New public sector pension plans

No1newts · 7 Oct 2010 at 16:48

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Po...Sector_Pension_Shortfall_And_Reform_Published

Linkie for you.

Essentially it is being suggested that public sector workers should pay more and then at the end gain less from their pension.

Personally I would say one or the other. Pay more for the good pension that they would be fair enough, or keep paying what they are and somewhat lower the end of pension payout within reason.

This report suggest another government case of having the cake and wanting to eat it too. At the moment public sector are not well payed in comparison to private sector. The benefit of going public though will be a good pension at the end.

If you remove this as a form of benefit why would the well educated and the sucessful want to into a career in public service when they will get shafted both ways?

Don't get me wrong I think that the pension scheme should be looked at but what is suggested in the report seems a little extreme.

Von Smallhausen · 7 Oct 2010 at 18:53

I currently pay 11% of my salary towards my ' gold plated ' pension that the media describes it as.

I sometimes do a dangerous job where my life can be at risk, I runs the risk of being assaulted, I have been punched, kicked, headbutted, had knives pulled on me, been spat on, working time directives do not apply, I can be ordered to stay back after a 12 hour shift if circumstances demand it and I am statistically in an early grave doing the job I do.

I don't want medals or sympathy but I would like to think there is a decent pension of an accrued sum and 2/3 final salary at the end of it and I would also like to think that I would have earned it.

borich_planner · 7 Oct 2010 at 18:58

2/3 final salary pension would be great and I work damn hard for it at my Council. I wonder if these proposals will only impact on new people joining or existing Council workers?

bloodline76 · 7 Oct 2010 at 19:03

Von Smallhausen said:
I currently pay 11% of my salary towards my ' gold plated ' pension that the media describes it as.

I sometimes do a dangerous job where my life can be at risk, I runs the risk of being assaulted, I have been punched, kicked, headbutted, had knives pulled on me, been spat on, working time directives do not apply, I can be ordered to stay back after a 12 hour shift if circumstances demand it and I am statistically in an early grave doing the job I do.

I don't want medals or sympathy but I would like to think there is a decent pension of an accrued sum and 2/3 final salary at the end of it and I would also like to think that I would have earned it.

Do you work in Maccy D's?

Tenzen · 7 Oct 2010 at 19:05

About time.

Vonhelmet · 7 Oct 2010 at 19:22

Public sector pension schemes are a pyramid scheme. There is a reason that all the private sector companies are closing their defined benefit schemes and moving to defined contribution schemes, and the reason is that the former don't work and the latter do. Simple.

Netguy · 7 Oct 2010 at 19:27

Von Smallhausen said:
I currently pay 11% of my salary towards my ' gold plated ' pension that the media describes it as.

I sometimes do a dangerous job where my life can be at risk, I runs the risk of being assaulted, I have been punched, kicked, headbutted, had knives pulled on me, been spat on, working time directives do not apply, I can be ordered to stay back after a 12 hour shift if circumstances demand it and I am statistically in an early grave doing the job I do.

I don't want medals or sympathy but I would like to think there is a decent pension of an accrued sum and 2/3 final salary at the end of it and I would also like to think that I would have earned it.

Police officer?

Vonhelmet · 7 Oct 2010 at 19:32

Netguy said:
Police officer?

How did you guess? It's not like he ever mentions it.

alx · 7 Oct 2010 at 20:17

No1newts said:
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Po...Sector_Pension_Shortfall_And_Reform_Published

Linkie for you.

Essentially it is being suggested that public sector workers should pay more and then at the end gain less from their pension.

Personally I would say one or the other. Pay more for the good pension that they would be fair enough, or keep paying what they are and somewhat lower the end of pension payout within reason.

This report suggest another government case of having the cake and wanting to eat it too. At the moment public sector are not well payed in comparison to private sector. The benefit of going public though will be a good pension at the end.

If you remove this as a form of benefit why would the well educated and the sucessful want to into a career in public service when they will get shafted both ways?

Don't get me wrong I think that the pension scheme should be looked at but what is suggested in the report seems a little extreme.

According to Lord Hutton this isn't true: "But, in his report, Lord Hutton rejected this: "There is no evidence that pay is lower for public sector workers to reflect higher levels of pension provision," he said." (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11491037)

Would like to see the research/data behind this as though....

Von Smallhausen · 7 Oct 2010 at 20:21

bloodline76 said:
Do you work in Maccy D's?

Burger King.

vonhelmet said:
How did you guess? It's not like he ever mentions it.

Truth be told, I wish I could go back to the days when nobody else did and I could be a daft arse on these here forums. I really wish I hadn't outed myself and much preferred posting behind a mask so to speak.

I am my own worst enemy on here sometimes. Your words are food for thought tbh.

LordSplodge · 7 Oct 2010 at 20:50

If somebody from ConDem Government touches my retire at 60 Final Salary pension I'll go to Number 10 and punch Cameron in the face.

Why else would I work in the underpaid world of the Public Sector?

Pudney · 7 Oct 2010 at 20:55

vonhelmet said:
Public sector pension schemes are a pyramid scheme. There is a reason that all the private sector companies are closing their defined benefit schemes and moving to defined contribution schemes, and the reason is that the former don't work and the latter do. Simple.

Totally agree. DB schemes should end, their cost is ridiculous.

Oh, and I did a rough working and about 3.6% of my salary goes into public sector pensions as well

(based on 18% of government spending is on pensions and a basic 20% tax rate - like I say, rough working)

SiD the Turtle · 7 Oct 2010 at 20:58

Just had a chat with my dad (works in the NHS) about this. His main gears to grind are that he wouldn't take the crap salary if the final salary was in place, but also that the final salary also applies to the top directors. Everyone pays in the same, but those at the top get more out of the pot.

Gackt · 7 Oct 2010 at 21:09

It almost seems like simply saving a portion of your pay for your retirement is the better choice. :/

kefkef · 8 Oct 2010 at 11:01

I pat around 8% into my pension in the public sector, it's a 40/80ths, so each year i pay in gets me 1/80th and the final salary works over the last 3 years of employment. Since a couple of years ago any new workers cannot enter the final salary scheme and are now put into a contributary scheme and we are also being encouraged to move to that scheme (not heard of anyone doing it as that would be crazy!). To be honest, with 30yrs of work left i would be very suprised if the whole public sector pension is still going to be in the same shape, so it's a bit of a risk but the reward might pay off, though to mitigate that i've carried on paying the maximum on top of that into my private pension that's been going for 17yrs also (will have 47yrs contributions in that one!).