to think that yesterday's strikes were a bit of a non-event?

[grovel]

Whether you supported them or not?

I cannot believe certain people's attitudes to teachers. They work fucking hard. I don't know a single teacher who sips cocktails while reading novel on a sun lounger during the holidays. They are all in school or at home working for at least 8 out of the 9 weeks in the summer break. They can't have a tea break when they fancy it, or wonder off to the loo when things get stressful.

It is a fucking hard job and they have worked their arses off to achieve an end that they were promised and they are now being told that they won't be getting back what they put in. It's disgusting.

I was on strike. Not because I want more pension. But because they want me to pay 3.2% more that won't go anywhere near my pension, it is going to treasury. So I am paying 150quid more a month in a new tax?

I am sorry but that isn't fair.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/willard-foxton/why-teachers-are-right-to-strike_b_889433.html

I work for the public sector on not much more than minimum wage, as do plenty of others ,we are not all on bloody high salaries

I don't understand the argument that some people in the private sector earn less and have a smaller pension therefore those striking are out of order. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Noone should have to put up with poor conditions.

Sorry for the typos. My fingers were angry.

That article is written by a Tory btw.

I am a bit disappointed by some posters remarks on here.

I went on strike yesterday as did many of my colleagues.

We all pay into our pensions - it isn't free - we are not being greedy. We entered into an agreement with the government that we would pay 6% of our annual salary into a pension scheme and the terms and conditions were laid out. The Government are now changing the terms of the agreement. We are expected to now pay 9% of our annual salary into the scheme for the same benefits. We are not being greedy and asking for more, we are asking for our pensions to be left alone.

We are already under the threat of redundancies, we have now had our pay rises capped at 1% and this is just the tip of the iceberg. I understand that these changes have to be made but not why my pension has to be changed.

If everyone stopped contributing to the pension scheme today the scheme would have enough in its reserves to meet all pension requirements for the next 20 years. So why do the Gevornment need to penalise me?

I think that march yesterday has sent me all Citizen Smith

CMFT. Interesting comment, "they are all in school working for 8 out of the 9 weeks summer holidays". I suppose that's why dd's headmistress never fails to say to me "oh haven't you got the holidays off?". I work in education - on my case books at the moment have: a teacher who has had sex with a pupil, a teacher who is awol, a teacher who won't go to work because she doesn't like the way her boss looks at her, several teachers who have had repeated grade 4 lesson observations, a teacher who has stolen from a colleague, a teacher who is continually late for lessons, a teacher who has been sick and moonlighting. Would you like me to go on.

Power to the people

Well, yes, practically but the government are putting a shedload into that pot too. They are now saying (you will correct me if I'm wrong - and I might be) that they are going to be putting less in. If teachers want to maintain a defined pension at the proposed level they will have to contribute more. You/I may not agree but the logic is reasonable.

£30k per year pension? The AVERAGE is £3.5k-£4k per year for females and £5k for males. There is a tiny percentage of public service workers on the larger pension, a huge percentage on the small amounts. Not supporting the strikes because the strikers are going to have a huge pension is just wrong in my opinion.

The government 'putting a shedload into the pot' - from taxes. That public service workers pay the same as everyone else. As well as their own contributions.

Practicallyimperfect, do you realise you've just told us how much you earn?

No, they are asking for 3.2% more from us and none of that is going into my pension, as it isn't needed. They reduced contributions in 2006 and we pay more as well as a later retirement age (60-65). Now our pension pot is not in deficit and does not need me to pay more into it.

They are going to use the money to fill other deficits.

I'm a public sector worker.
I don't want your sympathy.
I don't want a divisive public v private sector debate.
My pension is not 'gold plated'
I want a fair wage and a living pension - like the one I signed up to.
I don't want the Govt to nick 3% of my salary and use it to bail out the Treasury.
Public sectors workers are also tax payers y'know.
Many local govt pensions were substantially reformed to account for people living longer etc about 3 year ago.

It is daft saying because other people are worse off we shouldn't defend our right to fair deductions.

I do earn a good wage, more than national average. But I am 30, was the first year group to pay tuition fees, I have a 95% mortgage and am in negative equity because the housing market had already gone mental when I bought (2007). I am not too hopeful for the future and worry about the current generation debt/pension/working conditions.

This article explains the pensions public sector workers get.

practically, that does not answer my point. If the government stopped contributing to your pension completely the fund would be unable to pay retired teachers within 5 years. Apparently.

Based on the calculator given to by the government I won't get anywhere near £30k a year!

married, I assume you're talking to me as you quoted me. I said "I don't know a single teacher....." I was referring to teachers that I know. Not a selection of 'rogue' randomers. I must have had very good fortune to only be associated with teachers who are fantastic at their jobs and I'm extremely grateful for this. I really don't think that because some teachers don't do their jobs properly, then all teachers should be punished and have shit pensions. I don't go for a second opinion every time I see a doctor just because I've heard of some who break the law.

Ok fair enough. But I signed up to certain conditions. Friends that I went to Uni with work in London, banking, publishing etc and earn mega bucks- much, much more than me. And they get bonus' and company cars, and blackberries etc. I could have done that but I chose not too.

Surely as my empolyer they should be contributing to my pension. I do not object to them paying less. I object to them taking 3.2% and paying it directly to treasury

Can I just say, I am not trying to martyr myself by saying I work soooo much harder than other professions or anything like this. But it is not a job you can do when you don't enjoy it and engage with it. This requires attracting good graduates, which means a good salary and pension scheme.

Public vs Private pensions

But, practically, that doesn't work. The Treasury are guaranteeing you a defined sum in retirement whatever any "fund" may contain.

Look, I don't want to argue with you because I'm generally sympathetic but I think the unions are arguing all the wrong points. Many of us who had a reasonable private fund 15 years ago have had to recognise that the markets and Gordon Brown have decimated our expectations. You get a defined outcome. That's the "gold-plated" bit.

public Sectors Do NOT "pay taxes too y'know " Ricidulous !

Their salaries are a cost paid for by all private sector workers.
Taxpayers pay their salary then they give a part of it back to the taxpayers.

That is not the same as contributin. they contribute no MONEY at all !

If you have an island with 100 peopl trying to run a community , cut off from outside world, then would it work if 30 or 40 people did very little expecting all the rest to find food, grow food, collect firewood ???

No. It would makle sense for 90 to 95 of the total 100 people to work on ESSENTIALthings like that and the rest ( ie equivalent to PUBLIC sector people ) to do other useful back up work like look after kids. But only after the ESSENTIAL stuff was down or the whole Island would starve !!

Some parts of Scotland and Norther UK have 40 to 50% of people in public sector, ie not generating any money for the country. On an island that would not be feasible, when times where tough, only if Foodwas plenty.

I am in private sector on Minimum wage.I dont complain my pension is bad because I HAVE NO pension at all !!! I cannot afford my tax to pay for Public
sector workers pensions. The money saved is not going to reduce the deficit it is going to stop me having to pay even more tax, so I'll never be able to afford a pension at all.

To my family having a pension is a luxury, to pay my bills now is more important. My husband faces fear or redunancy.

Stop moaning Public sector and join the real world with everyone else !

Why should my family pay for your fantastic benefite set up ages ago in totally different conditonss.
They have only lasted this long because you have UNIONS to Fight for unfair advantages for yourselves....... AND MOST PEOPLE DO NOT !