Police Pension changes

jamesd

It's not the general population but "4,600 healthy Norwegians between 20 and 90 years". You're right that exercise would help but that still leaves estimates in the 15-25% range of people who could not reach the standard at some point before normal retirement age.

This isn't an unsolvable problem but the government approach seems to be trying to ignore the effect of age on ability to do the job and pretend that it doesn't exist instead of actually dealing with it. It's really hard for me to see there being so many people in that age range who are both trying and who could not be reassigned to well managed teams where enough of the team members could handle the higher physical workload aspects.

ger2000

jamesd wrote: »

It's not the general population but "4,600 healthy Norwegians between 20 and 90 years". You're right that exercise would help but that still leaves estimates in the 15-25% range of people who could not reach the standard at some point before normal retirement age.

This isn't an unsolvable problem but the government approach seems to be trying to ignore the effect of age on ability to do the job and pretend that it doesn't exist instead of actually dealing with it. It's really hard for me to see there being so many people in that age range who are both trying and who could not be reassigned to well managed teams where enough of the team members could handle the higher physical workload aspects.

For those people in this thread who believe that police officers can work effectively up to 60 doing night shifts protecting the public and there property are clueless. I am 50 and a serving officer, I can go at 55 and will do so as this was what I signed up to. I work in the east end of Glasgow and if you think this is doable then you are sadly wrong. If you have the misfortune to require the police in a real time in need then you better hope that no 60 year old copper turns up as you will probably need to get your hands dirty! Have a look at your parents and ask the question? Could they? As far as the pension, i am in the old pension and that was part of the terms i signed up for, so pay up as promised.

jamesd

No doubt at all that younger people are better at some things. What does your force do about this, just ignore it or try to assign people based on the work they can sensibly be best at doing? Wondering whether you're getting the same sort of ignore physical capability and age silliness as the fire brigade people are getting?

ger2000

jamesd wrote: »

No doubt at all that younger people are better at some things. What does your force do about this, just ignore it or try to assign people based on the work they can sensibly be best at doing? Wondering whether you're getting the same sort of ignore physical capability and age silliness as the fire brigade people are getting?

James, age and gender has no bearing on what you are expected to do. You are a Police officer, full stop. As a ex member of the armed forces(23 years) I am full aware of that physical ability is essential to carry out your duties. I cant speak for the fire brigade. I am only putting a point across at 60 it is in no one interest that have cops out and about at this age.As for the pension, it is no doubt a good one, but one that is available to most if they want it.

jamesd

Thanks. The fire brigade's union says that there aren't enough spots for the older people who couldn't qualify. What do you recon the situation with the police is, if the forces were actually to try to move people around to places where there was less need for physicality? Any chance of that being viable?

ger2000

jamesd wrote: »

Thanks. The fire brigade's union says that there aren't enough spots for the older people who couldn't qualify. What do you recon the situation with the police is, if the forces were actually to try to move people around to places where there was less need for physicality? Any chance of that being viable?

In the past this may have happened, however the thought going forward is if you are not fit to do the job, eventually you will lose your job.

Orwell

I think the idea that no other work is possible after age 55 is simply wrong. Why should the taxpayer pay for them to sit around when many other jobs are possible and in fact they can be quite highly sought after (for example in private security firms). We can't afford to have perfectly capable people being paid to be idle from age 50 or 55. Or do you want to have both a pension and another job?

These pensions are still amazing compared to what the taxpayers have for themselves. The national debt for public sector staff pensions is over £1 TRILLION already.

greenglide

The national debt for public sector staff pensions is over £1 TRILLION already.

I don't think ALL of the national debt can be blamed on public sector pensions!

Andy_L

Orwell wrote: »

The national debt for public sector staff pensions is over £1 TRILLION already.

but spread over ~80 years and only true if you ignore the changes to the schemes and make some implausible assumptions about pay rises & career progression in the public sector (eg every nurse becomes a matron, every civil servant a Sir Humphry)

Orwell

greenglide wrote: »

I don't think ALL of the national debt can be blamed on public sector pensions!

Let me re-phrase, the cost of the public sector pensions liability is over £1 trillion.