Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

to be completely confused about the strike on 30th Nov?

79 replies

seekinginspiration · 23/11/2011 18:35

So far I've heard completely contradictory statements on the radio, tv and from individuals. A friend has been told that teachers need to work until they are 68 years old - even if the job is very physically hard work e.g. reception class? She's only just over 50 - so up till last year thought she would be able to retire at 60. What is the truth?

OP posts:
tiredemma · 23/11/2011 18:38

Yes my job is very physical (psychiatric nurse) lots of rolling around the floor and fighting off blows. We used to have 'special officer' status that meant we could retire at 50. Not any more- I will now be expected to work until at least 68.

Dave C is also suggesting that I might want to take my kids into work with me on Nov 30th.

Clever twat.

EdithWeston · 23/11/2011 18:41

DC didn't come up with the kids to work idea: he merely endorsed what Louise Mensch came up with.

WidowWadman · 24/11/2011 09:42

I thought retirement age is going up, because on average people now are living longer than they used to?

catnet · 24/11/2011 09:43

i thought people were dying earlier of obesity etc, otherwise lets all get drunk and play ping pong

mollschambers · 24/11/2011 09:48

AFAIK public sectors workers are striking over pensions as they are being told they will:

  1. have to work longer.
  2. have to pay in more.
  3. have a reduced pension for their efforts.
planetpotty · 24/11/2011 09:56

Grin nothing to add on the strikes but I'm up for getting drunk and playing ping pong!

letmehelp · 24/11/2011 10:14

That's true moll, just like most people in private sector pensions were told 2-3 years ago. We can't afford these pension benefits anymore. It's distressing and disappointing for those involved, but more income tax anyone? Less spending on schools/hospitals?

mollschambers · 24/11/2011 10:19

I don't think those striking think it will change anything. Not the ones I know anyway. I fully support their right to protest. What would anyone take such a detrimental change lying down??

dreamingofsun · 24/11/2011 10:48

we took changes just like these a few years ago 'lying down' - the general feeling was that we felt we were lucky to have a final pension scheme at all, even if we had to work 5 years longer, pay more in and get less back.

niceguy2 · 24/11/2011 11:46

Dave C is also suggesting that I might want to take my kids into work with me on Nov 30th.

If you actually listened to what he & the MP who asked the question actually said, both said "...if it is safe to do so". So if you have a dangerous job then it's not safe is it?

The public sector won't get much sympathy from the private sector since even the reduced pensions the government are offering is something we can only dream of. In addition it all has to be funded from the private sector.

The bottom line is this. Are you paying enough into your own pension to retire? The answer to that is no. So in effect you are asking someone else to subsidise your pension. As I told my daughter who was asking why her teachers are striking. It's not me who will be paying, it's her generation and her kids who will be expected to foot the bill for something she's had no vote over. Is that fair? Not to her.

AbsofCroissant · 24/11/2011 11:59

but how many could feasibly take their children into work? I imagine very very few.
Office jobs - what, you're just going to sit all the kids in a meeting room with juice boxes and hope for the best. Hospitals - hahahaha. Couldn't even go there. Factory workers - I don't think so.

Should we be watching parliament with interest on Wednesday to see the MPs with all their kids in tow as the schools are closed due to strikes?

niceguy2 · 24/11/2011 12:09

Of course there will be many jobs where it's not realistic but it doesn't mean that many of us cannot. I don't see what's the big deal. Take them in if you can, don't if you can't. Jeeez. Give the guy a break. If you want someone to blame, blame the striking teachers whom want something for nothing.

SoupDragon · 24/11/2011 12:20

The teachers are the one group of people i don't blame.

JuliaScurr · 24/11/2011 12:36

Private sector workers who had their pensions destroyed suffered because they had no organisation to defend them. Having learnt that lesson, public sector workers are prepared to fight for theirs. Good. I completely support them and will not fall for the divide and rule trick being promoted by CallmeDave. Why should they pay more for longer to get less? Ridiculous.

letmehelp · 24/11/2011 12:37

Exactly niceguy2, they have excellent T&C (even the new ones) I get that they would prefer to keep old pension terms, but the alternative is to have fewer teachers, less support, no books etc.

I generally consider myself to be a bit of a socialist and it's uncomfortable to find myself on the government's side in this, but really....

Obviously not everyone can take their DC to work, but there's really no need to be so negative at the mere suggestion of it. I've taken DC to work when school closed for snow etc. They take some books/colouring/toy cars/school type work (and yes food and drink) and occupy themselves while I get on with what I need to, I'll take them to the park for and hour at lunch time and then they'll read etc a bit more. They make themselves useful fetching drinks from machine for colleagues/doing photocopying etc. By definition, as they're at school, they're not toddlers, having to entertain themselves quietly for a bit shouldn't be that hard. And they quite enjoy coming!

Boss is generally appreciative that I've turned up and will sometimes even contribute sweets. Other colleagues enjoy finding them things to do.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 24/11/2011 12:45

The OP started by asking about reception teachers retiring at 68. There are all kinds of people who are in demanding roles - either physically or mentally - in all walks of life. Some relish the pressure and keep going 100% right to the last day, others scale things down, switch roles within the organisation or decide to change career all together as they get older. However, outside of jobs like teaching and the police force, the ones that decide to change career don't usually get a pension in their fifties at the same time.

JuliaScurr · 24/11/2011 14:08

The upper echelons of private sector firms do OK for pensions, golden handshakes, etc.
Maybe they could extend their own schemes to their employees?

tiredemma · 24/11/2011 14:27

Ive just done a night shift, really tired and probably won't make any sense.

I have an issue with paying more money to effectively get less. Who wouldn't?

I work in the NHS, money isn't fantastic by any stretch of the imagination. I have a friend who left the NHS to join a Private company - No pension but a 13k pay rise. plenty to put into a private pension fund I would imagine.

Thats the thing- those of you trying to draw comparisons between private and public seem to forget that Private employees tend to get paid more. NHS do not.

So I get a shit wage, work longer, pay more and get less. Why do you think that this is ok? why do you think that I shouldn't protest about this? why should we do as we have always done and just take it lying down?

Reality is Ill probably be dead before I draw my pension anyway- short staffed wards, lack of resources- will probably have a heart attack. Hey ho. Probably what this Govt are trying to do.

GrimmaTheNome · 24/11/2011 14:29

Thats the thing- those of you trying to draw comparisons between private and public seem to forget that Private employees tend to get paid more

That used to be the case - everything I've read in the last few years says otherwise.

tiredemma · 24/11/2011 14:32
  • I can't speak for other professions but do know of colleagues who have gone off to work for local and national private companies and are earning more money. I wouldn't bother commenting on it if it wasn't the case. In fact I would bother commenting on this thread at all.
GrimmaTheNome · 24/11/2011 14:40

The upper echelons of private sector firms do OK for pensions, golden handshakes, etc.
Maybe they could extend their own schemes to their employees?

The upper echelons of the public sector don't seem to do so badly either. No point comparing any of us with any of them.

Fact is, many private company pension schemes realised they were underfunded quite a while back. Most have stopped final salary schemes. I never had that as an option - money purchase is all there is for a lot of us. We all know how well investments are going of late so the funds aren't growing too well. Annuity rates are crap; if you want an indexed annuity they are unbelievably crap.

Sorry, but the reason public sector is being asked now to pay more for less is that for a long time they've not been paying enough for what they have been getting.

cat64 · 24/11/2011 14:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

iggly2 · 24/11/2011 14:59

Cat64: WRONG

"The average pension in this country is just £3,900 a year. But a teacher retiring after 35 or 40 years of service at the normal age ? for them ? of 60 can expect to receive an index-linked pension of £24,000. Anyone who joined the scheme before 2007 also gets a tax-free lump sum worth three times the annual pay-out ? or around £72,000 for many teachers.

When unions like the NUT claim that the average teacher pension is just £10,300 a year they are right ? but only because they include within that average former teachers with as little as two or three years service. A headteacher at current levels will get around £42,000 a year. To get this kind of pay-out in the ?defined contribution? schemes now almost universal in the private sector, one would need to salt away a pension pot valued at around £1.5m during one?s working life ? which wouldn?t mean much money left over for fripperies like shelter, clothes or food.

These pay-outs don?t come from some great bank vault full of cash that teachers have contributed over the past. The Teachers Pension Scheme ? like most public sector schemes ? is ?unfunded?. That means the cash comes from current government expenditure. More plainly, it comes from tax being paid by you or I right now. The total, unfunded liability ? effectively the promises made to serving and retired teachers of the TPS is £223.9bn ? six times the size of the £35bn schools budget.

In 2009/10, the total cost of paying teachers? pensions was £7bn. But in just four years that is forecast to rise to £10bn. So we have a choice. We can either spend money on recruiting, training and equipping current teachers who will help ensure Britain has the kind of economy that can support generous teacher pensions in the future. "

By Neil O'Brien Politics Last updated: June 28th, 2011 in the Telegraph.

iggly2 · 24/11/2011 15:05

Another example given by a commentator mentions a more realistic wage and statistics of:
"Let's take a more realistic example, shall we? Since the maximum a classroom teacher can earn is around £36,756 (top of the upper pay spine), if they've worked for 35 years (very few teachers manage 40 years) they would get 35/80 of £36756, i.e. £16081. "

You would still need a very impressive pension pot for that.

niceguy2 · 24/11/2011 15:05

I have to pick the kids up so only have 1 minute.

The National Audit Office says the cost of paying pensions in the four biggest unfunded schemes - those covering the NHS, teaching, Armed Forces and Civil Service - was £19.3bn in 2008/09. Employee contributions were £4.4bn. This leaves the taxpayer to fill the £14.9bn gap, either from the budgets of the public bodies or direct from the Treasury.

So I fear it is you who is incorrect. So that's £15 billion we have to find and it will get worse as people live longer. The status quo cannot be afforded. It's not whether you deserve it or not. If we could afford it, I'd be the first to say let's give it. But the simple fact is that we have a deficit and cuts need to be made.

Pensions are one of our biggest outgoings and noone disagrees that things will only get worse. In that context we simply cannot afford to make our kids pay.

Swipe left for the next trending thread