Makes my blood boil

Muscle750

I just dont see why us in the private sector are on the negative side of our salary figure on retirement, yet there are alot in the public sector at ALL LEVELS, who will be better off than when they were working all off the back of ALL taxpayers including us. Because at the end of the day we are paying for both yours and ours yet you only pay for yours ...........That im afraid is where its all wrong. The governments over the years have done nothing to equalise this to make it fair mainly because they are the ones who will loose out along with the many thousands employed by them

chucknorris

Muscle750 wrote: »

I just dont see why us in the private sector are on the negative side of our salary figure on retirement, yet there are alot in the public sector at ALL LEVELS, who will be better off than when they were working all off the back of ALL taxpayers including us. Because at the end of the day we are paying for both yours and ours yet you only pay for yours ...........That im afraid is where its all wrong. The governments over the years have done nothing to equalise this to make it fair mainly because they are the ones who will loose out along with the many thousands employed by them

So why didn't you use the type of calculation below to compare total salary package, and switch to the public sector, in fact, why don't you do it right now? You could work for 15 years in the public sector, I built up a pension of approx £10,600 in less than 6.5 years.

chucknorris wrote: »

When I considered working as a lecturer, I worked out the value of the pension and realised that it made up for the shortfall in salary. The calculation was something like this:

1/60th salary = £713 pension earned (PA), which is worth a multiplier of about 28 when (this is subjective, it could ealiy be argued it is worth a multiplier of something like 33, but I use 28. 28 x £713 = £19,964 less the contribution of £4,364 (10.2% of salary, it used to be 6.4%, but lets stick with up to date figures) = £15,600 real term benefit (to me). As I said there is an element of subjectiveness about the selection of the multiplier) if someone used a multiplier of 33 the value would increase to £19,165. This is the type of calculation that people should use when comparing the salaries in public and private sector.

If it is because you just didn't realise this, you are not alone, I turned down the chance to switch to lecturing in 1999 (11 years before I actually started) because I considered the salary was too low, at the time I didn't realise that the overall salary package was probably very similar (in fact probably better, because back then in 1999 you could take your full pension at 60). But I don't blame PS workers for my lack of knowledge (at the time), I blame myself for not being fully aware.

GunJack

Muscle750 wrote: »

I just dont see why us in the private sector are on the negative side of our salary figure on retirement, yet there are alot in the public sector at ALL LEVELS, who will be better off than when they were working all off the back of ALL taxpayers including us. Because at the end of the day we are paying for both yours and ours yet you only pay for yours

utter, utter tosh I'm afraid, you really ought to get your facts right before basing an argument on them..

OldBeanz

"This compared to just £24,000 for private sector workers, many of whom have never bothered to prepare for their retirement."

I think the Mail article is true in at least one respect which might explain this thread.

chucknorris

OldBeanz wrote: »

"This compared to just £24,000 for private sector workers, many of whom have never bothered to prepare for their retirement."

I think the Mail article is true in at least one respect which might explain this thread.

Did you forget to show a link to that article, or have I overlooked it from another post (I did have a quick look)?

hyubh

chucknorris wrote: »

Well 'techically' (see below) you have a point, but this thread is about public sector pensions, and the TPS (teachers pension scheme) is a public sector pension.

Presumably you're talking about your personal situation...? Because depending on its history, a university might offer the TPS, LGPS, USS, and/or its own (e.g. SAUL).

By the by, making a clearcut distinction between public and private sector with university pensions is pretty hopeless. The USS is in itself a private sector scheme and the LGPS a public sector one, no doubt about that... and yet when FRS17 came in (the accounting standard that brought pension liabilities properly onto the balance sheet for 'private sector' organisations), universities managed to wangle an exemption for their USS liabilities, treating them like their unfunded TPS ones (all that goes on the balance sheet are the contributions paid). However, the rationale used didn't apply to the LGPS, which meant a university's LGPS liability does get treated in a properly 'private sector' manner.

chucknorris

hyubh wrote: »

Presumably you're talking about your personal situation...?

Yes I am. But I think that you are missing the point, the discussion is really about DB pensions (which perhaps incorrectly have been labeled as PS pensions), so on that you probably have a point. But I honestly can't be bothered to debate that, absolutely no offence meant, it is just that I think I would lose the will to live, if I had to discuss that particular issue. I really don't care that some universities have private sector DB schemes.

p00hsticks

Muscle750 wrote: »

there are alot in the public sector at ALL LEVELS, who will be better off than when they were working.

Can you please provide a link/source to support this ?

agarnett

chucknorris wrote: »

Yes I am. But I think that you are missing the point, the discussion is really about DB pensions (which perhaps incorrectly have been labeled as PS pensions), so on that you probably have a point. But I honestly can't be bothered to debate that, absolutely no offence meant, it is just that I think I would lose the will to live, if I had to discuss that particular issue. I really don't care that some universities have private sector DB schemes.

Isn't that the issue? So even, dog eat dog perhaps?

If having read you, I was to try to interpret by putting words back in your mouth to see if you agree they fit: "For the last part of my working life, I've decided to be a university lecturer qualifying me for perhaps 10 year's worth of a gold-plated (gilt) type fairly bombproof (if UK plc remains suspended on the usual hot air) UK government guaranteed DB pension scheme, to add to my previous much larger pension accumulations, but I really don't care about other university lecturers who have ended up in what is effectively an unsafe private sector DB scheme ..."?

If so, isn't that too easily extrapolated beyond the limited context of university employment to imply "I don't care about anyone in the private sector whose pension is less of a reward to them than mine is to me, and nor do I care that it mine is overly generous to the point that the rest of society will actually be shouldering the burden of it due to an unintended national anomaly, because indeed I made a deliberate position to place myself in that position"?

GibbsRule_No3

p00hsticks wrote: »

Can you please provide a link to support this ?

Must admit I will be. Lowest rung of admin Civil Service when I started work 45 years ago at age 17. Did not even know when I started work that it was going to be Civil Service, but was always told the reason my pay was less than I could get in the "outside world" was because they were paying into a pension for me. 25 years later we became semi privatised but under TUPE, so the company had to provide another final salary pension on a par with the CS one. When my state pension kicks in at 65 yrs 9 months I will probably, just be better off per month than I am now working. Will it be worth being paid less than "outside" for 49 years or not, will depend on how long I live for. Would I have paid as much into a pension "outside"? No! I'm sure like the majority of people I would not. I just get "Jam tomorrow" and only appreciate it now. New rules now for new starters and I am shocked that so many are not taking out pensions, other than the minimum the "auto enrolment" demands. They want the money now.