aibu to think that all those striking on thursday are being selfish and greedy?

[hellospoon]

And they should be thankful that they even have a job?

In a day where thousands of people are unemployed and living in poor conditions surely these teachers should be thankful they even have a job!

Many parents are having to take leave, some unpaid I presume the effect that it will have on family's is ridiculous.

But you're pissed off at the wrong people, Niecie. The people who can afford to bail out the economy, the fat cats, the big corporations evading tax, the banks are not being shafted. Why are you pissed off that we want to keep our reasonable (not gold-plated by any stretch) pensions, when there appears to be very little pressure on them to pay their fair share?

15,000 Lloyds workers losing their jobs should be taking action. In a bank that is part-owned by the public, they could also petition the government. Their executives are on ludicrous salaries, and bonuses are still being paid. In a company that has just sacked thousands, is that reasonable?

Of course they should go to the government. The government make employment laws. The government could do quite a bit. They could ensure private companies make minimum contributions towards pensions, they could require banks etc to hold safe pensions etc etc. If they really wanted to. The government, rather than saying lets bring public sector pensions down to be 'fairer', could equally say lets bring up private sector pensions to be 'fairer'. But, they did not. There are a million and one things they could do to make things 'fairer' for the UK. But, actually, fairness isn't their game. It is becomming clearer all the time, that the 'affordability' argument is a nonsense.

Which brings me back to a point I made earlier. Are you really absolutely sure you are being told the full story, or a story from the point of view in which they want you to understand it.

"They are saying that because private sector pensions are low you can't expect the private sector to pay more at the expense of their pensions and financial secuity just so the public sector can continue to have their larger pensions because that is what you are asking them to do".

Niecie, please get back in touch with me in a few years time and show me all the private sector employees who will be better off and who will be able to save for their pensions all because of the public sector pensions being worth less. Sorry, but I don't think that is going to happen!

Yes you are being unreasonable. Those on strike do not give up pay for no good reason. Their representatives were (and indeed still are) in talks with government. but then that same government says this is what we are going to do and we will not move from that. Strange then that when people went out on strike the government was whinging about why are they doing this when we are talking to them. No point in talking if you are not also listening. You need to take a longer view and perhaps acknowledge that a teacher worn out at 68 will not be providing a good education to children.

Niecie - local government workers do pay in to their pension. Their unions also agreed changes with the last Labour government in 2006. That pension scheme is not in deficit, funds itself, and needs no money from other taxpayers. The government did ask for an independent person to undertake a review, Lord Hutton, and even he did not say the scheme was not affordable. The government has also not been able to put forward any evidence that there will actually be a shortfall in the teachers pension scheme. Hence it is clear they simply want more money from these workers. I can understand why they are upset about that.

Gillg57 - have you read the Hutton report? He said that public sector pensions were untenable in the long term. Defintion of untenable - "incapable of being maintained, defended, or vindicated"

"They are saying that because private sector pensions are low you can't expect the private sector to pay more at the expense of their pensions and financial security just so the public sector can continue to have their larger pensions because that is what you are asking them to do".

Niecie, please get back in touch with me in a few years time and show me all the private sector employees who will be better off and who will be able to save for their pensions all because of the public sector pensions being worth less. Sorry, but I don't think that is going to happen!

You aren't getting it are you? I said that private sector pensions won't go up if yours go down. The two aren't interconnected in that way. There is no money in the pot. People are living longer and not saving enough for their pensions. The public sector are asked to pay more to compensate for this, just like the private sector are already doing, often out of their own pockets. If the public sector don't pay more but still want their pensions maintained where do you think the money will come from? I'll answer for you because you aren't getting it - it has to come from increased taxation. Who generates the profits and income for taxation - the private sector. Since the average salary is £19k after you take out the top 1% or something o exceptionally high earners what you will see is that the people who will be suffering this extra tax to meet pension shortfalls in the public sector will be people who are earning less than teachers. That isn't fair.

Some of you want to tax the banks and/or bankers (the terms aren't interchangeable by the way, they are different things). Half the banks have made losses this year. They won't be paying any tax at all for a while. Taxing banks will also mean that the additional cost to them of the tax will be passed on to the customers - that is you and me.

You are having a laugh now surely if you think changing employment law will improve private sector employees? pensions too. 60% of private sector employees work for SME's (not the big banks which so many of the public sector workers seem to think we all work for). 97% of SMEs employ less than 20 people. If you know anything about pensions at all you will realise that it is completely unaffordable for most SMEs that small to provide a pension plan for their employees. It just isn't going to happen because money doesn't grow on trees. Very often in employment law, the legislation allows an exemption for companies with less than 20(ish) staff because it is unworkable. So where are those 14 million people going to get this money you seem to think is rightfully theirs if only they complained?

Look this is all getting silly and somewhat tedious given that half of you aren?t even bothering to read what I have written now. I shall be hiding the thread. Carry on with your little strikes if you want to but they aren?t going to change anything. No government likes to be held to ransom, especially as talks haven?t yet been completed. Who says the Government isn?t listening by the way? Just because they aren?t agreeing with you, doesn?t mean they aren?t listening. You have taken industrial action way too soon and damaged your negotiation position but carry on if you want. Your loss.

Patronising, much, Niecie?

You seem to be confusing Tory policy to dismantle the public sector and protect the rich with absolute necessity to carry this out.

Just in case you can't resist the temptation to pop back in Niecie. Yes, I have read the Hutton Report. Probably more throughly than you by the sound of it. I have no axe to grind as I don't have a public sector pension. But I do believe in applying fairness, logic and an evidence base in making changes.