im so anxious about threats to cut ctc...

[em83]

god i feel so depressed about the threatened cut to ctc, i have been following the news religiously about this new emergency budget, and have just read an updat which was posted tonigha 22.10 which states that incomes £30.000 or over will not be entitled to ctc

im so pissed off with this and feel so anxious

My company's final salary pension scheme was regretfully wound up this month. To continue propping it up would have undermined the company to the point we'd have been financially unstable. I am furious but I can see why it was necessary. Really I don't see why the public sector should be any different.

I think it will be bloody unpopular but perhaps you can change pension for new entrants as they know what they are signing up for. But one of the reasons many people work in the public sector is pensions. But to remove the pensions that people have been working for for years is wrong and will backfire.

This is about all public sector pensions but I can only talk as a teacher. I am sure I read somewhere that teachers tend to die quite quickly after retirement. In which case keep the pensions as they are, you have a motivated workforce and a short time to pay out.

I am being flippant - a bit.

Right have googled that and suspect I am talking bollocks, strike the comment I am topping up my wine.

hornofplenty - did tootired know what she was signing up for? She has to accept change - why can't you?

I don't know where tootired has posted sorry.

Vesela I suspect I have no choice in the matter, if they want to change the conditions of my employment after 12 years I guess they can.

The only choice I have is to change jobs, which I probably will.

anyway, if the teachers strike, then at least now parents will be allowed to set up their own schools.

Sorry am feeling think too tired's post is above.

They will still need teachers vesela. Unless they are planning on doing the teaching as well.

They can have the ones you said were planning to leave...

I think there is a difference between a private company being unable to pay pensions for a limited number of people and the government choosing to cut the pensions of every public sector worker.( As hard as is it - my husband has had huge changes to his pension.)

Changes have been made to teacher pensions for entrants from 2005/6 I think. The burden will decrease.

I doubt very much we are going to leave to go and teach in a pet project school tbh.

They didn't remove the pension already earned to date - that's protected. They froze the scheme and we all start paying into a new one as of next month.

The thing is that public sector pensions aren't invested IIRC, there's no fund for most of them, it just comes out of the budget and I'd be surprised if it was possible to cut pensions for people already retired and receiving them. But the state pensions generally are a much larger part of the budget.

I have a chart I saved to my computer of a breakdown of the 2009/10 budget. I keep looking at it (as if it was my problem anyway!) and cannot for the life of me see where 25% or even 10% saving can be made without taking the knife to absolutely everything non essential.

I don't mind you cutting my pay ( well I do but I would prefer it to you taking my pension), I will give up my child benefit ( already have) tax credits ( already have) I will take a tax rise, VAT rise, I will work until I am 75 ( I will have to anyway) but if my pension gets taken away I will have had enough.

Selfish probably, naive probably.

I have already started looking for a new job to beat the rush.

It's not as if pension reform is something unique to the UK, though. Everybody's having to deal with it.

Yes tootootired, that is the usual practice on winding up a final salary scheme. The accrued benefits are protected and future contributions go into a defined contribution scheme.

The reality of public sector pensions is that the average is something like £4k, so in many instances it's not a lot of money, however, that doesn't mean they aren't very expensive to fund.

I think they will have to look at public sector pensions. It won't be popular of course, but if it's between job losses and pension reform, what is better?

Vesela I am not denying it. I have spent much of my career working in tough schools, I am holidaying in a nice school for few years before going back.

I work every waking moment, my job has cost me one marriage, for years I took daily abuse and violence, I spent my own money when budgets ran out. I took a huge pay cut to become a teacher. I take crap because I enjoy my job. One of the things that tells me that my job is valued by the government and society is my pension. By removing that pension that value seems to have gone. It is irrational and selfish, I hold my hands up - but is how I feel and I know many of my colleagues do as well.

Maybe as you said I will accept it and get used to it. I don;t think I will though. State schools are crying out for good teachers, this will not attract them and will drive out many of those who are there already. You will be left with mediocrity, a few who think they have a vocation ( and it is a few) and those who could not think of anything else to do.

good article here.

Apparently the PS pensions being paid out at the minute are "untouchable" - the best they can do is change the entitlements accruing from this point forward which doesn't solve the immediate problem. So I can't see how its related to job losses.

I really am tootired now and how did we get started on this?

but there are going to be strikes, aren't there. UNISON have said bring it on.

There will be strikes across the board vesela. As I said above I teach in a very good school at the moment. Because it is cushy people tend to belong to soft unions like the ATL - if any union. There has been a huge sign up to NUT recently at our school. I have never ever striked, I have changed unions to avoid striking. I will vote for a strike this time and go out,

What's it going to achieve, though?

Thats definitely the answer.
Screw over the innocent children by taking away thier chance of a good education.

I am from the generation who got screwed by the teachers in the 80's. I will be furious if I have to watch my children be failed by the teaching unions as well.

I have nothing but admiration for teachers but surely it must go against everything you all believe in to go on strike and leave your children with out a good education????

But then all the private schools will be just fine.
More people with no qualifications = more people on benefits = no money in the pot.

One big happy circle.

"I accept that people on 24,001 may need some help with childcare ( but I still think people need to ask themselves can I actually afford this child)..." by hornofplenty

DH lost his job. So, I just asked myself that question. and the answer is = 'I cannot afford this (second) child'. Where should we send him? Should I give social services a call and ask for the rich to give him a good home now?

Some of the excesses of past Government spending only just coming out the woodword are incredible. Anyway they are being rooted out and hopefully the books will balance better soon after the budget this week.

I favour simple taxation so people don't make decisions based on tax consequences but the real issue with the cuts is they are going to have to be so large that the only way for them to make any dent on the deficit and so we can afford the interest on Labour borrowings is if they hit a huge number of people. They have to hit in a category which affects so many people real savings are made. The Cabinet have accepted pay cuts and that's a great start but that has minimal effect on that else is needed. Cutting CTC or instead giving people a child tax allowance (or even if the nation could stomach it not givnig financial rewards for those who have children) is very likely to happen on higher incomes. The average pay in the UK I think is now £25,000. Anyone on that is doing a lot better than many. An average is just an average.

A full time minimum wage job yields about £14,000 a year.

As for teachers

" Q. I joined the TPS on 1 January 2007, will I have to work until I am aged 65?

A. No, nobody has to work until 65. If you became a teacher for the first time on or after 1 January 2007, you will have a Normal Pension Age (NPA) of 65. NPA is the age at which you can draw unreduced pension benefits from the TPS. If you were already in teaching before this date, you will retain a NPA of 60. You can retire at, before or after NPA. "

If teachers don't live long after claiming their pensions then presumably they shouldnt' mind if pension benefits accrued from now on (past ones are protected) change as they won't be drawing them for long so it's not worth worrying out.

"DH lost his job."

If second child is already here or on the way and your family income has substantially reduced, this presumably means that you are entitled to more help. If second child is just an idea, then you might delay their arrival until the family circumstances are more settled.