To think this is appalling hypocrisy

[charmedrose]

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/865327/Pension-Civil-service-Labour-Robert-Devereux-transport-UK-national-salary

Why should he be allowed to retire at 61 and why such a HUGE pension. It's all right for some isn't it.

The state pension age will be increased to 66 in 2020 before being upped again to 67 in 2028 - the foundations of the increases were laid by Mr Devereux
There lies the hypocrisy. Of course he's a hypocrite.

Do you not understand that when at some point the tories are ousted that this man will still have a job? He is a civil servant. He was working as a civil servant when labour was in government... and probably when the tories were in before that.

"The mandarin is no stranger to huge sums of money being thrown his way after receiving a £20,000 bonus in 2013 despite being heavily criticised by the public accounts committee after his management of the universal crediit scheme."

Not a man who does a great job it seems.

He doesn’t make policies. He administers them.

Politely, I think your anger is misdirected OP.

You do seem confused about the Civil Service.

There are two different ways to look at pay, imo: What people deserve to get paid, and what rates and benefit packages are needed to attract the best people to the job - particularly when the demand for a particular skill set, experience and competency exceeds the supply.
The former is subjective, the latter is more objective.

I think that care work should be paid much better - not just because they deserve more ( they do), but also because the rate at the moment isn't high enough to attract and retain enough people.

Care worker's pay is not connected to how much the top rung of civil servants get paid though. Paying those at the top less won't help care workers. The problem with the best paid public sector workers, is that even if we might not think they "deserve" their high pay, if their skills are in high demand in the private sector then we need to offer them something to keep them within the public sector. "Deserve" has nothing to do with it.

No he did the work he doesn’t write the policy!!! It is his job to implement the policy of the government as others have pointed out but you don’t want to listen.

Daily Express simplifies everything to make people rage who don’t want to know the full details.

If you want hypocrisy look at their tax affairs!

Ah, so he was involved in pensions work? Even so, civil servants develop options and implement politicians’ decisions. This one didn’t determine his own pay or pension arrangements, and presumably just did his job for the politicians.

No. There is no hypocrisy.

He is retiring at age 61 from a private pension arrangement. He is permitted to do so under the rules of the scheme, and any financial strain arising from his retirement affects (I assume) only the civil service pension scheme and the sponsoring employer. As long as private pension schemes meet legal requirements they can do as they please.

The state pension is funded through the current working population. Allowing people to continue drawing their state pension from age 65 (or 60 for women), in a world where life expectancies are increasing is not financial sustainable. Yes, increasing the state pension age seems unfair, but if the current average 40 year old is living to age 90 (for example), do we want to be paying them a state pension from age 65?

OP you don't seem to understand the differnece between employer pensions, state pension and private pensions.

Sloesloe can't get mine until I am 67 , current forcast is less than £400 a month and no lump sum

Should have said that is after 16 years paying into the pension scheme !

Life expectancy has actually plateaued , and it is not 90 for either sex , it is around the 80 -82 year mark I think .

Life expectancies have plateaued. But over the years since the state pension ages were set at 65/60 they have drastically increased.

My age 90 was a guess/example, but IMO not an unreasonable one for someone who is currently age 40.

My dad retired at 54, which seems ridiculous now.

Ah but Aurora , there is every possibility that it may actually go backwards

frumpety that will be your state pension. Private pensions have to let you have up to 25% of the value of the pot once you reach 55. This is because private/company pensions should be funded by a "pot" of money that has been invested from the contributions paid by employee and employer over the years. Even the Civil Service pensions, which are actually funded by current contributions, still allow you to have the notional amount of 25% of the value. You do have to bear in mind though that if you do take the 25% you have a lower income.

In theory you can take the whole amount out as money after age 55 from private pensions, but you get taxed something like 55% on everything over that 25% allowance .

And to be fair Aurora your 'drastically' is an increase of about 10 years over the last 47 years .

I've met Robert Devereux several times and I'd be hard pressed to find a senior civil servant with as much comittment and passion for a job as he has. You can't underestimate the dedication you have to have to succeed in the SCS.

Life expectancies could decrease, although IMO it's unlikely. Unless of course the NHS does completely go down the pan as some think it will in which case we'll start dying of things that previously the NHS would have saved us from, like heart attacks. A cheery thought!!

If the increase is 10 years that is still costly. If previously the government thought an average 65 yo would live to age 80 and they only needed to pay a state pension for 15 years, then an increase of 10 years is proportionately expensive.

SloeSloeQuickQuickGin where do you work where most people retire at 55? I don't know anyone who can afford to do that!

But the life expectancy rise has been pretty much consistent since 1970 , so every government since that year has known that it is coming and could have made less drastic changes .

But an average 65 year old will only live to about 80 , according to current figures , so if the retirement age is 65 , they will still only be paying it for 15 years ?

Allergic Well Local Authority pensions don't allow that. Have to wait till 67, although I can take it at 60 with an actuarial reduction.