WeX Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 at first they came for the private sector, and I didn't speak out because I was a civil servant. then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I'm just quoting from the O/P . No. You are misinterpreting the OP. Quite a difference really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisT70 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 nhs pension based on 65 yr retirement age now , old scheme based on 60 yrs. 40 yrs contributions will get them 50% of their final salary. the new scheme will pay them slightly less. 50-60% approx of NHS staff are i believe nurses, on say £25-30k. that would give them a pension of £15k pa and lump sum 45k after 40 yrs service. not bad, but not exactly gold plated. civil service used to be able to retire at 50 as did fire brigade and council employees, with full pension. has changed for some i believe, this should be brought in line with nhs scheme for fairness. council workers on £20k pa wont be retiring on any gold plated luxury pension tho, thats the papers making it up and gullable fools believing it to be so cos they spent their pay without bothering to save for a pension, many of the people i know age 40-50 havent bothered saving anything towards one. their loss! finally how about a cap on the max pension to anyone in the public sector of £50k? who needs more than that in all honesty if they have been earning over £100k pa anyway? they should be able to live (just!) on 50k plus their considerable savings you would imagine. some of the big earners on the public sector on 200k will be taking home a pension of £100k pa and lump sums of £300k+ which is excessive imho. all of the publicity and showboating about "gold plated" pensions is however working to take the focus off the current cuts, privatisation and plans to decimate the country as its all down to the "gold plated pensions" that got us where we are if you believe the hype! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 not long before the recession, the government knew what was happening and started retracting money from private sector contracts, the result was a sharp rise in unemployment on the backdrop of public sector pay rises. what did the public sector do? they stayed tight lipped as they know they had it good while others suffered. now its the turn of the public sector workers to feel the pain. they are up in arms and expecting everyone else to back them. well you had your chance but you failed to lift a finger in support of others. this is your bed, you lay in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scabbydog Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 No. You are misinterpreting the OP. Quite a difference really. No I'm not. Perhaps you should try reading the OP and in particular the bits I highlighted. The proposal - suggested by former Labour work and pensions secretary Lord Hutton - is contained in a consultation document to be published by George Osborne next month If anyone is misrepresenting anything it is the OP by trying to suggest that this is government policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Of course it can. How, out of a magic money pot? We'll soon have more people drawing pensions than paying them, the pot doesn't cover it, paying it out of general taxation shouldn't be an option! We currently pay the EU over £40 million every single day - and rising. International 'aid', given to rich countries, is rising by many £billions a year, and our 'wars of intervention' in conflicts that have nothing to do with us, also cost many £billions every year. There are certainly savings to be made, but I don't see that the money should be spent paying pensions which are no longer sustainable. It should be spent reducing the national debt. It's just a question of priorities. David Cameron and Nick Clegg believe that working class people employed in the public sector do not deserve pensions that pay as much as £4,000 per year. These public sector workers need to know their place in the 'big' society - which is right at the bottom. Working class people, like the executives on 200k a year and there 100k pensions after retirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 My brother retired from teaching aged 60 and took a lump sum in excess of £25K and is currently drawing a pension over £600/week. The pension increases each year, and of course at 65 he gets the state pension on top of that. He must have been pretty senior then. £600 per week is a pension of £31 200 pa. The best pension that he could possibly accrue is 40/80ths, which would mean that he started work at 20 and ended up earning a salary of £62 400. That would make him a Deputy Headteacher in a large secondary school, at least. He would also have paid 40 years of pension contributions. He'll have paid plenty for that pension and it doesn't look unreasonable to me, given the length of service and his seniority. Did you see how big a pension you get if your bank implodes and you get moved out of the way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 No I'm not. Perhaps you should try reading the OP and in particular the bits I highlighted. The proposal - suggested by former Labour work and pensions secretary Lord Hutton - is contained in a consultation document to be published by George Osborne next month If anyone is misrepresenting anything it is the OP by trying to suggest that this is government policy. Lord Hutton was engaged by George Osbourne to carry out the review. I could be wrong, but I think that George is still a Tory minister, isn't he. Just because Will Hutton served in a Labour Cabinet, doesn't make this Labour policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisT70 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 not long before the recession, the government knew what was happening and started retracting money from private sector contracts, the result was a sharp rise in unemployment on the backdrop of public sector pay rises. what did the public sector do? they stayed tight lipped as they know they had it good while others suffered. now its the turn of the public sector workers to feel the pain. they are up in arms and expecting everyone else to back them. well you had your chance but you failed to lift a finger in support of others. this is your bed, you lay in it. not quite true. for example contract engineers in construction have always for the last 20 yrs earned on avaerage 15-20% more than public sector and have taken that cash and spent it and had a good lifestyle, without any thought for the lower paid people who took the job with the benefits of a final salary contribution pension scheme. what did they do to help them? no one helps anyone these days, i dont think they ever did ! now contracting is shrinking due to the recession and lack of house building they are out of work and havent got savings behind them or a pension scheme. dont try and punish people for taking a different route, its not their fault. some perspective should be brought and the massive earning public sector people should either pay much more toward their pension if its not affordable or there should be a cap as i suggested at say £50k max pension. some of the mod and whitehall top brass (and police by look of it) have been receiving bonus payments on top of their very generous salaries, that cant be right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 not quite true. for example contract engineers in construction have always for the last 20 yrs earned on avaerage 15-20% more than public sector and have taken that cash and spent it and had a good lifestyle, with none of the benefits a public sector worker received such as pension, job security (job for life), subsides canteens etc. the private sector may have been paid more (back then) but the benefits the public sector received more then filled this hole. but then again this has all changed, as just over a year ago average public sector pay was £2,000 more then in the private sector! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.