From what I can tell the government is asking for public sector workers to work until they are 66 and pay a more reasonable amount into there pensions, just like the rest of us in the real world
Is this really too much to ask, or have I got it completely wrong?
No not really, i already pay nearly a hundred pounds a month into my pension and have been doing that for the last 24 years, why should i pay into it for another 24 years, when i could likely only live for another 14 years after that. My works pension will still be less than my state pension, if and when i get it(as the government keeps changing the age) and i'll be paying tax on it...the government is doing nothing more than spewing out propaganda that public sector workers are being unreasonable, have we all forgotten the bankers then and that public sector workers are to blame for the mess we are suppose to be in!
I certainly have not forgotten the bankers, I don't like them one bit
The thing what has probably tainted my viewpoint, is the amount of public sector workers I have worked along side over the years, who have retired early from there job, on a bloody good pension, more than I was earning at the time. Then they then get reemployed and do nothing but moan and groan about the conditions, I used to call them "British layland Workers", at the time. That's not my job syndrome!
Sorry, just my twopennorth... I work within the public sector.
The 'early retirement' argument is moot: my current pensionable age is 67. I've just received my annual statement. Most of my colleagues' retirement age is 67 or 68. How is that early?
The 'existing conditions stay the same' argument is also inaccurate: as far as I understand, that is not the case. My pension, which I have been paying into for some years, will change - if this goes through.
I am worried that this eroding of pension rights will stop people joining some of our most needed professions. We need nurses, firefighters, teachers, dinner ladies etc.
I think that setting this up as a public vs private sector argument is making us lose sight of the fact that we are being made to pay for mistakes that aren't ours.
Do you remember when the nurses and teachers screwed up the nation's finances, lost us billions of pounds and plunged us into a global economic crisis?
No, neither do I.
I can fully understand the public sector workers complaining and wishing to strike !!
They took the jobs on....on certain conditions....it seems goalposts are now to be moved.
They are being asked to work longer...pay in more..and get less when finished !!
Not what I would have called a great deal !!
All good things must come to an end.......................
Interesting debate
By way of a 'contrast' we know of several private company schemes where here was an expectation of people actually retiring at 50, indeed the schemes having been set up to pay a full and immediate pension from age 50.
Any guesses as to which 'industry' ?
Yep, you got it Investment Banking - rather than the usual Retail / High Street Banking schemes that still pay low salaries to most staff and therefore pay a low pension as well.
Indeed many 'high street' Banking pension schemes still have an insidious item called 'Clawback', whereby as soon as the retired member of staff is in receipt of their State Pension, their 'company' pension is automatically reduced by the State Pension amount, whether they qualify for a full State Pension or not (Plenty of examples of people actually being worse off once they start getting their State Pensions)
There is also another aspect to consider between Public and Company Schemes. One big difference is that many Company Schemes have seen the majority of the Companies actually take pension contribution holiday's since the late 80's, whereby the Company actually stopped making payments to their Pension Schemes and instead used the money to fund their bottom line, profits, and bonuses to Execs based on their 'Stock Market' performance. End result being many Company Pension Schemes being in deficit and actually being placed into the Government (i.e. tax payer) funded/back Pension Protection Fund "to pay compensation to members of eligible defined benefit pension schemes, when there is a qualifying insolvency event in relation to the employer and where there are insufficient assets in the pension scheme to cover Pension Protection Fund levels of compensation" Yet another case of the government having to bail out Private industry.
This then leaves Private Pensions, i.e. ones some people actually pay money into in the expectation of getting a private pension on retirement. Aside from 'deductions' by the companies operating such schemes for their salaries, costs, profits, etc. in creating and running these, remember Equitable Life anyone ?
(reasonable summary at )
Never mind the creation of the creation, by Government (i.e. Taxpayers) of a Regulator, the Pensions Advisory Service, the Financial Services Authority (FSA as was), and Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) dealing with the widespread miss-selling of Private Pensions that has occurred.
So once again Government (i.e. Taxpayers) yet again having to bail out another Pension Industry 'scheme'.
So some one is making money out of the whole pension 'industry' and sure as not it's not the overwhelming majority of pensioners, who are funding what's happened in the Company and Private arena for years and now to meet yet more reform, it's the moving of deck-chairs by Government from the vastly different individual schemes in the Public Sector to part fund cock-ups, frauds, scams and schemes elsewhere.
So what betting in 5 years time once again there will be headlines of vast mis-selling etc. to current Public pension recipients exposed to the ravenous and poorly regulated private pension industry that will step in to this 'new market' being opened up by the current Coalition Government ?
i think it should make no difference, all this public and pivate sector nonsense.
i read only last week that my council spend £1 in every £4 on paying for private pension schemes.
seeing as i pay £1500 a year on my council tax and then find out that a 1/4 of that money will go on paying for nice cushy pensions where they can retire at what age? a lot lower than i can for sure.
if i retire at 65 i do not see why some person in the public sector should in some cases be allowed to retire 15 years earliar. hardly fair and proper it seems to me.
a nurse and a teecher may well work hard but certainly no harder than me yet i cannot afford to retire anywhere neer this side of 60.
I can fully understand the public sector workers complaining and wishing to strike !!
They took the jobs on....on certain conditions....it seems goalposts are now to be moved.
They are being asked to work longer...pay in more..and get less when finished !!
Not what I would have called a great deal !!
As are many of the private sector including myself1 we have renegotiated twice in the last 6 yrs how much more we have to put in to keep the pension the same, now they want to renegotiate again and this time affect our benefits! The difference being the company I work for and my union are looking st this problem together and hoping to reach an acceptible solution (this will not be easy!) but we have to work together on this and not just Strike because the unions don't like the current government! and I am not in the banking sector so its not my fault either but unfortunately the position we are in means we cannot keep the staus quo on pensions (A very bitter pill to swallow!) will striking resolve this issue? I don't think it will. We need to negotiate a reasonable settlement to make pensions more sustainable. As harsh as it may sound we all need to take some of the pain to help sort the finances out!
wrong blue. the government, banks and hedge funds are gonna steal everyone's pension private and public. their gonna steal your taxes, health care, education, welfare and benefits that your taxes pay for. you are on the same side as the public sector workers wether you choose to be or not.
