Public Sector Pension Reform In Trouble?

zaax

Muscle750 wrote: »

The main problem is that for a long time the public sector pensions have promised big returns and i certainly dont see any retired ex public sector workers i know struggling to make ends meet i know of at least two that have stated they are better off from their pension income than they would be if they had carried on working. Now finally someone has suddenly realised these gold plate pensions are unsubstainable end of. Plus of course the employer ie the tax payer in the public sector are ploughing far higher percentages into workers pensions contributions every month My private sector pension in comparison is nothing compared to the gold plate public sector pensions which ive along with everyone else in the private sector have paid for. And as soon as somebody tries to change the public sector why do you think they all throw the toys out the pram , We have our FS scheme ripped from under our feet in 2007 since then weve been in a DC scheme which is looking like loose change. With a miserly 5% paid by employer.

I don't call 10K a year gold plated, maybe you should have looked harder.

Also the reason Brexit is shambles is because they can't recruit / keep talented staff. New staff with degrees are being paid £25 or less. When they see they friends from uni getting jobs in private industry who are on £35 + lots of benefits, guess how quickly they leave

hyubh

zaax wrote: »

I don't call 10K a year gold plated, maybe you should have looked harder.

The 'gold plating' refers to the index linking and statutory guarantees of the pensions being paid, which are undeniable. That said, the 10K will also be very good compared to the pay and service it relates to, compared to what the same pay and service would get you in the typical private sector DC scheme.

Also the reason Brexit is shambles is because they can't recruit / keep talented staff. New staff with degrees are being paid £25 or less. When they see they friends from uni getting jobs in private industry who are on £35 + lots of benefits, guess how quickly they leave

Quite possibly, and partly because the public sector employer's hands are tied in what renumeration package they can offer - being as it is highly unbalanced between pension rights and take-home pay, compared to contemporary private sector norms.

PS - I wouldn't worry about Muscle750, his wife has had a career in local government employment and so got an LGPS pension to match

Paul_Herring

zaax wrote: »

I don't call 10K a year gold plated, maybe you should have looked harder.

It most certainly is if the same length of service and pay in the private sector wouldn't acquire even half of that.

Tromking

Paul_Herring wrote: »

It most certainly is if the same length of service and pay in the private sector wouldn't acquire even half of that.

Traditionally some public sector roles are deemed quite onerous to carry out and to keep staff in post the generous part of their pay and conditions are sensibly payable on retirement.

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

As a taxpayer you should perhaps look at level of competence of the Government lawyers who no doubt signed off on this supposed reform. I recall the antics of the Cabinet Office to help push the changes through, the tactic was tap into the discontent of private sector workers and sow the seeds of the division you talk of.

See a huge waste of resources on a daily basis. Reform is an overdue word that unfortunately gets blocked by a collective cultural intransigence.

Tromking

Thrugelmir wrote: »

See a huge waste of resources on a daily basis. Reform is an overdue word that unfortunately gets blocked by a collective cultural intransigence.

The trick with this type of reform however is to make it lawful.
I wonder if those in the private sector who had their pensions destroyed would have been prepared at the time to pay Union subs to help fight their corner?
I believe the monthly subs for the FBU are circa £30 per month.

Tromking

Government loses its appeal and the FBU have won their case.
Back it goes to an Employment Tribunal for remedy.

https://www.fbu.org.uk/news/2019/06/27/firefighters%E2%80%99-union-wins-landmark-pensions-case

mapleoak

I have to confess I don't really understand the implications of this, other than the Government suggesting it could cost them £4bn. Is it that the pension contributions taken from Public sector workers has been too high, or does it only apply to a certain few?

liviboy

mapleoak wrote: »

I have to confess I don't really understand the implications of this, other than the Government suggesting it could cost them £4bn. Is it that the pension contributions taken from Public sector workers has been too high, or does it only apply to a certain few?

There were 2 parts to the Govts reasoning - the FBU and Judges both brought similar (but different) cases.

Essentially it is nothing to do with the contributions as such but the reforms were based on the age of the members as of some date in 2012 I believe as to whether they remained in, had transitional protection or were immediately kicked-out of their pension schemes and transferred into a career-average scheme.

It is essentially due to age discrimination that the case has went on.

If we are not allowed to discriminate on age then clearly the govt are also not allowed to do so when it comes to pension schemes.

The £4billion figure comes about as a ballpark for fixing this discrimination in ALL PS pension schemes that transitioned from final salary with a stated pension age to a career-average with a pension age which mirrored the state pension age. This includes the NHS, Teachers, Firefighters, Judges and a few others.

Ultimately, the CARE schemes were brought in as a money-saving tool for the Conservative/Lib Dem coalition govt and sadly for them they rushed through plans which have now been deemed discriminatory several times and the gov have finally been told they cannot appeal any further and must make things right.

mapleoak

Ahh I see (I think) - I was in the Classic scheme and then moved across to Alpha but I wasn’t moved immediately it was “tapered” so I moved after a couple of years. Presumably some were moved immediately with no protection - I suspect if it does cost £4bn the Government will simply insist on further changes as part of their next spending review to pay for it - you don’t get owt for nowt.