Get away from my pension.

[convert]

Your wife seems to have a pretty good job by any standard, whilst yours is exceptionally poor.

 

Maybe you could answer the last question you have asked? after all your job seems much worse than an average job, private sector or otherwise.

 

Perhaps rather than complaining about other people's fortunes you might be better off unionising your office and demanding fairer working practices, better pay and family friendly policies.

 

I'll answer the last question. My job was TUPE'd to an Indian company 4 years ago. I still see it to be a good job, and in the current climate I'm quite happy where I am. I'm not happy paying a grand a month in tax though; not for it to be wasted in the engorged public sector.

 

I'm not complaining about the fortunes of others merely stating fact.

 

Labour managed to screw our country into the ground, by enlarging the state so much that we couldn't even afford it in the boom years.

 

We all have to make compromises, even those in 'ringfenced' areas.

 

As for unionising, well I believe that unions have had their day

[Wildcat]

I'll answer the last question. My job was TUPE'd to an Indian company 4 years ago. I still see it to be a good job, and in the current climate I'm quite happy where I am. I'm not happy paying a grand a month in tax though; not for it to be wasted in the engorged public sector.

 

I'm not complaining about the fortunes of others merely stating fact.

 

The fact you are complaining is pretty inescapable? How else would you describe you first paragraph?

 

You must be earning something like £50k pa, and you are complaining about an "engorged public sector" wasting your money.

 

How exactly are they wasting your money?

 

Perhaps they are inefficient because the salary and package isn't good enough to attract better people?

 

I am sure there are areas where the money could be spent more wisely, we all have opinions on that. But on the whole I don't notice any obvious inefficiencies that couldn't equally be aimed at private sector employers.

 

Labour managed to screw our country into the ground, by enlarging the state so much that we couldn't even afford it in the boom years.

 

We all have to make compromises, even those in 'ringfenced' areas.

 

As for unionising, well I believe that unions have had their day

 

Hyperbole. The state has not expanded to the extent it can't be afforded, the public debt decreased during the start of Labour's term in office only slightly increasing from 2003 and remained much less than the average debt was under the previous Tory administration. It has temporarily increased because of quantitive easing and the bailouts of the banks, policies any party in power would have undertaken to protect private sector jobs.

 

For context public debt is less as a proportion of gdp than it was for the entire period from 1915-1975.

 

As for unionising, well I believe that unions have had their day

 

Well that is a shame because people all over the globe from China, to Iran or Peru are relying upon trade unions to represent their interests in the face of multinational exploiters, just as we do here. Perhaps you prefer a passive response on your £50k salary, but many do not have that luxury and instead of whinging about their plight and blaming those less fortunate, they are actively organising to improve their lives.

 

http://www.labourstart.org/

[chem1st]

The pension age needs upping now to be honest, if your 65 now, you should work to 70.

 

It won't happen though, because they make up the largest share of voters.

[Jabberwocky]

Tories... what more needs to be said...?

[xfox3x]

The pension age needs upping now to be honest, if your 65 now, you should work to 70.

 

It won't happen though, because they make up the largest share of voters.

 

No you shouldn't. I'm knackered and want to have a rest!

Let us all retire at 55 and give the young ones the jobs

[taxman]

No you shouldn't. I'm knackered and want to have a rest!

Let us all retire at 55 and give the young ones the jobs

 

Quite, why pay the young to be on the dole whilst the old work until they drop?

[Guest sibon]

You say that you paid 9% year in year out, even when times were tough? Well I and may others have done the same but into defined contribution schemes, and I've seen the real value of my pension fund fall by about 20% in recent years (with no input or guarantee from an employer either).

 

I've bought my fair share of financial products that have done the same sort of thing:) Somehow, being shafted by the Financial Services industry feels different to being done by the Government.

 

Your fund and contributions paid and accumulated to date, are ring fenced against the vagaries of investment performance, prevailing interest rates and inflation..I'd say you'd done pretty well so far sibon!

 

I agree entirely. If the upshot of all of this is that we start again from now, I can easily accept that. I'm a grown up and I can try to make my own provision if I know where the goalposts are.

 

My fear is that the Public Sector pension schemes will be degraded for everyone, starting very soon. That will hardly encourage my younger colleagues to make provision for their own future.

[Guest sibon]

Tories... what more needs to be said...?

 

Quite so Jabbers. Things are bad, but far from fatal.

 

I think that we are being softened up to accept a massive degradation in public services. It is like the 1980s all over again.

[convert]

The fact you are complaining is pretty inescapable? How else would you describe you first paragraph?

 

In your eyes maybe, as far as I'm concerned I was just stating facts.

 

You must be earning something like £50k pa, and you are complaining about an "engorged public sector" wasting your money.

 

How exactly are they wasting your money?

What I earn is none of your concern. It is earned through my own labour. However the money paid to the engorged public sector is derived from my tax, and the tax of those like me.

 

I have no problem with high earners paying more tax. I just don't like to see it go to waste. Waste on six month sickness policies, waste on early retirement on medical grounds (then coming back on agency rates to cover those off sick).

 

I'd sooner see it go to help those in real need; those who can't work.

 

I don't like seeing it go on spongers; those with 'yuppie flu' that can still manage to smoke 20 L&B a day, go to the pub 3 times a week and holiday abraod twice a year but can't get out of bed in the morning to hold down a job.

 

 

Perhaps they are inefficient because the salary and package isn't good enough to attract better people?

 

I am sure there are areas where the money could be spent more wisely, we all have opinions on that. But on the whole I don't notice any obvious inefficiencies that couldn't equally be aimed at private sector employers.

I do.

 

 

Hyperbole. The state has not expanded to the extent it can't be afforded, the public debt decreased during the start of Labour's term in office only slightly increasing from 2003 and remained much less than the average debt was under the previous Tory administration. It has temporarily increased because of quantitive easing and the bailouts of the banks, policies any party in power would have undertaken to protect private sector jobs.

 

For context public debt is less as a proportion of gdp than it was for the entire period from 1915-1975.

Piffle. Yet old 'Winky' still managed the economy so much so that our debt increased despite selling off all the gold.

 

Well that is a shame because people all over the globe from China, to Iran or Peru are relying upon trade unions to represent their interests in the face of multinational exploiters, just as we do here. Perhaps you prefer a passive response on your £50k salary, but many do not have that luxury and instead of whinging about their plight and blaming those less fortunate, they are actively organising to improve their lives.

 

http://www.labourstart.org/

 

Up the workers eh. More of your sympathy for global wealth re-distribution, Oh except where it affects public sector pensions.

 

You do know where to find sympathy in the dictionary, don't you.

[Rupert_Baehr]

Well, if the government is going to 'adjust' public sector pensions, I do hope they're going to start with their own.

 

How can they justify awarding themselves resettlement grants, 'winding up' allowances [who is it they're trying to wind up, I wonder?] and a 1-40th final salary pension scheme after just a few years in post. (Do teachers have a 1-40th scheme sibon?)

 

I was pleased to see that somebody at least feels MPs should receive performance-related pay. I understand that those who were re-elected (as opposed to those elected for the first time) felt that they had been underpaid in the amount of £119.63 in May.

 

Was than an administrative error or was it performance-related pay?

 

I think they should be allowed to keep the underpayment, in recognition of how well they served the country during the last Parliamentary session and that performance-related pay for MPS should be retained.