to say this to all the teachers who are striking next week

[Memoo]

As a parent I am 100 % behind you.

I really appreciate that you put your life and soul into your job and im sorry more people don't get just how hard you work for the benefit of our children.

Don't let the bastards grind you down!

This is not looking at the underfunded state pension either along with rising NHS costs of elderly. Our kids have had it.

They alreadyhave an agreement, specifically with teachers, to up contributions if the valuation - now very overdue - deems it necessary.

Do you get it?

TEACHERS AGREED.

Instead, the government would prefer to bypass that agreement, and the valuation, and up contributions anyway.

Now why would that be......

F*'s me off every time that the 'taxpayers' moaning on here about funding public sector pensions also appear to forget that public sector workers are also TAXPAYERS and therefore (a) indirectly fund their own pensions as well as making a direct contribution, but (b) fund everyone else's too via their National Insurance payments!

yanbu-here here! I fully agree!

Whoamireally That is complete rubbish, your tax contributions go towards the upkeep of public services such as schools, hospitals etc not pensions per se. NI contributes also to YOUR state pension. The government are effectively paying for our second pension! How anyone has the gall to grumble when their employer contributes the most to their pension is beyond me!
For all of the people who remember the miners strikes and the recession then, this is going to be a whole lot worse. . We are in debt of billions of pounds due to overspending and the unions believe striking and effectively costing the economy i.e. revenue for this country 500 million on one days strike is a great plan? Its like you being in personnal debt and burying your head in the sand and splashing out on a rolex for good measure - irresponsible and stupid!
The people harping on about the bankers need to realise that with internet technology banks can be based anywhere in the world and losing them to another country means a substantial loss of tax revenue for the government. I am also about the bankers top bonuses, however they are funding their own pensions, not the government.

AnxiousElephant

"I am also about the bankers top bonuses, however they are funding their own pensions, not the government."

LOL
They are not funding their own pensions

igglu - public sector pensions aren't a F 'bail out' like the banks - it is an employer honouring their contract with their employee.

Are you a numpty???

I'm a lecturer. I dont think Unions help the situation so am not a member.Whilst i understand the reasons for the strike, and empathise, I cant afford to lose a days pay and therefore wouldnt be able to strike even if I were a member. I work full time and have two school aged kids. Now I have to lose a days pay because the school is shut......

On the other hand ANYONE who has paid for years into any kind of contributory pension scheme, should have the right to challenge the fundholder who decides that they will pay them signficantly less pension AFTER the money has been paid in. OK, change the rules for new entrants to the scheme by all means.

If I had paid money to an Insurance Company pension which had guaranteed a percentage of my final salary, then I would look to the Financial Ombudsman to step in. When Murdoch and the like ran-off with company pension money, there was uproar. So why should the Govt be able to do this?

And yes,I realise the country is up financial shit-creek without proverbial paddle. So how about we stop bailing out banks, and demand back the taxpayers' money which otherwise would have supported public servants' pension arrangements. After all, the senior bankers have still awarded themselves and largely taken, yearly bonuses which could have paid back the bailout money over a five year period tops.

Could we please prioritise here? Tax the top-salaried and the inherently rich and make them pay, don't squeeze the middle people until we pop, and don't dump on the low-paid who are already barely surviving.

Still waiting for an answer to my question....

Feenie. Are you referring to the agreed pension changes which kicked in, in Jan. 2007? All agreed before the crash and the nation woke up to the fact the cupboards were bare?

Barnebear. If there was a way to raise taxes on the rich and the bankers to plug a deficit of £150billion a year, it would be done by now. And bear in mind that's just the deficit as it stands today. Unfunded pension liabilities were set to sky rocket with or without the financial crash.

This issue has been around for decades. A quick nip tuck here & there to taxes isn't going to help matters at all.

And as for tax the rich? Who do you think pays the taxes in this country? The poor? They pay next to nothing already. The middle classes? A little maybe. It's the rich who already pay most of our tax. The top 10% pay 50% of all income tax. So in my book they already pay a lot.

The total income tax received in 2009-2010 was £134 billion. That's EVERYONE. And don't forget the top 10% paid half of it. Just how does someone propose we tax the rich to plug a deficit of £150 billion?

Demanding to tax the rich more to pay for something that simply isn't affordable just shows complete ignorance in the subject.

*So a private sector worker pays into their pension and their employer also contributes and that's fine.

A puled sector worker pays into their pension and their employer also contributes and that's not fine as suddenly everyone is bleating that their taxes are paying for it. Well I'm sorry but I fail to see the difference inbetween one employer and another. That's what you pay taxes for, to pay the salaries and renumeration packages of people like teachers and nurses.*

The difference is that you are forgetting that the private company is probably making a profit so can make contributions to the pension. The government on the other hand has no money. Worse than that, it's in debt. A boat load of it. If it were a company, it would have been put into administration years ago and the politician's who have frittered away our cash would be charged with corporate fraud.

So the "bleating" as you put it is because some of us are simply pointing out that there is not enough money to pay for all the things the previous governments have promised. Going on strike won't make the magic money tree grow. Because right now, that's the only way more money will be found.

No, Niceguy - I'm talking about the agreement made in 2007 that if a valuation due in 2010 showed that more changes were needed, then teachers would agree to pay more.

They already had this agreement.

But they won't perform the valuation which would prove that changes are necessary.

Why?

We have already lost a full time physio (gone P/T) and a full time community nurse as a result of the cuts.

I know private workers have a bum deal too, but these services are so vital that we (the public) need to support all of those who are striking.

I reluctantly clicked on this thread thinking it would be another teacher bashing thread.

But it isn't, so thank you.

'it makes me when people see school as childcare.'
What a stupid post!.Could you epoint out what childcare there is for school age children during school hours then? And even if there were some, you couldn't claim tax credits for it, therefore the govt clearly regard it as childcare

Feenie, correct me if I am wrong but I think the government postponed all valuations, not just the teacher's.

The bottom line however still remains that the pensions rely upon a very large (14% I think) contribution from the employer. An employer which is broke. An employer which also has millions of other pensions to pay for, as well as the NHS, schools, defence, benefits etc. etc. All worthy causes.

The thing I keep hearing over & over is "Why should we pay more and get less back?". To me that's not realistic argument for the above reasons. You simply cannot get blood out of a stone by going on strike.

Lord Hutton looked at public sector pensions on the whole and whilst it wasn't all as doom & gloom as some would have us believe, the simple fact is that we ALL must work longer, pay more and expect less back.

To single out teacher's as a special case whom deserve special treatment is impossible. What next? Do nurses not deserve the same? Border Agency staff? Where do you draw the line?

If you want to argue for the government to reinstate all pension valuations and commit to funding the difference between what the employees pay and a reduced employers contribution then I think that's a fair request.

Indeed - and therein lies much of the problem.

WillowFae, did you read the same thread as me?

I genuinely have no clue what point you are trying to make, Niceguy.

Is it that the government haven't done anyone else's either, so the injustice is entirely fair?

They have an agreement to up contributions - which is what they want - and yet refuse to provide the evidence that would make it necessary?

Why?

I think Willow just meant the original post!

I hate the way there has been such propaganda put about about public health sector workers pay and conditions in the past year or so. We signed up to a deal that meant we dont get great pay but we got a decent pension and now they are trying to take that away. I supported the firemen when they had their dispute because it seemed wrong what was happening. This is wrong too - just because other people have had wrong things done to them doesnt make this right. We cant just sit back and let things like this happen - every so often we have to stand up! I have never striked in my life before but have joined a union especially so that I can this time. My children will come with me to the march and I hope I have taught them that every so often you have to stand up for what you believe in - whether it benefits you or not - but because it is right.

Last thing from me as I've said my piece over and over. Niceguy,no one thinks that teachers should get a special deal over and above everyone else. We are all standing together as a public sector to get a fair, transparent and honest deal for all. This thread just happens to be about teachers so that is what has been discussed.

And, I want real figures that show where and why, not just a few large numbers and random percentages. Pretty sure that's what the unions are after too. Funny how all of the report that you have linked to all state transparency is paramount and yet the government is not forthcoming.

Okay, really done this time. Good luck to everyone on Wednesday, I hope that the rallies will be peaceful and violence (verbal and physical) free.

Nospringflower good that your children are going with you to the march. They and their children will be the ones who have to pick up the bill for the past 10 years of spending. Their future is surely looking dire financially and I do feel sorry for the youth of tomorrow.

There isn't any more money.

See now im on the fence offending either noone or everyone

I understand that existing staff are annoyed that their deals are changing, but the reality is they are living substantially longer than they were supposed to when the deal was made. So the terms of the deal have already changed.

Maybe there needs to be options:
a) you only get you pension for the 15 years you were originally expected to live after retirement?
b) you pay more in and get you pension for longer?
c) you work till you are older and then get your pension until you die?

I dont know. I know that long term without a change pensions are not sustantianable due to earlier retirement ages and later death ages.

It shouldnt be a them (public) and us (private) arguement which is what it keeps deteriorating into. The answer, if people arent careful will be to sell the entire public sector off into private coffers and do away with the hassle .......

Just a thought but why don't the public sector workers who are convinced they earn so much less than their fat cat friends in the private sector actually ask them what they earn? I think people might be surprised

. And finally, for all those saying 'well you could buy a whole lot of pension for the perceived difference in salary' it is not the actual purchase of the pension that is the issue . Pensions are just insurance and defined contribution means that you might pay in all your life and it be worth less if the economy etc tanks.

Public sector pensions are guaranteed. Great if you can afford it but we can't now and certainly can't when our kids grow up. How exactly do you think Greece and Italy got into the position they are in?

This is going to be brutal, but I have to say that if the govt caves on this I for one will be on the streets marching for the sake of my children and I don't think I will be the only one.

Oh and the reason the rest of us are screwed? Mr brown took our pension savings to spend on public services. No need for growth , just steal £5 billion a year. Now THAT is literally robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Ps sorry for phone grammar