Civil Servant for 23+ years yet no pension?

Colin297

Tromking wrote: »

I`ll make this my last post in defence of decent pensions in the public sector as uknick is right as regards the off topic nature of recent comments on this thread.


Again, your comments are heavy on rhetoric rather than balanced and reasonable. If your argument is that pensions in the private sector have gotten so bad, that those in public sector need to be as bad, then I can`t really argue against that logic can I?
In my area of the Civil Service, the intrusion of the private sector has reached a bit of a crisis point. It would appear that the privateers aren't as good as some would have you believe and in a couple of cases their penchant for embezzling taxpayers money is truly shocking.
The changes you talk of will never happen in certain public services in my opinion, simply because unless the package is decent then the goodwill and quality people the state needs to do the 'down and dirty' things on our behalf, wont get done or not to the standard we expect.

People benefiting from the public sector's over compensation should just be happy with it. I mean, fair play to whoever gets a lumpy pension above their market value.

My gripe is where people try to justify it by using mantras that include terms like 'deserve' and 'fair' all the while ignoring the irrefutable fact that the public sector is renumerated substantially above its true market value. The other fact that has to be conceded is that not only do the private sector not enjoy insulation from such market forces but it literally funds the public sector. Therefore, it is a little audacious for a public sector civil servant insult a private sector employee's intelligent by saying things like 'so WE should be expected to have a crap pension because you in the real market have to?'. Just think about it.

Facts are facts. People have to be honest with theirselves. I would have no hesitation of taking a 6 figure salary and amazing pension from the public sector if it was offered. I wouldn't be ashamed or defensive in any way. I would call a spade a spade and would still sympathise with people not as fotunate in the private sector. I certainly wouldn't antagonise them

BobQ

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.

Glad you are sorted! Hope the debate on related issues has not put you off. Thanks for inadvertently stimulating a lively debate.

BobQ

bigadaj wrote: »

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

.

Fair comment, must pay more attention!

As a general rule I do not read 5 pages of comments just to see if its worth commenting on. Its not required you know:cool:

hugheskevi

My gripe is where people try to justify it by using mantras that include terms like 'deserve' and 'fair' all the while ignoring the irrefutable fact that the public sector is renumerated substantially above its true market value.

My gripe is when people over-simplify irrefutable facts and say public sector is either over or under remunerated when the facts are clear that it is a mixed picture depending on a variety of factors including age, location and responsibility level.

Agree about the 'fair' point though - never understand why some people believe that just because they perceive something as fair, other people should too. Far too often a statement is finished with 'because it is fair' as though that is a definitive, argument winning point and anyone who thinks this subjective view-point isn't obvious and 'right' is a blithering idiot.

The other fact that has to be conceded is that not only do the private sector not enjoy insulation from such market forces but it literally funds the public sector.

There is some validity to this, but this argument would suggest that if you privatised the NHS the work of doctors and nurses would change from being a burden on the private sector to instead be making a valuable contribution to fund public services. That would be despite the same workers doing the same job for the same reward and helping the same people.

Facts are facts.

Indeed. Statistics can be cited which will support both sides of any argument, so it is important to understand the nuances of evidence and interpret it correctly.

Simply asserting the entire public services are remunerated above their true market value without citing any reliable study or segmenting even by work sector is painting with a spectacularly large brush.

BobQ

Yopu make some fair points but I would dispute this......

Colin297 wrote: »

..................... while ignoring the irrefutable fact that the public sector is renumerated substantially above its true market value.

Saving it does not make it true. Peddling averages as fact is not helpful. The facts do support the idea that some lower skilled admin jobs in the regions get paid above market rates. But for many professional public sector jobs the pay is less than the private sector.

For example, a nurse working for BUPA gets paid more than an NHS nurse. Are you saying that an NHS consultant is overpaid? What does the private sector pay a consultant surgeon?

Averages conceal the fact that a lot of low skilled jobs have now been outsourced and those that remain have a much higher proportion of professionally qualified staff (scientists, engineers, actuaries, doctors, etc). The average pay in McDonalds is less than the MOD because the MOD employ more highly skilled people. Not a criticism of McDonalds staff but a fact.

alexanderalexander

It sounds like the OP has been helped, so I will continue with the general conversation. Two points:

1. It may be true that at lower skill levels public sector has a better overall remuneration package than the private sector. However, the higher up the scale you go in terms of skill the more the balance tips the other way. To take an extreme example, the Chief Exec of a FTSE 100 company gets paid on average £4.4m a year. There will be good handful of public sector workers with an equivalently high level of responsibility, but I am absolutely certain that none of them get paid more than a fraction of that.

2. If the public sector does pay its staff at the bottom of the pecking order better than the private sector, how is that a bad thing? It shouldn't be a race to the bottom between public and private sectors to see who can screw over their most junior staff the most. Paying the people at the bottom better could make sense more broadly for the public sector, as if they paid less the slack would have to be picked up by housing benefit etc. and means tested retirement benefits -- which would throw the cost back at the taxpayer again.

atush

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.

And why are you hijacking the thread?

Too may PS workers come here to complain, insult and justify their malingering.

Criticizing some of the above posts was required.

None of us have anything but Good will to the OP.

Who has EARNED their pension. but was nearly denied it, by Public service workers who either don't know how to do their job, don't care about their job or are simply incompetent.

Thank goodness they were able to prove they had a pension at all thanks to some here. This is what MSE does best

BobQ

atush wrote: »

And why are you hijacking the thread?

Too may PS workers come here to complain, insult and justify their malingering.

Criticizing some of the above posts was required.

None of us have anything but Good will to the OP.

Who has EARNED their pension. but was nearly denied it, by Public service workers who either don't know how to do their job, don't care about their job or are simply incompetent.

Thank goodness they were able to prove they had a pension at all thanks to some here. This is what MSE does best

I agree that the purpose of the thread was to help the OP as it should be. I was not one of those who hijacked the thread, in fact I did not realise the thread existed until the help had been provided and the debate had moved on. The thread had already been hijacked so I fail to see why I cannot comment on the issues as you did in the second line above?

Your criticism of the pensions administrators may be valid but neither of us know. They have to provide accurate information based on the records that exist. There are many private sector organisations like insurance company's that will deny your insurance, life cover, etc if you do not provide accurate information to prove your entitlement. Is this any different? When the OP found more detailed information (with help from people on this forum ) she got the right response.


Its clearly impossible to know what sort of posters come on here and what are their motives. You say they are malingering but how the hell do you know?

We have seen an unprecedented level of anti- PS bile in the past few years apparently because they are receiving a good pension. I once worked in the public sector doing a job that actually saved lives and put me at some risk. People doing that job today are called "pen pushers" by people on this forum. No wonder PS workers push back.

Annie1960

atush wrote: »

Who has EARNED their pension. but was nearly denied it, by Public service workers who either don't know how to do their job, don't care about their job or are simply incompetent.

The truth is probably that, owing to constant political tinkering, many public sector workers have to re-apply for their jobs every couple of years or so, in the context of re-structuring. This means that paperwork falls between the gaps or gets lost as people and teams get moved around, which often includes moves between different locations. The physical moving of files etc is contracted out to the private sector. In one of my moves, I labelled all the stuff on my desk and filing cabinets clearly as instructed, and the whole lot went missing, due to the private sector company that moved it.

atush

We have seen an unprecedented level of anti- PS bile in the past few years apparently because they are receiving a good pension.

There was no anti public service bile about people getting the pensions they had earned.

Where you find bile is, when they come here and whine they are being ripped off, and when they strike even though they still have gold standard PS pensions.

We support those in the public service who support us. And we like to see them get what they have earned as in the OPs case.