to think that the NUT advertising in the press about teachers' retirement age..

[wimblehorse]

..is a bit off?
The advert is asking people to sign up to an online petition that teachers should not have to work until they're 68 and if you agree to sign up to the petition.

It also says that they don't think nurses, police, ambulance drivers etc should have to work until this age.
Teaching is a stressful, demanding job and I can quite understand not wanting to do it full-time until age 68.

However I am not convinced that teachers warrant such "singling out" above other jobs. Of course the NUT is standing up for its members, however there are many other deserving (and undeserving) jobs out there and I would feel happier if we were "all in this together" and could have some sensible discussions about retirement age, gradual winding down of work etc for everybody.
AIBU?

wimblehorse - That is what annoys me. Lots of jobs are stressful and difficult to do if you are not on top of things. I work with challenging families and it is very stressful and you can't switch off at all. You have to be alert and aware all the time, or situations can and do develop quite quickly that can be horrendous.

And it is the same with lots of jobs. I wouldn't want to be a nursery nurse at 68 or a care assistant or a cleaner.

where do the NUT say teachers are more deserving than people in your occupation OP?

If their intention was that no-one should have to work until they're 68, I presume they would have said that rather than listing out a few choice occupations?

Mrskittyfane - NUT haven't, but other posters on this thread have. And tbh it does annoy me that on any thread about being a teacher there is ALWAYS at least one poster who says well it is different for teachers. And if I was a teacher it would annoy me even more.

The NUT are campaigning for TEACHERS.
They cannot campaign for anyone else because they don't represent anyone else.
The OP is getting annoyed because the NUT has used advertising space to raise the profile of it's member's campaign.
The OP then sees this as the NUT putting it's members above other workers rights.
Ridiculous.

Teachers in the NUT are being balloted at the moment for possible strike action on the 28th March. I wouldn't want to be teaching 30 boisterous 5 year olds at the age of 68. It's not fair on the teachers or the kids!

Lesley yes, I agree.
By campaigning for your organisation's cause you are not putting down everyone else's cause.

OP 30 years ago I used to hear a lot about 'the politics of envy'.

Then it was exclusively used to dismiss the resentment felt by the less well off about the rewards taken by entrepreneurs, captains of industry - the sort of people who put the great into Britain.

The Govt of the day regarded it as a Very Bad Thing Indeed.

The politics of envy is still very much around.

It's just that now it's almost exclusively a squabble between the less-well off with those in the private sector who have seen their working conditions eroded resenting the public sector for wanting to cling to their employment rights and agreements and having the organisation to protest.

The current Govt doesn't use that phrase but I suspect they think it's a Very Good Thing Indeed.

I am angry with the RSPB for ignoring the plight of teachers.

The bird loving bastards.

kaytola
perhaps teachers could be treated like the forces (which are recognised as predominantly a younger persons profession), with retirement and a reduced pension at an early age with a second career to follow.

tethersend :o :o :o !!!!

I am angry with the RSPB for ignoring the plight of teacher

The bird loving bastards.

tethersend

Maybe I am not making myself clear.

I do not expect the NUT (or RSPB) to campaign for me.
I do not object to the NUT campaigning for teachers.
I do not think it is A Good Thing for all teachers to have to teach 30 5 year olds full-time in their late 60?s.

I did not like their advert because it felt divisive and it has put me off supporting their campaign.

The bird loving bastards.

Oh, you're having a go at the birds now.

IME many teachers keep going anyway, or change role in a school so they might not be teaching, but taking admin roles.

We are notorious for dropping dead as soon as we retire, that's why many avoid it.

The issue of public sector pensions is by nature divisive.

People agree or disagree and argue over whether they agree or disagree.

The debate/ argument isn't going to go away. Maybe you see the NUT as fanning the flames? So be it. They are balloting their members at the moment and will act on their behalf.

I

Some stats I found..not the most up to date however

1: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmhansrd/vo050407/text/50407w10.htm

Extract: "As part of the demographic assumptions associated with the periodic valuations of the Teachers' Pension Scheme, the Government Actuary takes into account the life expectancy of teachers following their retirement. In the latest valuation report at 31 March 2001 the assumed life expectancy of teachers in normal health at age 60 was 26 years for men and 29 years for women. At age 65, assumed life expectancy would be about five years less than at age 60. The Government Actuary will be taking account of any subsequent improvements in life expectancy as part of the current valuation of the scheme."

Also this: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1567252/Why-accountants-live-longer-than-builders.html

Teachers are included here with comparable occupations e.g. managers, journalists. OK, it's an average, which can be misleading but if teachers were so far out of line from other occupations I imagine that would have been highlighted, as would the Minister's answer in the Commons.

I take issue (a little) with what seems to be an automatic assumption that people in their sixties cannot handle pressure, stress or are physically too taxed.

I have just retired - by choice and for more time to pursue hobbies and voluntary work, not because of health issues - at 68. My occupation involved a lot of international travel, a lot of stress and deadlines (including dealing with 24-hour media) a lot of responsibility and the need to assimilate difficult scientific and medical concepts very fast. My working week at pressure times ran to 90 hours and was rarely less than 45 (I was self-employed so no EU directives to hamper me).

OK there are certain occupations e.g. active duty in the armed forces, which would not be feasible, but I think you would find that a reasonable proportion of teachers in their sixties are well able to deal with the demands of the job.

OK there are certain occupations e.g. active duty in the armed forces, which would not be feasible, but I think you would find that a reasonable proportion of teachers in their sixties are well able to deal with the demands of the job.

Are you a F/T teacher sports?

Well no, you aren't

I don't really think it's for us to say, unless we are in our 60's and teaching F/T.

Lol at RBPB campaigning for teachers. Can you imagine the parental complaints if the teacher pops their clogs midway through the Romans:

'E's not making progress '! 'E's passed on! That old codger with the elbow patches tis no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the whiteboard 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the payscale! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-TEACHER!!

I'm just wondering about the motivation to stay at work past 60.
A well paid job is hard to give up in exchange for a pension?

Also, a 60 something teacher gets paid twice that of an NQT in their '20s. A teacher who is staying on to 68 because they have to isn't great for a school's budget.

I doubt they will get much sympathy from people in other occupations. BUT I think we should all be asking what the hell has happened to private sector pensions. The value has collapsed - what have trustees/investment managers/actuaries/the government been doing to lose all our money? Everyone seems to have forgotten one factor that I suspect is relevant - the way companies took 'pension holidays' in the 90s and stopped paying in because actuaries (and Nigel Lawson) claimed the schemes were 'over funded' i.e. had too much money.

They were wrong. Why and is anyone accountable/should anyone be accountable for that grave error?

Government has pulled the wool over everyone's eyes by turning it into a private sector v. public sector issue - but I think we should be asking what the hell has happened to private sector pensions.

Government has pulled the wool over everyone's eyes by turning it into a private sector v. public sector issue

I'm sure Dave loves these arguments/debates. They nicely take the spotlight off government.

As for sympathy Edam I don't think teachers want sympathy. They are fighting government changes in the same way private sector workers should be fighting against what has happened to their pension schemes.

MrsKittyFane: I don't really think it's for us to say, unless we are in our 60's and teaching F/T.*

You're probably right MrsKitty - I wouldn't argue. I guess I was posting more to provide a few background stats and to register how cross I sometimes get at the way older people are automatically assumed to be frail, feeble and past it.

I suppose, much like a 40 year old seems moribund to a 15 year old a 65 year old seems moribund to a 40 year old

It doesn't sound fair that they should be the exception for working till 68.

However last year DD1 who teacher gave the impression they have lost their passion for the actual teaching side of the job.

I wouldn't like to see more teachers like that in schools teaching.

had a teacher who gave .