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

[seekinginspiration]

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?

To be fair to OP. Iagree I have found it hard to find details on exact changes to pensions. The Guardian has an article on an offer from the government but it would be useful to know all the old terms.

This is an article I found on the BBC News website from July.

Link

From what it says, most teacher's are being asked for what appears to be a very modest increase in contributions. In fact, less than 2% more.

I know there are also planned changes to retirement ages but hey, that's not just teachers, that's pretty much across the board and I don't see any particular reason why teachers should be excused from the rest of society.

Now if someone came to me now and said "If you put 2% more in a month you can have a final salary pension", i'd snap their hand off.

Yes they are being asked to pay more. Yes it's unfortunate but personally I think by any stretch of the imagination when you look at the context and the facts, they are still getting an incredibly generous deal.

The crux of the matter is we feel we are being lied to. The TPS was reviewed in 2007 and seen to be self subsidising no extra needed from the rest of the tax payers, probably due to many headteachers dying within 6 months of retirement. Retire at 67, we'll die in the job, same with nurses!! The NHS pension scheme runs at a profit!? so all of a sudden to be told that its unaffordable is a lie. We feel that we are being taxed, an extra £70 or £ 80 a month to pay off the deficit, whilst fatcat bankers get their truly gold plated pensions, because they were in a contract!! The govt raided the British Rail pension pots in the same way in the past. It is simply not fair and if its going to happen its going to happen but we're not going out without a fight. I thought we 'were all in this together'

Plus we are also striking over working conditions. This government are trying to privatise the education system by stealth and cut budgets to the bone so classes will be hugely overcrowded, with little TA support and fewer facilities. I have never seen a policy of divide and conquer working to such great effect. Lets get the public sector hated by the private sector and the elite can carry on regardless.

"Lets get the public sector hated by the private sector..."

And how did deciding to strike, inconveniencing millions of ordinary people, improve that? The track record of strikes changing government policy is pretty poor. If the public sector doesn't want to be hated and doesn't want to fall prey to divide and conquer, wouldn't it have been better to take the moral high-ground, keep working and carry on with the negotiations?

Chosenone. Are you a teacher?

Your information seems to be at odds with what I've read. From the BBC article above, it would seem that most teachers are being asked to contribute < £30 a month more. If that deal were offered to me, I'd jump at it.

In addition, the contributions are not to pay the deficit off but instead will go towards your own pension. A pension scheme which it seems only the teaching unions seem to believe it's self funding. Everyone else seems to think the taxpayer needs to pick up the tab. And therein lies the problem.

If it is genuinely self-funding, then go for your life. If it's not then it seems unfair to ask others to pay for something you haven't paid for.

Lastly as for working conditions, what are the problems? Privatising education? No, haven't heard that either, unless you are referring to the academies which seem to me far from private schooling.

Chosenone: if you are being told that about TPS, then indeed you are being lied to.

The last valuation of TPS had it in deficit. There has been no recent valuation. Longevity is increasing. TPS includes provision for increased contributions.

Chosenone and Cat64 are absolutely right - I belong to another teaching pension scheme which is extremely healthy - the government deficit is being used as an excuse to bash us down and also to downgrade benefits for new members, while asking us all to work longer (in severely worsened privatised conditions), pay more, relating pension to CPI and not RPI, inflation capping etc etc.

Strike ON.

Telsa just google "government pension liabilities". Anywhere on the BBC website will do also any economists column. You will realise the problems the UK is in, how unfunded are our public pension liabilities and ultimately it will be our children paying for our pensions and welfare/NHS as we get older. Sorry it's not fair on them.

Here is a good report:

www.public-sector-pensions-commission.org.uk/wp-content/themes/pspc/images/Public-Sector-Pensions-Commission-Report.pdf

If we are not seen to be doing anything we go the way of Greece and Italy and Ireland we lose our credit ratings and the interest charged on our debt rockets.

Well if capitalism ain't working' let's abolish it. It's an inhuman system pitching generations against each other, while permanent war (for profit) is fought.

Anyhow, my education pension is from a private provider - it is a very healthy fund, but its managers are jumping on the bandwagon to downgrade conditions. My union reps are well informed thanks - I don't need to 'google'.

DH is public sector I see Unison posters at his work. To be honest I find them scarily devoid of facts and data but worryingly high on propaganda.

The public sector pensions commission report is pretty good at looking at different areas.

www.public-sector-pensions-commission.org.uk/wp-content/themes/pspc/images/Public-Sector-Pensions-Commission-Report.pdf

On another thread others seemed to be quoting dubious Union facts and assertions.

To me it's not a question of how much public sector workers are going to have to pay in (though some are going to find it extremely hard to manage) or how long they are going to have to work for.

Even though I accept that paying higher contributions into our pensions now will ease the burden of future generations, I think we would help them more by getting the government to think again about making cuts to education and health service budgets and privatising them.

A privatised health and education service will harm them far more than higher taxes in the future imo, because fewer of them will be in high-paid jobs (they won't have been able to afford a good education). Also if the papers are to be believed, modern children are so unhealthy that they won't live to a ripe old age either - especially if the health service is allowed to be ripped apart.

I've more or less decided to go on strike on Wednesday because I don't want other people to fight my battles for me any more. My sister says this is a 'What did you do to protect the health and education services, Grannie?' moment. I feel bad enough about how my generation and the ones before me have let down our children and grand children, and I am desperate to try to put things right for them.

The only way to do that is to stop the government making these cuts!

The cuts are inevitable Solopower. The only thing you can seek to do by striking is delay them.

Why? Because the money isn't there. This isn't an issue about the odd billion or two where we can raise it by slapping a penny on income tax. This is about cutting the largest peacetime deficit since WW2. There's not enough rich people in the country to save us even if we increased their tax to 100%.

So we either make cuts now or we are forced to later ala Greece style. This is not about ideology or saving bankers. This is about mathematics. And if it's a choice between maths & striking public workers, my money is on maths.

I just don't trust this government, Niceguy. I don't believe that their cuts in education and health are necessary, or that their way is the right way to make savings. I've been watching them in increasing horror ever since they came to power, and the one thing they have shown me, very clearly, is that their priorities are not mine.

To me, there is nothing more important than education and health, jobs and housing. There is plenty of money around; more of it needs to be channelled into public services, not less.

Chosenone: 'The TPS was reviewed in 2007 and seen to be self subsidising no extra needed from the rest of the tax payers....'

But was that true in the light of the financial shenanigans going on at the time?

I agree with the OP. There are so many dubious facts flying around, I don't know what to believe. However, I do know that this strike has nothing to do with working conditions, and that the unions are whipping members into a frenzy with stories of 'what is going to happen' (all bad - none substantiated).

After a good deal of soul-searching, I've decided not to strike, as I don't think pensions can ever be 'guaranteed' being dependant on economic factors. Dh's company scheme is undergoing exactly the same changes. The TPS guaranteed me a pension, but did not promise the amount. If it had, I (and 250,000 other teachers) would be taking them to court!

I also don't see what a public sector strike can achieve as there is really nothing to bargain with.

Furthermore, I dread to think how the union leaders are fighting my cause - I went to an ATL meeting just before the ballot, dared to question the union's strategies, and then had to schlep off at the end in case someone hit me! The preceding 'debate' had degenerated into a teacher's reminiscences of nature walks in the 70s (seriously). I nearly wept.

We need the unions to hop into the 21st century and become media savvy.

Putting aside the issues of trust for one moment, the financial situation speaks for itself.

I watched this program last Wednesday. I urge you to watch it on iPlayer. Very factual and some of the ex minister's are refreshingly honest now they are not shackled by their job. Your Money and How They Spend It

We are overspending by the tune of £150-£170 billion a year depending on who you speak to. Given tax revenues in 2009-2010 were just shy of £400 billion according to the HMRC Source: HMRC. That includes VAT, corporation tax, income tax etc. etc.

That's a BIG overspend.

So if we put that into more layman's speak. If you earn £1000 a month but spent £1400 a month, that's a bit of a problem yes? How long can you sustain that for?

OK, so you must cut back. It's the only logical thing to do. You try shaving nearly 40% of your spending without affecting the basics? Your home, your car, gas, electric, pocket money for the kids. All are important and why should the kids suffer for the fact you overspent eh?

The simple fact is that whilst we all WANT to channel more money into public services, we cannot afford to. Just in the same way that I really WANT to drive a Ferrari rather than a Nissan but I have to make do with my Nissan cos I can't afford the Ferrari.

"Chosenone: 'The TPS was reviewed in 2007 and seen to be self subsidising no extra needed from the rest of the tax payers....'

Interesting points Fraidylady transparency is certainly an issue.

Teachers pensions are made up of 6.4% employee pension contribution and 14.1% employer contribution (ie contribution by the school on teachers behalf but ultimately from the state IYSWIM). The employee and employer amount combined is seen as in profit (but only due to the substantial employer/state contribution). This "inprofit" also refers purely to the current outgoings of the scheme (those payments to teacher currently retired). In the private sector the average employer contribution is only 6%. The NHS scheme also loves to refer to a "surplus" but this takes in 5-8% employee and 14% employer. So still actually big net cost to taxpayer.

In total for year 1010-2011: £18 billion is projected to come from taxpayers (£13.5 billion of employer contributions and £4.5 billion from the Treasury) and £7.5 billion from employees in these schemes.

Even worse the report in summary also shows that the employee contribution and the employer contribution quoted above actually covers less than half the pension scheme cost . We are all living longer. As more retire there will be more pensioners compared to workers. As a result the pensions are very underfunded (most actuaries and the Public-Sector-Pensions-Commission-Report value the public sector pension schemes as £770-£1,176 billion underfunded on page 8 of report ).

The problem now is as we need other countries to invest in us (eg India, China, Russia, Japan....) to cover both the yearly deficit and the total debt by purchasing government gilts etc. We need to show we can deal with our finances (eg this unfunded pension scheme). We need to look a sound investment as we are in risk of being like Greece, Italy, Spain...

"covers less than half the pension scheme cost " please look at pages 34-35 of report as there are difficulties in truly evaluating how much an actually invested amount of money would be worth. If invested wisely then of course payments in to such an investment may do better in covering pension costs.

I support the strike. I'm a nurse and I'll be striking too. If these changes go ahead I will have to come out of the pension scheme as I can't afford the hikes they are proposing, for the lesser gain at the end. It's as simple as that.

The report:

www.public-sector-pensions-commission.org.uk/wp-content/themes/pspc/images/Public-Sector-Pensions-Commission-Report.pdf

I think the public sector pensions needs reform. However the government has been pretty shoddy in handling negotiations (eg making offers publicly before discussing - bit of a PR stunt really). Also public sector pension reform has been going on for years - changes have already been made (I know changes were made in 2003, for example, making new entrants get less generous terms) and the government doesn't acknowledge that. Also public sector workers have had pay freezes too or very low increases less than inflation.

Strangely, MPs don't put themselves through quite the same belt tightening. Bit like CEOs keeping massive pots for them but fucking over everyone else.

Teachers seem to be taking the hit PR wise but we're talking a wide range of workers here.

The National Audit office has shown that the projected costs of pensions is set to fall from 2020 too.

Maybe we need another way of saving for retirement although the pensions selling scandal would put off many people. Savings accounts are crap, stocks and shares are risky and who knows what will happen to house prices.

The sad thing is the private sector workers who all bleat (like sheep) the lines they've been fed about unaffordability and don't question the lack of decent pensions on their side. However I bet they'll be expecting a state pension. Which will be funded by....?

But public sctor workers get a state pension as well .

Yes they do. My badly made point was that there will be an expectation of a decent state pension if you don't have a proper pension. I don't think you should get a state pension if you have an existing pension at a liveable level.