Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Public Sector Pensions

73 replies

Chil1234 · 07/10/2010 10:04

Lord Hutton (former Labour cabinet minister) has produced his report this morning on the state of public sector pensions suggesting, amongst many other things, that increasing contrbutions may be necessary to make up some of the shortfall and that final salary schemes should make way for average salary schemes. Union representatives interviewed on the Today prog this morning ranged from 'we'll look at the recommendations' to 'no way Pedro'. Who's right?

OP posts:
Original poster
Chil1234 · 07/10/2010 10:14

Duplicated an existing thread. Whoops...

OP posts:
turkeyboots · 07/10/2010 10:14

I think public sector pensions will change (sadly as am a civil servant and only pay a tiny percent into my lovely final salary pension) but it will mean that people will leave the public sector. Talented people, who the public sector needs, will jump ship to the private sector, as public sector salaries won't be going up to cover the difference.

As it is we can't compete for the best talent on pay, and it will only get worse. It will take serious commitment and altrusism for people to join as conditions keep getting worse.

VivaLeBeaver · 07/10/2010 10:19

Its changed to an average salary scheme in the NHS already. I joined the NHS in May 2008 and am on an average salary scheme. If my CRB had come through 4 weeks quicker I'd have been on a final salary scheme.

Obviously I'm fairly gutted about that. I think its bad for women as they're likely to be part time when kids are younger, etc.

I thought the idea of the NHS pension apparantly being good was that it made up for crappy nurse wages.

Knowing my luck I'll be on the average pension scheme and still have to contribute more.

BeenBeta · 07/10/2010 10:26

If you jump ship to the private sector you wil get no pension at all. Public sector pensions are worth about 20% on top of take home salary.

Are they going to do anything about cutting the actual pensions already being drawn by retired former public sector workers? That is the biggest problem.

Some people are drawing public sector pensions index linked and will draw them for 40 years or more. Years longer than they actually worked. This is too big a burden - it makes up a huge chunk of local authority spending. Spending cuts by local authorities will hit frontline services yet the pensions of employees who retired years ago will still carry on as normal. Even if local frontline services were cut to zero peole would still pay a lot of council tax just to cover retired local authority workers.

FloraFinching · 07/10/2010 10:26

Agree with turkeyboots.

with massively decreased job security, and now cuts to my pension, I do ask myself why I wouldn't start locuming, given that locuming would boost my pay by 50%.

Let's hope for the good of the NHS that it's only evil old me having that particular thought.....

scaryteacher · 07/10/2010 11:21

We are waiting for the Forces Pension report, which is separate from the Hutton report. I'd be glad if they would raise the retirement age, dh has to leave at 53 before we've even started to pay for uni fees.

VivaLeBeaver · 07/10/2010 11:31

It does seem unfair that police can retire at 50 (I think 55 for new recruits now), But nurses can't retire till 60 or 65 for new recruits.

scaryteacher · 07/10/2010 11:38

Depending on whether your are RN, Army of RAF you will have a different compulsory retirement age even at the same rank. Dh has to go at 53, it would be 55 if he was Army and the same or older if he was RAF. It means the Army and the RAF can get more pension than the RN.

fluffles · 07/10/2010 11:41

we're all screwed in the public sector anyway. if we're not out in the private sector producing consumer goods and contributing to consumption then apparently we're a waste of space.

scaryteacher · 07/10/2010 11:49

If you are public sector you still have to eat and buy clothes so are contributing to consumption by buying things to consume iyswim.

ruddynorah · 07/10/2010 11:56

Most of dh's police civilian colleagues are retired police men. They enjoy their gold plated pension as well as their full time wage.

IsItMeOr · 07/10/2010 12:03

BeenBeta - did Hutton look at that issue do you know?

Because you're right, the big costs that I heard quoted on the radio earlier are all to do with pensions currently being paid out.

But I had always thought it would be grotesquely unfair to change the rules after someone has retired and has no opportunity to do anything about it.

scaryteacher · 07/10/2010 13:26

Or even when they are just before retirement and can do nothing about it in time.

expatinscotland · 07/10/2010 13:38

What BeenBeta said.

telsa · 07/10/2010 13:40

On what all this means, read this fantastic and illuminating blog post by Richard Seymour - who wrote a great book called The Meaning of David Cameron.
leninology.blogspot.com/

telsa · 07/10/2010 13:41

should have done that as a link
leninology.blogspot.com/

Original poster
Chil1234 · 07/10/2010 14:42

As the person writing the blog points out.... the union reaction suggests that this is a good plan and they'll probably approve it rather than make a big fuss.

OP posts:
BeenBeta · 07/10/2010 15:11

IsItMeOr - I dont know if he did look at it. He should have if he didnt.

Problem is that once again older people have a lot of votes and hence the cuts are unlikely to fall on them. Once again it is the younger generations paying for older people's benefits and paying more tax and having their own benfits/pensions cut.

Public sector workers retiring at 55 or 60 has to stop and pension has to be based on average pay over career and that I think would be fair. I also think it should be made retrospective.

I do not think retrospective taxes or beenfit changes are good but needs must. If the Govt was to set up a pot of money today to pay out all future pensions for public sctor workers that are already drawing their pension it would add a huge amount to the national debt.

The pain of cuts has to be spread cross all age groups and income categories. We are in this together.... aren't we?

I know I will have to pay more tax and not get a pension and have to pay for my DSs university education,. I accept that. However, I expect those not paying tax and already receiving a pension to take some pain as well down a to a minimum sensible state pension level.

solo · 07/10/2010 15:23

When I started my career job, they'd just changed the retirement age from 55 to 60 and now new recruits will be working til they are 65. They tried (and in the main failed) to get us to change our pension, meaning that it would be worth a lot less, but those joining after then were put on the new pension so didn't have any choice.

I'm trying very hard to imagine a 64.9 year old rolling around on the floor with a dangerous and aggressive (pulls age out of the air) 26 year old prisoner after possibly running up 5 flights of stairs...there are certain jobs that really do need young and fit employees and not so much the aging ones.

I certainly don't want to be a 65 year old prison officer.

telsa · 07/10/2010 15:45

Union leaders' reaction is not that it is a good plan - they are just more terrified of something even worse.

Litchick · 07/10/2010 15:56

Beenbeta is correct - some of the existing pensions are too generous.

Some teachers took early retirement, early pension and now do locum supply work. Ditto local authority lawyers.

It's a nice pipedream, but unsustainable.

I also wonder if state pension ought not be income linked. Those with comfortable pensions don't need the full state pension that some poor sods have to live on do they?

BeenBeta · 07/10/2010 16:24

solo - would it not be wise for prison officers to move on to management level or probation service work after 50? They have huge experience that could still be put to good use even after they physically may not be able to do the prison officer job.

Same with police officers, fire officers ambulance staff etc. The spend years training yet retire early and their skills and experience are lost.

scaryteacher · 07/10/2010 16:55

'Public sector workers retiring at 55 or 60 has to stop and pension has to be based on average pay over career and that I think would be fair. I also think it should be made retrospective.' How do you make it retrospective though? I don't think you can. The last government had already been in consultation with the EU legal bods on the consequences of reneging on the public sector pay deals and were advised not to go there.

If you make it retrospective, then you won't make things cheaper. Those who can will apply for hb/ctb and other benefits. Many of those on public sector pensions are like my in-laws, with my mil having no state pension, as she paid married woman's stamp, and not a lot of teachers pension either, as I've known her since she was 50, and she didn't do paid work then. My fil supports her on his service pension and the other private sector from when he left the services.

ruddynorah · 07/10/2010 19:36

BeenBeta that's what i was saying several of dh's police civilian colleagues do. he joined as a civilian 25 years ago. many others are retired policemen. he earns the same as them but they have their police pension on top. in theory those police could have just been moved into those jobs at 50 rather than retiring if they were unfit for their previous role. yes it would do dh out of a job, but still Grin

scurryfunge · 07/10/2010 19:45

The Police roles available as civilians are not as well paid, generally as the Police officer's wage. Police officers should not be paid their wage to do support roles. That doesn't make sense, ruddynorah.