that the police get such massive pensions...

[TakenYears]

....and from the age of 50.

Other public sectar workers get nothing remotely resembling that.

What people seem to forget with the police is you sign up for a fixed term and you can be made to retire at this time. Many officers who would like to stay on are being forced to retire. New recruits already sign up for longer than 30 years.

If your not familiar, why do you have a problem with it?

I agree with police pensions - but:

"Other public sector workers don't get punched in the face on a regular basis."

Social workers are more likely to be attacked or killed at work than the police. Don't assume police have the most dangerous job, because they don't.

Police aren't the only public sector workers that put themselves at risk, what about nurses and other A&E staff. Frontline staff in the NHS have to put themselves at risk of violence everyday, not to mention infection.

TakenYears I think that you nurses do a fantastic job too :) but here's the but.

But most of you get to work until you're past 50 still in one piece. A significant number of Police officers don't get to that age in the service because of injury sustained in the course of duty. Just as that pension's of no use to my first husband it's of little comfort to my cousin, who had to leave the force at the age of 31 as a result of injury caused during an attack upon him.

Looking on the other side of the argument, who'd be a Police officer for such little pay? A PC starts on, what, about £25K PA? And yet a PC is in the firing line for abuse and violence far more than the average DCI, far more than, say, the average manager in the average civil service office though both of these guys will earn double the PC's income. My DH sits on his butt in an office , taking occasional trips from the UK to the wilds of Dublin on business (involving a little business, then Guinness with a couple of his staff), that's as dangerous as his job gets, yet he earns more than a Chief Inspector and almost triple the wage of a PC. Is that fair? Maybe we should be looking at paying the Police more and increasing their benefits, not complaining about them.

I don't think so, Lesley. Social workers don't get killed or attacked more often than police, that's ridiculous. You don't cqall the social work to break up fights/deal with accidents/calm riots etc.

I think the police are amazing (in general although it is a profession that attracts a lot of megalomaniacs) and deserve their pensions.

I pay something like 3.5% into mine and the greatest risk I face on a daily basis is from the static shocks I get thanks to the carpet in our office.

I'd be a bit of an arse to begrudge coppers their pension. So I don't.

Do nurses and social workers also pay as much towards it? The police those dangers everyday as well.

It is currently under review. The annual pay rise is being frozen, some pay is being reduced. Lump sums are being lessend or possibly removed. The retirement age and length of service required is being raised.

When nurses, social workers, ambulance staff etc get assaulted or foresee situations that may escalate into violence who do they call to sort it out?

Police only retire at 50 if they have worked for 30 years and after contributing a large monthly chunk into their pension scheme.

No but you call social workers to go into a violent household to check on their child or to check on someone who is psychotic. Saw stats for this about 10 years ago, so may be currently different. But was true then.

YABU.
graham :(

Any indications that a household is going to be violent then social workers are straight onto police for a combined visit. Same for ambulance staff. Same for housing officers...the list goes on.

Yes pay is being reduced in the CSI dept and people are leaving and not being replaced. I work in a fairly easy chartiy job and earn as much as dh's superiors without any of the stress.

Ok - didn't used to be the case - so my case is based on stats in past. Just looked in google and violence has fallen dramatically over last 10 years.

I don't begrudge police officers a single penny of their pension - which, as others have pointed out, they pay 11% of their salary towards.

Feel free to join the Police Force OP.

You too can have that "perk".

Really sorry to hear about your loss Graham.

It isn't quite true to say that police who retire at 50 are getting back what they've put in. Even those who've contributed 16% for 30 years. They'll be getting back quite a bit more than that, financially. There are lots of good arguments to support police pensions, but financial payback certainly isn't one of them.

I'm another one wondering about the sense in forced retirements at 50, too. Not saying it's never appropriate, but it's concerning to think that experience which could be utilised for communal benefit is going untapped. Not all police work requires a person to be young and fit after all.

Sorry to hear of your loss Graham.

OP, it's worth pointing out that police officers have a short life expectancy after retirement (it used to be on average 5-10 years post-retirement, however I know it's gone up recently, can't find updated reports, which is one of the reasons govt. are so keen to cut their contribution) compared to others.

Every ex or serving police officer I know (a fair old number of people) has said there is no way they would've joined knowing how fubar-ed the job is going to be in the near future, morale in the service is at an all time low.

No one gets what they have put in. You could potentially get far more out of a state pension than you put in. The OP was that they get more. They pay in more so, of course, they should get more.

Yes DPrince but you said people get something they pay for. That's not really true. The best argument in favour of high police pensions is that it's justified for them to get back more than they put in because of the particular circumstances of the job.

DH pays 15%. The pension scheme is entirely self-supporting here ie the working officers pay the pensions of the retired officers. Nobody else contributes, not you op, not 'the taxpayer'. DH signed up for 35yrs paying 15% and taking not a penny from you. Explain, exactly, the problem? Of course if Nick and Dave devalue the pension or the role any further no fecker will sign up for it and you will end up supporting their worthless pensions. But you actively encourage that all you want.

And your thread title makes no sense btw.

No - YOU think that's the best argument. I think its only part. Lots of people think their job is the hardest/dangerous etc. However pensions come down to figures. They get what they put in relative terms. They put more in, so they get more out.

I'm a Social Worker in Criminal Justice. I can count on one finger the amount of violent attacks I have known amongst my colleagues in the past five years, but every week, I write at least one report on offending which includes violence towards the police.
They get spat on, punched, kicked, headbutted. People try to run them over. They get stabbed by needles hidden in a drug addict's pockets, and have to worry about disease as a result. They, on a daily basis deal with the aftermath of violence and sexual abuse. I don't begrudge them a good pension after 30 years of that. Particularly since they have paid for it.

Bitching because someone else gets a better deal is a bit pathetic actually. How about we start trying to raise conditions for everyone instead of sitting in the corner crying about how the other kid got a bigger slice of cake. Because all that does is let the Condems shrink the cake further whilst getting fat.

I actually said I support police pensions.

DPrince in relative terms yes that's possible, in financial terms it's incorrect. I suppose it's true that what constitutes the best argument is a matter of opinion. But I don't think I'm being controversial in saying an argument that's factually wrong isn't very helpful.