To think public sector workers

[firsttimemum77]

Are being 'punished' for mistakes made by bankers / previous government? I work for my LA and at the moment everything around making savings is centred around our jobs and salaries! People think we earn loads, get bonuses etc etc - I certainly don't and I work unsociable hours with no bonuses and a average wage which pays my mortgage and bills...

So AIBU to feel like this or do I deserve it because I work in the public sector!

Martha, I don't work in the private sector. This shouldn't be about people's individual choices. It is about creating a fair retirement and pension system that we can afford. Not everyone can work in the public sector. Lots of essential jobs are done by the private sector.

and actually, I think we should give the communist society a go. It would appear from recent global experiences that capitalism is all well and good in theory, but just not sustainable in practice .

Splodge, - not everyone deserves the same. We all deserve access the same opportunities. Slightly different thing.

And, to be realistic, 'we' don't all work hard. There are feckless lay-abouts in both the public and private sectors!!

And everyone does have the opportunity to choose to work in the public sector with the advantages and disadvantages that it offers.

FWIW I agree with you about pensions. They should be scrapped, not because they're unfair, but because we (the country) simply can't afford the luxury of them anymore. Salaries would probably rise for those (lucky few!) who still work in the public sector which would help to mitigate the effect of their loss.

I also think there are other areas ripe for cuts, starting in Whitehall ...

Milly, a fair system is precisely what we used to have. There used to be a state sponsored final salary scheme, which was designed to provide a pension of half your average salary over a 40 year working life. It was scrapped, and now we have means tested benefits to try to make sure that pensioners have a semi-decent life, that cost millions to administer, that many of the poorest pensioners don't claim and that discourage a lot of the less well off in work from saving for their own retirements.

We're all off to hell in a handcart, and the bankers weren't to blame for that particular fiasco, regardless of what's happening now.

Good post Gerbil Measles, I think what has annoyed me is that people are not comparing like with like.

Yes 11% or 16% or whatever does not make a large pension pot, yes I know that there is no actual pot for the civil service scheme, and I am aware that the system is pretty untenable but part of my decision to remain in the civil service (being paid less than the private sector) is because of the pension. I could earn £15K more in the private sector but would have to put a large percentage of that into a private pension scheme, and to me that is the pay off.

As Gerbil Measles has so kindly pointed out everyones taxes are actually paying for the current public sector pensioners. Its our kids that will have to pay for mine

I do accept that its an untenable situation and think most of us in the public sector are aware that changes will have to be made.

The point is that most of us are not highly or overpaid and we are going to have a few harsh years to come. Its not pleasant to see people suggesting we deserve it because we're overpaid or get unfair pensions.

BTW, I know I can be a bit ranty about pensions (I deeply love my job) but I'm not trying to say that public sector workers shouldn't have decent pensions. Everyone should be able to know that when they're not able to work any more, they're not going to be starving or freezing to death for lack of money.

It just annoys me a bit that the real value of these pensions isn't appreciated, and I'm glad that all the press coverage is making people realise how valuable they really are. I used to want to throttle one of my cousins when she went on about how she had to pay 3.5% superann (I know it's more now), and how it was scandalous that they were taking that amount out of her wages, when she was on track to retire on two thirds of her salary when she was 58.

But auberginesrus

if you worked in the private sector as demonstrate by my example you'd have to earn multiples of your current salary to enjoy the same retirement benefits not 15K more

25K in public sector gets 12k pension
25k in private gets 1k

therefore

300k in private sector gets 12k pension

The private sector is motivated by greed, plain and simple. Now the chickens have come home to roost and suddenly people realise the gravy train wasn't so great. Oh dear, my heart bleeds.

My proposal for the public sector - cut out layers of senior management. But those are the people they need to pay huge sums of money to attract out of the private sector aren't they? Not likely to be much altruism there then.

Gaelicsheep, that's not true and you know it. It's no better than saying that the public sector is full of workshy jobsworths.

I work in the private sector, and I'm driven by loving my job. I get paid to argue with people, what's not to like?

It's just ridiculous of you to say that all private sector workers are driven solely by greed. You want to protect your own terms and conditions - no problem with that - but on your interpretation, isn't that just as much greed as someone in the private sector wanting a decent wage or conditions?

My life would be infinitely more difficult if it weren't for the brilliant (private care home) carers who look after my Alzheimers suffering mum, and others like her. Shame on you for saying they're greedy. They work for money. So do I. So do you.

Not so nice when the boot's on the other foot is it?

I have no idea what you mean by that, but I suspect that it's intended harshly. There is no need for that. Everyone is going to be suffering, and it's nasty to see gloating about it.

FWIW, I would support a pay freeze for a year or two. I wouldn't even complain at a small pay cut as long as it was reasonable. I'm not in a union so will not be torn over what to do when they strike at such proposals. I'm not a complete idiot.

I object to people who lump together everyone in the public sector as one big bunch of scrounging maggots.

Changes have already been made to the public sector pension scheme. Contribution rates have been raised, retirement ages have been raised. I think pensions probably should be capped at a maximum amount. Again, if the contribution rate was raised again I wouldn't complain - I know how lucky we are.

But let's not forget that much of the reason that private companies no longer have decent pension schemes is that they gambled away the money or decided that shareholder profits were more important than making proper employer contributions. As I said, greed.

I meant in terms of sweeping and unfair statements.

gaelicsheep

Its not greed that got rid of decent private sector pensions, they were unfundable, just like they are now in the public sector, yet in the public sector apparently that's ok coz you can just grab someone elses cash to make up the shortfall

Gaelicsheep, I have not (if you look back) said that anyone in the public sector is a scrounging maggot, let alone lumping them all together as such. You were the one who was accusing all private sector workers of being greedy.

You're also wrong about private pensions - the majority of them are now closed because they have to operate under different rules to public sector pensions, not because money has been gambled away. OK, contributions weren't as high as (with hindsight) they should have been. Sometimes money was taken out of them. Sometimes (quite often) that happened because of Treasury rules, not because the people running the pension schemes wanted to do it.

Looking at the obscene profits of many of these companies, not to mention the salaries and bonuses paid to those at the top, I seriously doubt that is the only reason.

splodge - gaelicsheep is not wrong. Good pensions need not be unfundable. The USS is an example of a pretty good, private scheme (though adjustments are needed and coming because of the increased life-expectancy of its members).

The public sector pensions crisis is caused because - like NI and the state pension - it was never set up as a savings/investment scheme; that is, the recipients of the pensions are being paid directly from the current contributions of members. If (like Norway with its oil reserves) the UK public sector pension scheme had been set out differently, we might not be facing the pensions "black hole" of today.

GerbilMeasles - none of my comments were directed at you personally. I have simply become increasingly peed off at the trend the thread has taken since yesterday and the sustained "let's lump together and bash all public sector workers for daring to earn a living wage". And the refusal to accept any reasoned arguments (of which there have been many, including by me yesterday evening).

I never said private sector workers were motivated by greed, I said the private sector per se is motivated by greed and I stand by that statement.

Penthesieia

If the public sector scheme was actually funded every tax payer would have to contribute 17K right now!

Norway is a ridiculous example

A country with a tiny population and MASSIVE oil revenue. It's GDP per capita is way larger than ours

And it's closest neighbour, Sweden with a high tax system scrapped it's ridiculous final salary pension schemes years ago. Dear old GB was too scared of the unions to do similar reforms here

Penthesileia, gaelicsheep is wrong in saying that corporate greed is the only reason private pensions are now pretty much on the way out. Yes, the USS is funded, and yes, it's private (though I suspect if I were to read the valuation report on the USS, there'd be a pretty big hole there, hence the changes). There are still a few private schemes out there (I'd be out of a job otherwise).

I think splodge is right in that many pension schemes are now unaffordable. It's not the current cost that is the worry (though it's higher than it has been), it's the fear that suddenly those costs will go through the roof - the market capitalisation of a lot of companies is a fraction of their pension scheme liabilities and the companies could very easily be tipped into insolvency. That's not in anyone's interest, private or public sector.

Anyway, to get back on track. Public sector workers should have decent terms and conditions, including pension. Private sector likewise. It's not a way, folks, we both need each other.

I really don't get why this argument is such a big deal.

You either believe that people doing broadly similar (skill level, education, experience, hours) jobs should get broadly similar pay and pensions or you don't.

"not a war". Bah, brain the size of a planet, still can't spell or type properly.

I didn't say the only reason, I said it was much of the reason.

Anyhow I agree, as I think I said yesterday, that none of this should be about private sector workers against public sector workers. Real changes have to be made, but I fear that they won't be.

splodge: I meant to use Norway as an example of a country which made sensible investment provision (via its oil resources) for its population. It's not entirely a ridiculous example. Tony Benn proposed a similar saving scheme for Britain in the 1970s following the discovery of the North Sea Oil. Regrettably, his proposals were not followed.

I was not implying that the demographic picture of Norway was comparable with the UK.

GerbilMeasles: gaelicsheep's rhetoric may have been polemical, but I am not entirely convinced that the thrust of her point was not correct. Good pension provision is also a question of political and corporate will, rather than straightforward inherent unaffordability (after all, what determines what is "unaffordable"). Final salary schemes may be, I admit, impossible to fund; but the kind of scheme to which splodge is commited (according to the info. on this thread) - well, it's a disgrace. It appears to perform worse than conventional savings.