Why do we pay council workers Pension ???

Techno

Have to step in here as this Muscle750 really has no idea what he or she is talking about!

A huge number of the people who work for Local Government are on the minimum wage.
The people who cook your children's meals or support them in the classroom
The people who wipe your Granny' bottom because she can't care for herself any more
The people who make sure the leisure centres are open and run the holiday clubs
The cleaners to name but a few.

Then there are those who get paid a bit more but do you want to do their job? The road sweepers, the bin men, the Children's services social workers who experience the horrific circumstances some children survive in and can't get to sleep at night?

And there are other jobs which require a degree or other professional qualifications - are you expecting those people to be paid the same as someone in a low skill job?

And yes I used to work for a local council but now I work in the private sector and whilst salaries are beginning to equalise I get paid more for the equivalent job in the private sector so the pensions balance things out.

chiefie

Muscle750 wrote: »

The auto enrolment was in many peoples eyes only bought in to make us think that we werent so hard done by in relation to public sector pensions and to shut us up moaning..............maybe someone could explain why the employer contribution is set at such a low level compared to the public sector employer (tax payer) contribution. Those in the company that i work for who have autoenroled i believe are getting 1% from the company i only get 5% in the dc scheme now 11 years after our FS scheme was ripped from under our feet as i said in the public sector the CARE scheme they bought in was not alot more than a name change hoping those of us who had just lost out big time in the private sector losing our FS pensions wouldnt really notice And please dont tell me the Public sector salaries are well below ours ive never heard so much !!!!. Take people who work in supermarkets for example and all those on the min wage if the min wage was the norm in the public sector etc....................yes exactly.

Easy to rant on a forum. Share your views with your bin man next time they come round. Or if you are unlucky enough to go into care share them with your carer. Or pop into a school and tell the dinner ladies and the teaching assistants and the caretakers what you think of their contract of employment.

They had a choice you had a choice. You made yours they made theirs. And as for low levels at auto enrolment - that was to give employers and employees a chance to deal with a transition.

You don't want public sector employees to have db pensions because you don't have one.

In the coming years they will get phased out for sure anyway.

Why not target your anger at the multi nationals who pay little or no tax in our country whilst making massive profits. If they paid a fair level of corporation tax the U.K. would be in a healthy position.

Muscle750

Techno wrote: »

Have to step in here as this Muscle750 really has no idea what he or she is talking about!

A huge number of the people who work for Local Government are on the minimum wage.
The people who cook your children's meals or support them in the classroom
The people who wipe your Granny' bottom because she can't care for herself any more
The people who make sure the leisure centres are open and run the holiday clubs
The cleaners to name but a few.

Then there are those who get paid a bit more but do you want to do their job? The road sweepers, the bin men, the Children's services social workers who experience the horrific circumstances some children survive in and can't get to sleep at night?

And there are other jobs which require a degree or other professional qualifications - are you expecting those people to be paid the same as someone in a low skill job?

And yes I used to work for a local council but now I work in the private sector and whilst salaries are beginning to equalise I get paid more for the equivalent job in the private sector so the pensions balance things out.

Yes they are paid at the lower end however the employer contribution to their pension is alot higher than it would be if they worked in the private sector all we ask for is fairness which we havent got as it stands

Muscle750

chiefie wrote: »

Easy to rant on a forum. Share your views with your bin man next time they come round. Or if you are unlucky enough to go into care share them with your carer. Or pop into a school and tell the dinner ladies and the teaching assistants and the caretakers what you think of their contract of employment.

They had a choice you had a choice. You made yours they made theirs. And as for low levels at auto enrolment - that was to give employers and employees a chance to deal with a transition.

You don't want public sector employees to have db pensions because you don't have one.

In the coming years they will get phased out for sure anyway.

Why not target your anger at the multi nationals who pay little or no tax in our country whilst making massive profits. If they paid a fair level of corporation tax the U.K. would be in a healthy position.

Love it my wifes a teaching assistant and her last pension statement made mine look like loose change and she only does 30 hours pw classed as FT.

Tromking

Now is the time If anyone fancies a 'gold plated' public sector pension.
There are many public sector roles struggling to recruit and retain staff. Take the Prison Service for example, we are at the start of a major recruitment campaign, 400 have completed initial training so far this year, although approx. 100 of those have left already!
Must be the fantastic pension on offer!

ffacoffipawb

Tromking wrote: »

Now is the time If anyone fancies a 'gold plated' public sector pension.
There are many public sector roles struggling to recruit and retain staff. Take the Prison Service for example, we are at the start of a major recruitment campaign, 400 have completed initial training so far this year, although approx. 100 of those have left already!
Must be the fantastic pension on offer!

Maybe they retired early.

chiefie

Muscle750 wrote: »

Love it my wifes a teaching assistant and her last pension statement made mine look like loose change and she only does 30 hours pw classed as FT.

So you want your wife's pension taken from her - wow - have you told her ?

AndyAdams

It is a fact the majority of defined benefit schemes in the private sector have closed, in the public sector they are still going strong even though they have been watered down a little. They are still massive value for money when compared to the defined contribution scheme.

I am a 50 something graduate having worked in the private sector all my life and never had the luxury of a defined benefit pension. To be honest looking at pensions were not my top priority until I hit around 45. In hindsight I wish I went straight into the civil service from uni, pay isnt bad for graduate professionals and I would indeed have been sat on a "pot of gold". Alas I didn't and am now "reeping the rewards". My wife who left education after O levels and has never had a great paying job had always been in a defined benefit schemes, she has been in the LGPS for around the last 10 years, will have a better pension than me, although on average I have been earning 3 times her income for the last 30 years and have a pot of around 500k.

Defined benefit pensions are obviously a lot better but unfortunately some of us don't have them, we just have to accept that. It is no different to the housing crisis this country is experiencing if you bought a house pre 97 you're laughing, if you rented for the last 20 years the boat has sailed. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, we all just have to do the best we can and keep moving forward.

BobQ

Muscle750 wrote: »

The auto enrolment was in many peoples eyes only bought in to make us think that we werent so hard done by in relation to public sector pensions and to shut us up moaning.............

AE was introduced because Government could see that too many people were not investing in a pension. The long term impact would be elderly poverty and more dependence on state benefits. So the plan is make people take responsibility for their retirement income and not allow employees to escape their responsibilities to invest in a pension. Equally the aim was to make employers contribute to their employee's pension.

.maybe someone could explain why the employer contribution is set at such a low level compared to the public sector employer (tax payer) contribution

.

It's a business cost so could be inflationary. The plan was (and still is) to increase the employer contribution.

Those in the company that i work for who have autoenroled i believe are getting 1% from the company i only get 5% in the dc scheme now 11 years.......

Agree its not enough. You get 5%? How much do you personally pay in?. Those in the LGPS pay in 5.6 to-6.8%, the employers match that and the massive pension fund makes about as much again.

after our FS scheme was ripped from under our feet as i said in the public sector the CARE scheme they bought in was not alot more than a name change hoping those of us who had just lost out big time in the private sector losing our FS pensions wouldnt really notice

A CARE pension is a type of pension but its value does depend on the accural rate. If it is a CARE scheme it is designed to match career average salary with the employer. You cannot fudge career average salary, either it does match it or it does not. A FS pension in any sector is not changed retrospectively. You have the FS scheme up to the point it closed which is more than some have.

And please dont tell me the Public sector salaries are well below ours ive never heard so much !!!!. Take people who work in supermarkets for example and all those on the min wage if the min wage was the norm in the public sector etc....................yes exactly.

There are people on minimum wage in the public sector but most are not I agree. This is mainly because many low paid public sector jobs were outsourced to the likes of Serco, Capita etc. It follows that a greater proportion of the public sector are in higher skilled jobs, needing higher qualifications so will be paid better.

As far as I know the public sector do not employ many people stacking shelves or manning checkouts in supermarkets. What matters is whether comparable jobs are paid differently. So a nurse in the NHS compared to one of similar qualifications and experience in the private sector. The data is there if you can be bothered to look.

longleggedhair

To give some context to this, a family member worked in local government for 30 years, when she retired she was earning about 25 k. Her pension is around 650 per month after Tax. its decent but not enormous.

However the new scheme has allowed another relative to build up an annual pension of £3000 per annum after just six years on a similar wage. The new scheme which is supposed to save money seems far more generous and I think it will build up problems for the future.