Teachers to strike - 30 June

[meditrina]

breaking now on SKY

Overwhelming vote by 2 teachers' unions (92%)

I still find this an amazing debate - it really isn't about who 'deserves' a pension or not - it is just the maths. How on earth odo those of you who think the pensions should be left unchanged think we should pay for it??? And please don't say 'let the bankers pay', because the very basic maths of this are that the bankers, however much you hate them, are a tiny tiny minority of people, and you couuld tax ALL of their income and come nowhere near to fixing this problem.

I worked in the public sector for 5 years, I dutifully paid into my pension. I moved into the provate sector and was told that to maintain the level of benefit I would get from the public sector pension, I would need to pay 1/3 of my monthly salary into a private pension, which would still not be guaranteed. That is the reality - these pensions were just not designed for current life expectancies or indeed lifestyle expectations.

All of you complaining about the pension age being raised have to remember that this is for everyone, builders, farmers, shop assistants. No-one will be getting a state pension before 68 (probably a lot later by the time we make it there) but a 65 year old today is a lot fitter than a 65 year old 20 years ago. I am a real pragmatist and just get very frustrated reading people's unrealistic assesments of the situation we are in. Part of getting out of this mess is going to be facing up to the choices that we have been making for the past 20 years, and to the realities of an ageing population.

I was at school in Merseyside during the 80s - I remember the strikes and it simply wasn't fair on the pupils. Loads of kids in our class really struggled and missing so much school was definitely part of that. My daughter starts school in September, and I am depressed by the thought of history repeating itself.

It isn't fair that some people earn more money than others, it isn't fair that some people are surviving comfortably while the rest of us are struggling. It isn't fair that my family in the north are all being made redundant or on reduced hours, whereas where we are in the south east things are nowhere near as bad. It isn't fair, but it is where we are at the moment, and the solution is investment and growth, not throwing borrowed money at the problem.

Sorry for the rant, I am sure many of you will disagree, but I simply don not think our kids will be able to enjoy any kind of standard of living if we don't take these kinds of actions now to correct the imbalances of the past few years. We seem to talk so much about the need to fix the environmental legacy we are leaving them, surely this is equally important?

Standing firm on this is the best thing Cameron can do for the country and I think it would be worth being a single term administration to try and fix this. I suspect everyone would then vote Labour in, but I will eat my hat if they ever reverse the pension changes - they know it is necessary, but don't have the ability to make the change.

isn't it's about the money here and I can see why. The idea that we should hope that our best go into teaching 'for the children' is just nuts. I can see that the overall package might appeal to some, but to the people who could walk into really highly paid jobs in the City etc... it looks like a joke. We either hold up our hands and say that's the way it is, or we do something about it and about our schools and general education level in the process. The teaching profession should be seen as just that, a profession but while the salary gaps between teachers and lawyers, doctors, architects etc... remain, it won't be and we will lose our brightest students to the private sector. I'm not saying everyone should contribute more to fund higher salaries and/or pensions for teachers, but those of us on higher than average salaries should.

would a teacher come on here and tell us exactly what % of their pay they themselves pay over in pension payments and how much in % the state pays
and what, on average, they will have as a pension as a % of their salary if - say they work for 35 years

DorasBackpack - spot on!

I'm a nurse. I work in the private sector. I will receive no pension and just have to make my own private pension arrangement (which will be worthless by the time I retire).

I receive no sickness pay if I'm off sick - Just SSP.

I haven't had a pay rise for two years.

Why are public sector workers so special?

I also have to work until I'm 67 as well

I'll be long dead by then.

And to highlight again as someone has already - when has anyone ever seen strike action work? In the private sector it never makes any difference just a load of hassle and upset with the same end result.

And why do all union leaders have to be flippin northern - makes me ashamed when I here them ranting on (yes I am northern)

I think it's very sad that people are bashing teachers. They stand to lose 10% of their pay - they get paid peanuts for graduate level work. They do a fantastic job on the whole and are making a highly meaningful contribution to the future of the whole country.

Close friends who are teachers work all hours god sends and put all their energy into making kid's futures better.

You should be ashamed of yourselves for wanting them to suffer. The government CAN find a way of making this work. They waste billions on getting involved in wars or bailing out other EU countries. My tax money goes towards this crap and i would much rather pay someone to teach my children well.

AAAGGGgggghhh it is NOT about bashing teachers!!!!!!

The cost of any war or indeed ANY EU bailout is NOTHING compared to the pensions timebomb. The pensions thing will continue for ever (and continue getting worse and worse) unless it is changed. Our children's children will be living on stones to pay the 90% tax that will STILL not cover the public sector pension liability by that stage!!

You may think it is just a conspiracy dreamt up by the government to subjugate us, but that is a genuinely a conspiracy theory, not a relfection of the facts. I don't know why I care about this so much today, but I feel like we just have to face facts and try and find a way forward, rather than whinging and blaming the coalition.

And interestingly, the bailouts are required because some of our European neighbours are not able to make the kinds of changes required to meet the terms of their financing. You think we should just leave the Greeks to it, I suspect. If it happens to us, would you want everyone else to do ythe same?

My A levels were wrecked by the strikes in the 80s - we barely saw one of the teachers, a leading member of his union. It took me years to catch up on my education.
I don't have a pension and I receive no sick pay.
As a childminder, 30th June will be especially busy for me because I'll have all the after school children here all day.

I supported the teachers strikes then and I support them now. I fully understand why they feel they have to take this action. Perhaps it's because I know what teachers really do and how hard they work.

Can I also here the full advantages of working for the public sector:

Full sick pay - not SSP and this could be for a couple of years and even paid even for self inflicted injuries - which is never managed or challenged which is public money paying for un-necessary leave.

Excellent holidays - plus extra holidays for things like the royal wedding, and additional days after bank holidays. I think my friend works part time and receives 22 days!!! Private sector around 26 days on f/t???

Flexiable working - Much more flexi time - much more accommodating for mums. Even home working.

Paid over time.

All these plus more need to be taken into consideration - not just pay.

Tanith - me too. The EIS had widespread strikes throughout the 3rd and 4th year of my scottish secondary education

I don't think the pensions timebomb is a myth. I have worked in central govt as an analyst. But believe me money could be spent differently, from a policy point of view we don't have to get involved in a lot of things, we also have very low rates of tax. We could also employ things like transitions into retirement where people are only required to work part-time after, say, 62. The range of options is as vast as people's imaginations.

It IS about bashing teachers because they are incredibly underpaid already.

I also have friends who work in investment banks who get fantastic benefits and holiday/sick pay. If you think people in operations roles in banks don't take sick leave, have five weeks per year plus bank holidays off then you're misinformed.

Teachers shouldn't be taking the hit on this. There are other ways, Cameron et al are doing this on ideological grounds.

Yes there is a pensions 'hump' but we will get past it and it is not going to continue growing at the rate it currently is and get worse and worse - that is story we are being fed....

I am giving up now! How on earth anyone would think that the pensions thing is a 'hump' is beyond me. That simply defies logic.

Unless you are a pensions expert and can show me some ultra-complex wizardry that will make the pensions issue go away, I just think you are burying your head in the sand on this.

Bacon, teaching is one of the least flexible jobs there is. When my children were ill I couldn't just take annual leave, I had to take unpaid leave. It broke my heart to tell my 5yr old that I couldn't come and watch him in his Christmas play because both showings were during the working day.

Oh and just to say, yes, the private sector are also feeling the pinch but during boom time wages in the private sector rise vastly especially for graduate professions. This doesn't follow in the public sector.

Lastly but I think of fundamental importance is the fact that from the governments POV this has sweet FA to do with economics. This is a long-held ideology of the Tories and the current economic situation is making it possible. I'm not suggesting public sector pensions are not hugely expensive, simply that that is not the reason the government are tackling this now.

X posts with your last statement, Lookthepart.

If the public sector is such a dreadful place to work then why do so many people currently work in it. I worked in local govt for over 20 years. i now work in the private sector and have done for the past 8. there is no comparison between the two in terms of conditions of service. Public sector was much more flexible and family friendly. the argument that you get paid less because the pension is so generous doesnt stack up any more. When the old age pension was introduced it was meant to catch people at the end of their life. av life expectancy was 63 now with it in the mid to late 70's people are regularly living 20 years beyond their retirement. do the maths it don't stack up any more.

good for the teachers they do a good job for crap pAy

THEY HAVE MY SUPPORT

I am more cross the the conservative propaganda 'think of the single mums' - they were never interested before!

Anyone who believes that teachers are on seriously good money and can afford to do this, needs to get their heads checked.

This applies to the younger generation of teachers more, but many of them are still paying off student loans (and they won't be paid off until they're middle aged) and being hard-working professionals, own their own houses. They're taxed up to their eyeballs- and like many parents know, if your household earns over £35k (even combined between you and DH)....student finance is a real prick about it- meaning if their children want to go to university- they're going to have to help them considerably (my DD is expected to live on £3400 next year, this doesn't even cover her rent- even her working wouldn't cover this deficit.

These people have a lot of costs to cover transport, bills, mortgages, their children's higher education- these are educated people who have worked hard and do a fantastic job looking after your little darlings...which certainly not everyone can do. Their 'long holidays' are spent marking work and preparing lessons, desperate to meet targets because of our exam culture where they need to get results....

a good pension is one less thing for them to worry about. It's a perk of the job and they're perfectly entitled to fight for their right to keep it under the current measures.

Yes, and people are living longer but in poorer health. Most of these people in their 60's are going to be signed off on what was incapacity benefit anyway. The idea of a 66 year old working a full 37 hour week on their feet isn't going to happen in the majority of cases. My FIL recently died aged 64 from cancer, not everyone is going to make it. The current obesity crisis will also contribute to increased ill health in older age.

If we want a dignified, civilised society then we need to think creatively about how we handle this. But I return to my original point. I have worked in central govt as an analyst. I have seen the facts without media/political spin on them (as can anyone else if they do some internet digging). There are other ways of dealing with this than taking 10% of teacher's pay away. Anyone who tells you otherwise is also part of an ideologically driven conspiracy theory. It's lazy thinking to assume that Cameron is not putting his own spin on this.

Policy options could be spread across any number of sectors to drive down the cost of living so that people could retire in a staged way and if needed on a lower amount e.g. cheaper rent capped housing, intervening in the utilities/food market to ensure lower living costs, encouraging people to take out cheap supplementary private pensions - with a bit of thought the problems could be managed. None of this is being discussed.

Increasing contributions so heavily, in such a damaging way is just a blunt instrument typical of ideology - rather than needs - driven politics.

I can't be fecked to post anymore. Let's just be a bit more bloody creative in our thinking. It's not just a case of pounds in/pounds out.

For those of you who claim there is another way...what do you suggest?

For those who are saying the Tories are doing this on ideological grounds, can you explain why they'd want to? Surely it's a sure fire vote loser and exactly why the last two-three govts are avoided the very same issue.

And also why is it a bad thing that the Tories would implement policies based on their "ideologies"? Wouldn't you expect Labour/whoever to do the same? It's like claiming you are christian but then celebrating Eid.

A fairer system would be that everyone paid into the same type of scheme, whether privately employed or state employed, and the months worked/quarters worked would be counted at the end. That would then be calculated with a percentage of the best earning years of a career to set your % pension and it would work the same for everyone, public or private employee.

At present, I am afraid the public sector are benefiting (whether they believe it or not) from better terms than private sector workers - who are paying the taxes to supply the better terms whilst also having to pay more to try and make up their own pensions. This cannot be fair.
Re older teachers, policemen etc, I think society has to wake up to the fact that you cannot have a career of 25/30 years finishing by your mid/late 50's (as many public sector workers have gotten used to) and get a fantastic solid pension, then live till you are 90 odd without the consequences being a drastic reduction in lifestyle for your kids and grandkids. The State system was not designed for this. Sorry but it wasn't and change has got to come, for EVERYONE.

PriceWaterhouseCoopers did a report a few years back where they compared teachers' hours to those of other professionals. If you add up all the hours teachers work over a year, it apparently works out the same as other professionals, except that teachers' work is compressed intensively into term times. Head teachers, on the other hand, work bonkers hours compared to anyone, but that's a whole other issue.

It's reported here

So let's stop muttering about teachers sitting on their backsides half the time.