I received an email from mycsp today saying i was on 'penserver' but that DWP HR had not sent the form EF430 on my resignation. Mycsp will contact them and once the necessary form has been submitted I will be posted details of my preserved entitlement. This is a huge weight off my shoulders and to those of you who were there for me, a sincere thank you.

Great news. I thought it would just be something like that.

bigadaj

BobQ wrote: »

Why can't people help the poster rather than make political points like this in para 1?

To be fair to the OP, in the days when she worked as an AA the employers contribution to the pension was nominally calculated to be about 8%. True, over the years the % has increased an 25% is a fair value today. My point was that at the time nobody in work knew that.

I recall that in those days when I worked in the public sector, my private sector friends often told me I was stupid to work for a lower salary when their jobs not only paid more but had a better pension based on an ever growing pension fund (albeit with it requiring more of contribution) I was stupid enough to believe them, and had I needed to rely on occupational pensions in retirement I would not be a happy bunny.

That raises another point. In those days, the nominal 8% was roughly the difference between the lower civil service pay and the private sector equivalent. I accept that public sector salaries are now similar to private sector ones (in a true like for like comparison of similar skills).

You make a valid point in the second paragraph, but surely this is true of any job, that you must consider the wider benefits of working for the firm apart from pay (leave, pension quality, pension contributions, sickness policy, flexible working, company car, subsidised purchases from the employer, etc). There may be people never do this but I have always considered this. I recall when I was paying 12% mortgage my friend had a mortgage of 3% from his employer.

But the OP should not have to apologise for taking the pension that was on offer. The Government thought that it was so efficient to pay for civil service pensions from employing people at lower salaries and saving the administrative costs of having a real pension fund.

Criticising civil servants as malingerers (as some have done) is so unfair. There are many dedicated people in the public sector (as there are in the private sector) who work very hard. Equally there are still some jobs in the public sector that are of dubious value, but this is also true of the private sector.

So why drag up a post from ten days and several pages ago?

If you'd read my other posts I've been just as critical of private sector inefficiencies in banking for example, my preference is for an open and transparent system that works efficiently for everyone and primarily the taxpayer.

It's looking like my next job will be in a local government out sourced position, or at least working with people who have come from local government. It'll be interesting to see whether my views are changed by this experience, or not.