A bit out there but AIBU in my opinion on Pub sector pensions/striking

[mrskeithlemon]

Ok, so I am of the opinion that we are in the midst of a global recession, and that just because you chose to work in the public sector, it does not make you more important than private sector workers. Therefore I think the pension cuts are justified (armed forces aside) if we are to move on to a brighter future as a whole country. I think everybody has to suck up the fact that we are all affected by the recession and public sector or not, we are all going to take a hit

mrskeithlemon - you've (I assume, wilfully) misread my post. You actually stated quite clearly that public sector workers were asking their bosses for "pay rises and better pensions". My point was that we have sucked up the pay freeze (and I don't particularly have a problem with this, as I accept there have to be savings) and are NOT asking for a payrise, as you seem to think. I was not complaining at all, simply pointing out that we are not actually asking for pay rises, as you seem to think. There is no point having this discussion if people are going to deliberately be obtuse just for the sake of bashing people that work in a different sector to themselves.

My DP is in the civil service and after commuting to work, paying bills and nursery fees etc...he barely breaks even at the end of the month and thats without the pension crap..not to mention he works in the job centre part and has to listen to people on the phone all day claiming benefits when its not worth him working at all.....very frustrating for him.
You only ever hear of the higher paid public sector in the news, not the bog standard normal jobs that the majority do and its these that are most affected.

why should there be an equality of misery? I HATE the argument that 'private sector workers don't get ...' maybe they SHOULD maybe the answer isn't to treat workers equally BADLY - just a thought!

Public sector workers being worse off doesn't make private sector workers better off, there's no correlation. If my pension disappeared tomorrow do you really think your taxes would go down? Everyone having access to a good pension scheme would improve the wellbeing of all workers so surely that is a better goal to work towards?

I can catergorically state that my friend who is a civvy office worker in the RAF pays NO pension at all,never has.

Maybe the government should declare bankruptcy, and all Public Sector pensions should be declared null and void?

Public sector workers are not asking for better pensions or salary increases. They're just resisting the level of cuts - they're not denying that cuts are inevitable.

Missfenella, I have just read the TUC document somebody linked to on here. It seems to be saying that a greater amount from GDP will need to be put into public sector pensions. The TUC are saying that the way that greater amount has been portrayed in the press is scaremongering and misleading, but they are not denying that more will have to be paid in from Government money.

They claim that it doesn't matter because GDP will rise, but given the mess the world economy is, and how the world economy seems to be moving away from the West and centering on Asia, I'm not convinced our GDP will rise in the long term.

Either way, the TUC does not seem to be agreeing with you. They admit that more public money will have to go to covering the cost of public sector pensions. But perhaps I am misunderstanding the situation and somebody can explain?

I do think that the current situation where many pensioners are living in poverty cannot be allowed to continue or get worse, and the best way to make sure that all pensioners are treated decently would seem to be to deal with all pensions in a collective way.

From what the TUC seem to be saying, there is a vast difference in public sector pensions, with female health care workers having tiny pensions. It would seem that pension provision needs to be completely revised, to make it fair between different kinds of public sector workers and between private sector workers.

I also don't think it is realistic to think that private sector workers can organise sorting out better pension deals in the way the public sector can, when private sector workers are much more likely to be working for small firms and so not be able to organise in the same way.

We need to organise all of this collectively, and also include the many people who have spent a lot of their lives as carers and so have no real pension provision at all.

Public sector workers being worse off doesn't make private sector workers better off
How so? Prices for goods and services (especially things like housing) are set by what people can afford. If public sector workers were paid more realistically, house prices would fall to reasonable levels, especially in areas where public sector jobs are the highest paid ones.

It's not unreasonable for people to be getting pissed off that public sector people are being protected from the downward pressure on wages caused by globalisation and mass immigrations, policies that the public sector unions were strongly in favour of, somehow thinking that they would be immune from the effects of.

Doingthebest I think we're talking about different kinda of public sector workers? Civil servants do pay!

The situation has similarities with private sector workers who paid into pensions in good faith only for them to go bust - but they ended up with nothing.

Public sector pensions are still incredibly good even with proposed changes. Far better than if you have to go private. At present its barely worth starting one if you haven't got one due to fees and unstable market. I know plenty of people who have paid into one and its worth less than they have put in now. You are better off, saving in other ways, particularly if you have a mortgage.

I find it incredibly difficult to have sympathy with public sector workers as a result. I appreciate the argument and I value their work but at the same time inequalities between public and private sector work have been reversed and wages in the private sector haven't risen for a longer period. I know a lot of people who have had pensions cut, had to take 'voluntary' pay cuts or are on reduced hours still. Not all companies even have pension schemes. And it annoys the living crap out of me when people say, that private sector workers who are unhappy should campaign against it. How? What are you actually supposed to do when your company only have 4 employees and looks like it might go bust? Talk about naivity. I think a lot are just grateful to have jobs at all right now. Inflation has hit everyone hard regardless of which sector you work in. Its tough out there.

I certainly don't get where this idea that the private sector is doing really well from comes from as its certainly not the case in the area I live or the line of work i'm in - all our customers and suppliers are reporting the same thing too. If anything its the worst its been since the start of the recession in 2008. The lastest growth figures have hardly been showing massive growth.

I also have issue with the unions on this. A lot are totally self-serving and don't necessarily act in the best interests of their members which they should do. The fact the teachers unions striked earlier in the year when negiotations were still ongoing lost a lot of respect for me. I had much more for the one union that didn't and the reasons why they didn't at that point, though they may do in the future.

I dunno. I'll probably get abuse for this but I just think there are so grossly unrealistic views out there in the public sector who are completely unaware of what else if going on. In an ideal world I would love to give the worst paid public sector workers a better deal. But its not an ideal world.

Its not fair that they get a worse deal than they expected, but its even more unfair to expect people who have already lost significant amounts of money in their own private pensions (if they have one) to pay for deals they could never begin to dream of. Given that the taxpayer does contribute to public sector pensions you can't separate the political argument from that. Its tough, and there are a lot of people from the last 30 years who are to blame for the situation - a situation that numerous governments - both labour and tory refused to address. They were more bothered about pandering for votes and power than making more difficult and less popular decisions, which would have benefited everyone as it was a long term issue they didn't need to worry about in their term of office. Result is we are left with a crappy mess that everyone gets shafted on. I see little point in pointing blame at this stage. The seeds were sown a very long time ago.

And for the record, when people quote 'fact' and put a link to the TUC I have just as many doubts about the bias as I do with Daily Mail articles. I have seen other figures from independant sources, which have a trusted reputation which are wildly different from the TUC. The daily mail has an agenda, but so does the TUC.

What are you on about JLK2? please back up your assertions with facts.

"It's not unreasonable for people to be getting pissed off that public sector people are being protected from the downward pressure on wages"

I don't understand this statement. How exactly are public sector workers being "protected" when there is a pay freeze? The average private sector worker received a 2% increase this year. Please note, I am not complaining about the pay freeze (before the OP jumps on me again) but I don't see how your argument makes sense.

mrslemon I wasn't complaining about the pay freeze, I was stating it as a fact, and I also said that I had accepted it. What I am complaining about is the government's complete lack of transparency on this, their refusal to present the required figures to the unions, and your apparent belief that some public sector workers (armed forces) are worth more than others.

Big public sector pensions were fine when workers were paid less and the pension was a reward for a lifetime of sacrifice to the nation.

Nowdays they are just employees, like private sector employees. Whether you are nurse, military, civil servant - you arent 'taking one for the team' by doing the job you do. Its just a job like any other. The nations mindset has changed.

So its understandable when the private sector sees public sector pay and pensions outstripping what they can earn, while also being asked to fund it via taxation.

SO YANBU OP. And the public sector need a reality check in this age of globalisation. You arent precious snowflakes and you dont deserve to be paid multiples of pension more than your private sector counterparts till you die in your late 90's. Stop being greedy cnuts.

Have a look JLK2 at how many public sector workers there are in different areas, because it looks to me that the more affluent an area, the less of the population are employed in the public sector. Figures are 2010 though so may have changed.

www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/nov/16/public-sector-employment-statistics-map-by-authority

I can't say I understand the argument that comparable public sector roles are pricing private sector workers out of the housing market. I can see that a teacher might be able to afford more than a call centre operative, but not that a state school teacher vs a public one would have much more (if any) spending power?

The fact you can look forward to a payrise year on year when we are NOT in an economic crisis is something to be grateful for. Many private sector workers don't get this luxury.

MissTinaTeaspoon I think the armed forces are worth more than many many many people from all walks of life, not just 'other public sector workers' can you honestly say that a clerical job at the council is comparable?

I think the two jobs are comparable. A clerical job at the council may be part of saving the life of an abused child or stop people dying from carbon monoxide poisoning in a dodgy tenancy.

Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of 'ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky!

:)

MrsKL maybe they SHOULD - but why is it 'lucky'

why shouldn;t workers get pay rises in line with inflation - all workers? That is why I am in a union - to protect all workers.

It's wrong to say that contracts are being broken - public sector pensions rules include provision for changes to contributions rates. The debate is how that may be activated, not it's actual existence. Also, no changes will be retrospective, so everything accrued under existing rules will be paid out in accordance with existing rules.

Also, the Armed Forces are not being omitted. It's just that their pay/pensions are realty with by a separate body, which is on a different time timetable so it's not current. But changes, notably move to career average and possibly changes to contributions, are on the cards for them too.

My big problem with the proposed strikes is what was actually on the strike ballot. Unison didn't ask if members wanted to strike, it asked "Are you prepared to take part in industrial action in the form of strike action?" which isn't the same thing (I'd be prepared to strike, because unified collective action is an important right; but that doesn't mean I think it is right at this point).

That, combined with the low turn out, does not appear to provide a sufficiently strong mandate for strike action.

I have worked in the NHS for over 30 years. I will strike on the 30th November.

The pensions issue is completely unrelated to cuts / general financial downturn ? it is a point of principle that a contract was entered into when I joined the pension scheme in 1980.

In any other contractual situation one party cannot turn around to the other at the end and change the terms in their favour.

I am prepared to strike to defend that point of principle

And also because the government has lied regarding the purpose of the additional contributions.

It is nothing to do with making the scheme financially viable, but everything to do with providing the government additional revenue they can then use to prop up other shortcomings.

They think public sector pensions are a soft target

I have not gone on strike because of having to make savings.

I have not gone on strike when staff cuts have meant I have had to take on double duties for no recompense.

I have not gone on strike when I have had to work ridiculous extra hours for no overtime payments (because the job has to be done).

Yes, you are being unreasonable.

quietlyafraid thank you - you put in to words what I mean a lot more articulately thatn I am capable of

The private pensions sector "robbery" started back in 1997 when Labour came into office and started "stealth taxing".

Did the public sector care about the loss of dividend tax credit reclaim which was previously available to pensions ? NO, because it didn't affect them, the loss of income relative to their pension fund was topped up from tax revenue (from all tax payers).

So at that point a person paying into a private sector pension had to increase their contributions to maintain the same projected level of pension at retirement (and remember, no guarantees with private pension money purchase schemes, the value of investments can go down as well as up) or accept that they would be getting a lower level of final pension. At the same time they had to top up, through taxes being allocated to public sector pensions, the increase required to maintain the defined benefit guaranteed pensions of public sector workers. I don't dispute that public sector workers do partly contribute to their pensions but at that time there was no requirement on the public sector worker to increase their own contributions so where do you think the extra funds required came from ?

Actuaries have for many years been re-evaluating the level to which defined benefit schemes will be able to cope with increasing longevity in the UK. As a result the vast majority of private sector employers' pension funds were converted into money purchase schemes instead - NO MORE GUARANTEED BENEFITS for the private sector on the whole.

Please explain why (and leave out the now disproved notion that public sector workers are paid less than the equivalent private sector worker and leave out the pay freeze stuff, private sector suffered that and pay cuts/hours cuts/redundancies much earlier than the public sector) the public sector is a special case. Oh and leave out the "we signed up for this and now we are getting that", my own pension age has been increased by 7 years since I started work, we've all had the goal posts moved on us, just that sometimes it's not been initially as obvious as the current proposals.

Yes the public sector needs to re-organise so that aging members of its ranks are utilised more fully in the peripheral desk roles etc but a good teacher should be able to keep order whether they are 25 or 65. If a role requires manual physically challenging work only some of the time and most jobs do then organisations should address this matter through team working, It's unlikely that a hospital ward is completely staffed by 60 something nurses /health care assistants all on the same shift and if it is then you have to call in to question the thinking of the rota organiser. (If a public sector worker is unable to do the job through ill health then they retire early on the grounds of ill health, funded usually by enhanced pension rights, something not generally available to the private sector worker). People in the private sector will be feeling their age too as the years go by but they'll still be expected to work until 67+

Possibly lots of sweeping generalisations in the above but some of it needs saying.