Public-sector strike: does it get your support? Please vote in our Facebook poll

[HelenMumsnet]

Morning.

We'd love to know how you feel about Wednesday's public-sector strike action. Does it get your support - or not?

We've put up a little poll on our Facebook page to help us find out. Please do click and vote.

Thanks v much, MNHQ

Ellen, if you were paying into a savings scheme in a bank, you would (unless the bank went bankrupt) get what you put into the bank plus any interest the bank had earned on your behalf (from interest earned on lending your money to other customers, plus investments).

A pension scheme is the same in that you are putting money into it BUT you are expecting to get a SHED load more out of it, which you hope the pension scheme can earn through investments, but the return on these go up as well as down, as we all know, depending on the economy, skill/luck of the fund manager, and how much is left in the pot once everyone else has taken their share. So you could end up with much less than you expect. In fact you may end up with less than you put in (if you're in a Defined Contribution scheme) if you've not been in it very long and end up being charged admin fees that are more than the interest earned.

So actually, it's quite different. Cash savings are low risk, investments are higher risk.

The economy is not good currently so investment growth is less than in previous years and not meeting our previous expectations, hence the need to put more money in if we are to meet those expectations. Question is, if the money's not coming from investment growth, where's it coming from? Tax? Education funding?

all the things we take for granted both in the public and private sectors came about as a result of the actions of the Labour movement (i.e. the unions): the two day weekend, holiday pay, sick pay, maternity leave, pensions, minimum wage, the eight hour working day (for lots of people anyway). We take all these things for granted and believe they are carved in stone- they are NOT, they can all be reversed; they are all under threat if we do not fight back. The Tories are ideologically opposed to many of them. The attack on public sector pensions is just the start. Dave and Gideon and Co would quite happily see our kids back up the chimneys given half a chance.

Good post LadyPeter and once it has been swept away in favour of lining the pockets of the few there will be no going back.

Ladypeter
where is the money for the pensions going to come from?

private sector companies are NEVER going to roll back all the stuff you ranted - its a small world and the companies that look after their staff will get the best results
there is nowhere else left to outsource to.

Over 1012 votes in support, 295 against in the mn poll.

I don't think I was ranting :)

No, I don't support the strikers, for all the reasons already mentioned.

I do however support thier right to strike.

So, everyone who still thinks they can have their DB scheme for ever more - what's the answer - where is the money going to come from?

If people are envious of the so-called gold plated public sector pensions, then they can pay some (or some more) of their salaries into a pension, this is what public sector workers have been doing for years- paying a larger than average pension contribution. Many teachers, nurses, etc. accept a more modest salary than they could perhaps get elsewhere to do a job they love on the understanding that they will get a decent(ish) pension at the end. Apart from anything else, teaching and nursing are jobs that require a great deal of energy and continuous professional development. As a teacher (pushing 40) I don't see how I could still bring the same energy and enthusiasm to the job in my mid to late sixties as I birng now.

The government needs to prove that there's not enough money in the pension pot before trying to implement a 3% tax on teachers. I don't think they have proved their case. They are relying on driving a wedge through the country, making it a 'them and us' scenario- suddenly those greedy nurses and teachers are the problem. A clever piece of legerdemain.

Public sector workers can i point out are taxpayer too.

And where is the money going to come from to pay the 50% extra I need to pay into my pension fund (for less gain and 8 years more work) cos on a part-time wage in which contributions are made on the basis of a full-time salary, a lot of us can't afford it.

But this is a deep assault on working women - so why don't we help the government along by attacking each other. It's sad.

Ladypeter
as per the maths above
you are paying 6%, the school is paying in 15% = total of 18% paid in
of each of your salaries going back to when £10,000 was good
but you are taking out
50% of your final salary - say £40,000 for arguments sake
it ONLY works if you die within ten years of retiring - which is probably not part of your plans

So do you think public sector professionals should earn what their privately employed (e.g agency) counterparts do? I'm just curious.....wondering whether you think vocation alone should be the only thing that makes us consider the public sector?

Nobody in the future will do these jobs for the current terms and conditions.
Everybody is quick to complain about nurses and teachers but don't want to see them paid to do a good job and most of them do. We did not create this problem. I am for one at breaking point in my nursing job and this is what i wanted to do since i was about six.

talkin you don't seem to factor in the growth that you would see against that pension pot over the 40 to 60 years it would exist.

The main problem with the Public Sector pensions is that governments have failed to invest the contributions, and now rely on GDP to pay the pensions.

A point I have already made more expansively earlier on in the thread!

Over 1012 votes in support, 295 against in the mn poll.

All that tells me is that there's a lot of people with no clue about the economy, how it works or don't care as long as someone else is paying for their pension.

People seem to forget that if they want to attract high quality people to the public sector, then they have to pay decent salaries and offer decent packages. As the only benefit in Public Sector work is the pension - no private medical, no company cars, no interest free loans (other than for season tickets), no reduced mortgage rates, no days out at the races - basically no bloody anything other than fairly decent conditions and an acceptable pension at the end of it.

You hear 'restraint for public sector pay because of the deficit' but I bet you'll never see him pay us a huge bonus/large rise when this crisis is over. No,then it will be 'restraint as an example to the private sector'. But you will see large rises - and in fact are seeing large rises now in exec pay - in the private sector again.

The end to national pay bargaining is another way of reducing our pay.

People need to think long and hard about how they think the UK will attract the right doctors, teachers, strategists, leaders etc to the public sector in the future.

Exactly malakadoush

Honestly you lot open your eyes to what is going on the banking industry continues to pay bonuses at every level of pay even the ones owned by taxpayers. My bonus is patient satisfaction which is rewarding but does not feed my two young children who want to know why i am home late each night. But i do this cos i care and for what??

[Everybody is quick to complain about nurses and teachers but don't want to see them paid to do a good job]

The minimum starting salary for a registered nurse is £21176.
The minimum starting salary for a teacher is £21,588.

Not well paid? Of course not.

malakadoush You don't seem to understand that many public sector schemes are unfunded. For the funded schemes they have invested fairly wisely, I would say - for example the USS has a 1% deficit which isn't bad going. The problem is the market has been crap for ages, and many of the actuarial assumptions being used to create the models on which previous valuations were conducted turned out to be not as valid as one might have hoped.

I am at a bit of a loss at the quoting starting salaries . Okay doctor starting salary for 40 hour week :£22,412 (if no out of normal hours).
a lawyer doing thier pupilage probably earns less!

Both above professions are not known to be hard up later on in their careers! Quote averages for full time or part time and probably also the pay for the mean level someone reaches within that chosen career.

This has been a bug bear for me with Union sound bites eg from one poster (probably curtesy of Union poster):

Average worker in the civil service
Paid around £17,000
Pension: £4,000 a year
Pay more: extra £240 a year
Work longer: May not be able to retire until 68
Get less: £80,000 total loss

Okay working out this example posted above:

Average worker in the civil service
Paid around £17,000
Pension: £4,000 a year

Okay assuming flat wage of £17,000 throughout:

On the old scheme:

1/60 accrual of final salary per year worked
3.5% employee contribution

This person would have worked for

Please read the reports:

This the interim report most useful for the financial background to how the pension schemes and their valuations work:

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

This is the Hutton report 2011 which focuses on what potential changes to the pensions could entail:

cdn.hm-treasury.gov.uk/hutton_final_100311.pdf