MPs 10% pay rise - snouts in the trough

zagubov

ggb1979 wrote: »

I guess the snp members are turning this down?

Pretty much.

What percentage of MPs lose their seats in each election?

chris_m

zagubov wrote: »

Pretty much.

What percentage of MPs lose their seats in each election?

Depends whether they were LibDem or not :rotfl:

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

Pretty much.

What percentage of MPs lose their seats in each election?

No, the SNP haven't turned the Westminster increase down: nor have the SNP rescinded the absurd salary of the Scotland's first minister or reduced the pay of Holyrood members.

They have all 100% accepted the increase in their (eventual) very generous pensions (arguably more value that this years salary).

Temporarily giving money to charity isn't the same as receiving a lower salary and a lower pension.

hugheskevi

but combined with increased retirement age & contributions and a change to career average from final salary.

Unlike the rest of the public sector, MP pension contribution rates have gone down, rather than increased (other than for members choosing to be in the 1/50ths or 1/60ths sections).

For members of the most generous 1/40ths section, the member contribution rate used to be 11.9%. In April 2012 there was a 1.85 percentage point increase, taking the contribution rate to 13.75%.

There were no further changes until the new scheme was introduced, with a contribution rate of 11.09%.

In other public sector schemes there were increases of, on average, 3.2 percentage points between 2012 and 2014, with contribution rates in the 2015 schemes set to raise the same amount as the 2014/15 rates would have raised.

Still, the old MPs scheme was very generous and the contribution rate is, as you say, only part of the story.

zagubov

CLAPTON wrote: »

No, the SNP haven't turned the Westminster increase down: nor have the SNP rescinded the absurd salary of the Scotland's first minister or reduced the pay of Holyrood members.

They have all 100% accepted the increase in their (eventual) very generous pensions (arguably more value that this years salary).

Temporarily giving money to charity isn't the same as receiving a lower salary and a lower pension.

I said pretty much , rather than yep.

Maybe they prefer to focus on attending parliament on behalf of the electorate, serving the public rather than wasting time exploring potentially obscure mechanisms of salary rescission on which possibly you are more expert than they are.

And Nicola's salary was established ultimately by ....the Labour Party!

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

I said pretty much , rather than yep.

Maybe they prefer to focus on attending parliament on behalf of the electorate, serving the public rather than wasting time exploring potentially obscure mechanisms of salary rescission on which possibly you are more expert than they are.

And Nicola's salary was established ultimately by ....the Labour Party!

so you think that all Westminster MPs shouldn't waste their time discussing the salary increase but spend their time focusing on their electorate ?

Did the SNP vote for the First minister's salary : yes or no would be honest and decent answer?

Can the SNP change the First ministers (and other Holyrood salaries)? yes or no would be a good answer.


or maybe the answer is that anything the SNP decide is, by definition, acceptable to you are a true acolyte of the chosen one.

obviously you accept that the pension increase will be fully accepted by all the SNP hypocrites, in the safe knowledge that the electorate is too stupid to notice.

Zero_Sum

TheBlueHorse wrote: »

the public sector don't just get the 1% salary increase. They also get another increase each year just for simply being there. Ok, the ones at the very top of their scale don't get it, but they are overpaid anyway.


Essentially, they are told, you have been here another 12 months and therefore here is more money irrespective of your performance. Oh, and btw, you get another 1% pay rise on top of that pay rise.


They've never had it so good (except when Brown was in charge)

So you make a claim, then admit it was rubbish?

As the public sector is shedding staff, and as such not recruiting much, most will already at top of their scale anyway.

Oh, and it's not a payrise, it's that they're paid less than the job is worth for the 1st few years while they lack the experience

paparossco

Eight years to reach a qualified staff nurse salary of £28.5K assuming they get through the foundation and final 'gateways' (no, it is not automatic).

CLAPTON

paparossco wrote: »

Eight years to reach a qualified staff nurse salary of £28.5K assuming they get through the foundation and final 'gateways' (no, it is not automatic).

does that mean a 26 year old will be earning more than the average wage?

paparossco

More like 29 or 30 depending if was a 3 or 4 year degree course they did. They will start at £21.8 at 21 or 22 assuming uni entry at 18.