Rhetoric media on state gold plated pensions

Prism

drummersdale said:

Similarly to the teacher who commented earlier I worked 41 years to arrive at a pension of c£23k per annum plus lump sum - if it’s gold plated then it seems only gold leaf as opposed to 24 carat - but I have nothing else to compare it to so not sure what someone who worked 41 years in the private sector would be picking up in comparison. I also agree that I knew what I was signing up for and if I wasn’t happy could have voted with my feet, as can those in the private sector. The irony is that after 10 years of continuous pay restraint by the Tories their fantastic stewardship of the economy means that my pension is likely to increase by a significant % over the next 2 years due to inflation. I realise that is cancelled out by rising prices but inflation will fall eventually whereas my pension will get a decent uplift in perpetuity.

Difficult to compare as I doubt many private sector workers contribute the 25% of their salary to bring their pension to a level of the public DB ones.

marlot

I have a mixture of private DB, public DB and DC pensions.

My DC pensions did rather well from 2016 to 2020.  My private DB pensions are linked to RPI, so had been doing well (but are limited to 5% and 3.5%, so less well now).  My public DB pension is linked to CPI, so now likely to do well.

So all three have had periods where they have outperformed the other two.

I didn't notice any outrage at public sector DB schemes when the DC pensions were doing better - the newspapers love to stir dissension and pit one group against another.

Flugelhorn

I have had people telling me that my NHS  pension is "too high and should be reduced" - this is without them actually knowing what I get. 
I wouldn't dream of telling people they were paid too much or their pension was too much, none of my business biut seems that doctors' pay and pensions is used by the press to stir up bad feelings

zagfles

Flugelhorn said:

I have had people telling me that my NHS  pension is "too high and should be reduced" - this is without them actually knowing what I get. 
I wouldn't dream of telling people they were paid too much or their pension was too much, none of my business biut seems that doctors' pay and pensions is used by the press to stir up bad feelings

Like MPs pay, "fat cat's" pay etc. The Independent have a dedicated "High Pay Centre" page to stir up bad feeling about others who are paid more: https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/high-pay-centre

zagfles

marlot said:

I have a mixture of private DB, public DB and DC pensions.

My DC pensions did rather well from 2016 to 2020.  My private DB pensions are linked to RPI, so had been doing well (but are limited to 5% and 3.5%, so less well now).  My public DB pension is linked to CPI, so now likely to do well.

So all three have had periods where they have outperformed the other two.

I didn't notice any outrage at public sector DB schemes when the DC pensions were doing better - the newspapers love to stir dissension and pit one group against another.

Indeed they do. It's how the sell papers (or online advertising). They all do it, but the groups are different across the different type of newspapers, for instance some pit public sector workers against private sector, some "fat cats" against ordinary workers, immigrants against indigenous, men against women, north against south, young against old, England against Scotland/Wales etc.

Stir up a grievance, exploit that grievance, vilify the other group, create a sense of identity with the paper/media source, create disparaging terms for other groups, and other media sources who identify with those groups.

The only way to get a proper sense of perspective these days is to read a variety of different media sources. Then you realise they all want you to hate someone, and that in fact it's not worth the emotional energy to hate anyone. Not even polliticians

CorseyEdge

dunstonh said:

frugal90 said:

Don't think mine is especially gold plated. I worked as a teacher in middle management for 36.25 years. Pension is £22800 per year plus I got 3 times as a lump sum. Fortunately married to retired teacher , so comfortable compared to many.

It is the deal we signed up for. Those that complain go and do 36 plus years at the chalkface.

To get that equivalent in the private sector, using a DC scheme, you would need to have paid around 25-30% of your salary (including employer contribution).

The comparison of just pension equivalence could be seen as quite a narrow economic view of the teaching profession's impact to our society. If we continued to pay teachers £20-45k pa (headteachers £50-80k) and then asked them to contribute 25% of salary how many teachers would we have... less of them or more??

Today's public servants contribute 6-10% (teachers ~7-11%), the 'employer' contributes around double that, that being the private industry standard. There's your 25-30%

dunstonh

The comparison of just pension equivalence could be seen as quite a narrow economic view of the teaching profession's impact to our society. If we continued to pay teachers £20-45k pa (headteachers £50-80k) and then asked them to contribute 25% of salary how many teachers would we have... less of them or more??

In some public sector roles, it is justified.  In others, it is hard to justify.

Today's public servants contribute 6-10% (teachers ~7-11%), the 'employer' contributes around double that, that being the private industry standard. There's your 25-30%

Many of the public sector pensions are unfunded.   There is no real employer contribution.   Just the taxpayer.

german_keeper

arnoldy said:

Most people appreciate very much the public sector front line...dinner ladies, road sweepers, nurses, police, squaddies, firemen..etc.

But what they don't like is the standing army of quangos and back office "administrators" dressed as managers. And their final salary pensions for their jobs that have a tenuous link to front line delivery. Remember of the 1.3 million people + that work in the health service barely 400,000 are nurses and doctors. Scandal.

You're obviously a subject matter expert. Presumably you have extensive experience of working in the public sector. 

Andy_L

CorseyEdge said:

dunstonh said:

frugal90 said:

Don't think mine is especially gold plated. I worked as a teacher in middle management for 36.25 years. Pension is £22800 per year plus I got 3 times as a lump sum. Fortunately married to retired teacher , so comfortable compared to many.

It is the deal we signed up for. Those that complain go and do 36 plus years at the chalkface.

To get that equivalent in the private sector, using a DC scheme, you would need to have paid around 25-30% of your salary (including employer contribution).

The comparison of just pension equivalence could be seen as quite a narrow economic view of the teaching profession's impact to our society. If we continued to pay teachers £20-45k pa (headteachers £50-80k) and then asked them to contribute 25% of salary how many teachers would we have... less of them or more??

Today's public servants contribute 6-10% (teachers ~7-11%), the 'employer' contributes around double that, that being the private industry standard. There's your 25-30%

I don't think that the private industry standard is employers contributions of 2x the employee's. Do you have a citation for that? 

JoeCrystal

Andy_L said:

CorseyEdge said:

dunstonh said:

frugal90 said:

Don't think mine is especially gold plated. I worked as a teacher in middle management for 36.25 years. Pension is £22800 per year plus I got 3 times as a lump sum. Fortunately married to retired teacher , so comfortable compared to many.

It is the deal we signed up for. Those that complain go and do 36 plus years at the chalkface.

To get that equivalent in the private sector, using a DC scheme, you would need to have paid around 25-30% of your salary (including employer contribution).

The comparison of just pension equivalence could be seen as quite a narrow economic view of the teaching profession's impact to our society. If we continued to pay teachers £20-45k pa (headteachers £50-80k) and then asked them to contribute 25% of salary how many teachers would we have... less of them or more??

Today's public servants contribute 6-10% (teachers ~7-11%), the 'employer' contributes around double that, that being the private industry standard. There's your 25-30%

I don't think that the private industry standard is employers contributions of 2x the employee's. Do you have a citation for that? 

Especially when the private industry standard is 3% from the employer and 5% from the employee based on the amount above the qualifying earnings limit. Even major companies try to get away as little as possible; Amazon, for example, only match 5%, so 10% overall. I believe Tesco only contributes 7.5% maximum as an employer as well.

Pension provision is undoubtedly one of the most crucial aspects to look out for when applying for new jobs in my case.