Mr Bloom Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 In general that's true but in the public sector you get a gold-plated pension and can retire in your 50s. It's swings and roundabouts. You're absolutely right. You know how much gold-plated stuff is worth? Nothing! Retire in your 50s? Maybe 30 years ago. :hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchemist Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Yes and Yes Im not sure why the pay of MPs and public sector workers are in the same argument - The fomrer are overpaid, the latter in many cases probably underpaid. But if you dont pay MPa decent wage then you end up with only those with sufficient external income to be MPs. But they ARE being paid a very decent salary, in fact TOO decent. If they wernt why are there regulalrly 20 or so people willing to pay 500 notes a go to try and get that job? MPs should be paid the minimum wage then they will start to have a better grasp on reallity ---------- Post added 10-07-2014 at 08:43 ---------- Other things are also important and the money is divided between them, what do you propose we don't do so that public sector workers can have a pay rise. OK, nuclear weapons, pay rises for MPs ---------- Post added 10-07-2014 at 08:45 ---------- And what will we cut the next time they want a pay rise the country can't afford, and the time after that. Then you have to consider that private sector tax payers might want Nuclear weapons and the Monarchy far more than they want public sector workers to have a pay rise. How is it that the country can seemingly afford MP pay rises? ---------- Post added 10-07-2014 at 08:47 ---------- Probably because the people that voted in this government would rather they spend the money on the other things and not pay increasing for public sector workers. The PEOPLE did not vote in this government it was Cleggy boy that left us with this mess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willman Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Well I don't know anyone in my public sector employment who can retire at 50. 66 is the going age for retirement. Maybe you were thinking of bankers. It was Fred Goodwin who got his pension of £703,000 per year when he was 50. Care to give examples of public sector workers who got similar? The police are allowed to retire after 30 years service, i know several ex officers who have been retired since their late 40's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukdobby Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 The police are allowed to retire after 30 years service, i know several ex officers who have been retired since their late 40's. I think the fire sevice can retire around 50 with a full pension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 The police are allowed to retire after 30 years service, i know several ex officers who have been retired since their late 40's. I think most will retire from the police force or army and not from having to work. Unless you want to shove old men onto the front line ---------- Post added 10-07-2014 at 09:23 ---------- I wonder what time Cameron will get his ugly mug on TV and say the strike has no effect and not many people turned out. @prdictablemoaningtoffboy.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 So why don't private sector workers look for jobs in the public sector if it's all so easy, a gold plated pension and retirement at 50?Because in the public sector, salary and seniority progression are usually consensus- and group-based, not productivity- and profitability-indexed (there is still only one UK Government department which is actually profitable, as in taking in more money than it costs to run it, and that's the UK Patent Office). Basically, you can be the best teacher there is, and will still be paid the same as the worst teacher there is, according to a negotiated scale/grade/the like for the position. In the private sector, there is more scope to reap the just rewards of one's efforts, as by and large it still works as a meritocracy (all forthcoming leftist and class war-driven anecdotes to the contrary notwithstanding). In most cases, it is pointless comparing public and private sector employment factors and variables such as pay and perks. A lot of the benefits of working in the public sector cannot be readily monetized, such as increased job security, better working conditions, individual support and group solidarity (as manifested today), and many more I'm sure. E.g. you don't earn as much, but should have a better work-life balance. I did 12 months at a very senior level in the French public service (executive) and tbh, the pay/perks etc. on offer (had I stayed in), which were the best to be had by a country mile short of working in Ministries in Paris, did nothing for me. I was "past" that level inside 5 years of working in the private sector, and would have had no realistic prospect of achieving my 'current level' ever, if I'd gone career. It's a personal career choice at the end of the day...but people should have to assume their choices and responsibilities a bit more/more often these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 No-one in the public sector retires at 50? Public sector pensions are ridiculously generous, compared to the pensions that people paying for the public sector get. This is wrong, and needs to be changed. Correct! Everyone deserves a generous pension, not just public service workers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickiethecat Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 You know you are lying, but you think constant repetition will make it true. Not at all. You can't argue with the facts. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/10698432/Final-salary-pensions-10-times-more-common-in-public-sector.html Perhaps you should stick to topics where you actually have some idea of what you're talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 The police are allowed to retire after 30 years service, i know several ex officers who have been retired since their late 40's. Not many jobs carry the risk and demanding workload of the police, fire service, armed forces etc. 30 years is a good stretch, we should be saying "thank you very much for your 30 years of servive, enjoy your well earned retirement!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willman Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Not many jobs carry the risk and demanding workload of the police, fire service, armed forces etc. 30 years is a good stretch, we should be saying "thank you very much for your 30 years of servive, enjoy your well earned retirement!". I never said any different and neither do i disagree - HOWEVER the fact remains that after 30 years service a police officer can retire under 50 and then find a second job. Not many just sit at home in fact they often return to the force as civilian employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.