30th of June strikes.

VeNT said:
doubt it.
Agency staff cost 2x what they are paid and have to be paid the same as they person they cover.
ergo you would see costs double
also they wouldn't know what they where doing as from my exp the jobs that most back office people do in the NHS are madly convoluted because of silly things like IG etc
Click to expand...

Only if you assume that (a) every member of staff is currently needed and (b) every task done by the public sector is vital and must be done the way it is now.

I doubt either of these are true...

You're also assuming I'm suggesting hiring temps, I'm not.
 
Dolph said:
Only if you assume that (a) every member of staff is currently needed and (b) every task done by the public sector is vital and must be done the way it is now.

I doubt either of these are true...

You're also assuming I'm suggesting hiring temps, I'm not.
Click to expand...

agree that a may not be true and that you may be right about B but with B getting anything changed is a PITA as it requires auth from so high up they don't understand what it is that is being done.
although you don't have to go very high for that, my manager once said "oh I don't understand these technical things, I don't have time to understand".
that's very good for the manger of a network/security administration team..
 
VeNT said:
agree that a may not be true and that you may be right about B but with B getting anything changed is a PITA as it requires auth from so high up they don't understand what it is that is being done.
although you don't have to go very high for that, my manager once said "oh I don't understand these technical things, I don't have time to understand".
that's very good for the manger of a network/security administration team..
Click to expand...

B is one of the problems of many big companies, but the public sector seems far worse than most. The best solution is to destroy the large public monopolies into smaller, competing chunks so that competition drives reform.
 
Dolph said:
One problem, none of the private sector pension schemes being subsidised are still accruing additional entitlements and new joiners.
Click to expand...

You cannot say that with such certainty at all Dolph.

The opposite implication being the Public sector are, which they are not in terms of final salary.

Either which way this constant spotlight-fallacy-from-all-angles on the Public Sector is going to ensure that reform in the private sector is not as efficient expedient or as thought out as it could be. Concentration should be on the largest potential impact, and that is the private sector. Big noises about one without the other is ideological.
 
Biohazard said:
You cannot say that with such certainty at all Dolph.
Click to expand...

Yes, I can, because it's a requirement of acceptance with the pension protection fund.

The opposite implication being the Public sector are, which they are not in terms of final salary.
Click to expand...

Yes they are, final salary schemes may be gone for new entrants, but existing members are still accruing new entitlement.

I'm entirely behind honouring existing earnt entitlements. It's moving forward we have to make changes for all those involved.

Either which way this constant spotlight-fallacy-from-all-angles on the Public Sector is going to ensure that reform in the private sector is not as efficient expedient or as thought out as it could be. Concentration should be on the largest potential impact, and that is the private sector. Big noises about one without the other is ideological.
Click to expand...

There is a world of difference at the moment between the two in terms of funding and liabilities...
 
Dolph said:
Yes, I can, because it's a requirement of acceptance with the pension protection fund.
Click to expand...

Er no.

That is not a requirement for qualifying for the pensions protection fund.


Dolph said:
Yes they are, final salary schemes may be gone for new entrants, but existing members are still accruing new entitlement.
Click to expand...

Shock horror, fancy that.

Anyway straw man - my point was clear. They are not taking on new members.


Dolph said:
I'm entirely behind honouring existing earnt entitlements. It's moving forward we have to make changes for all those involved.

There is a world of difference at the moment between the two in terms of funding and liabilities...
Click to expand...

Ah here we go, dismiss everything in the private sector as not being a problem. Or the public sector is a larger problem.

Mythical nonsense.
 
just used the pension calculator £77 extra month! 6 more years work, £179k wiped off compared to previous scheme, and mines already career average scheme riiiigggghhhtttt damn right we are going on strike
 
Last edited:
Biohazard said:
Er no.

That is not a requirement for qualifying for the pensions protection fund.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is.

The pensions protection fund only takes on insolvent schemes, one of the results of that is that no new liabilities are incurred, so no further accrual of benefits, no new memberships.

The key part is the existing scheme has to be wound up.

Shock horror, fancy that.

Anyway straw man - my point was clear. They are not taking on new members.
Click to expand...

But they are allowing people to continue to accrue new unfunded liabilities. Hence it is not the same thing at all.

Ah here we go, dismiss everything in the private sector as not being a problem. Or the public sector is a larger problem.

Mythical nonsense.
Click to expand...

The public sector is a larger problem, because of the nature of public sector funding.
 
MrMoonX said:
just used the pension calculator £77 extra month! 6 more years work, £179k wiped off compared to previous scheme, riiiigggghhhtttt damn right we are going on strike
Click to expand...

So how much have you actually paid in compared to your existing pot?

Go on, give us a laugh.
 
Dolph said:
So how much have you actually paid in compared to your existing pot?

Go on, give us a laugh.
Click to expand...

3.5% how do you pay into yours?

all i know based on my last statement that even before the changes im getting **** all at 60 and from 2015 im gonna be working longer paying in more and still getting **** all
 
MrMoonX said:
just used the pension calculator £77 extra month! 6 more years work, £179k wiped off compared to previous scheme, and mines already career average scheme riiiigggghhhtttt damn right we are going on strike
Click to expand...

Won't you be fired then (and lose your pension completely)?

Or charged?


I thought it was illegal for prison officers to strike?
 
Last edited:
amigafan2003 said:
Careful throwing about the you's, I'm a private sector employee. I'm fully aware of the challenges the private sector faces.



I think it's time the majority of private sector employees woke up and smelt the coffee.
Click to expand...

in what way exactly?

or are you saying they should follow the example, because that wouldn't work
 
Last edited:
MrMoonX said:
3.5% how do you pay into yours?
Click to expand...

I'm talking about the amount paid in vs the size of the pension pot needed for the benefit at the end.

In most cases the contributions end up around 10% the size of the required pension pot needed to actually pay the pension, with the difference being robbed from the taxpayer.

all i know based on my last statement that even before the changes im getting **** all at 60 and from 2015 im gonna be working longer paying in more and still getting **** all
Click to expand...

And it will still be heavily subsidised by the taxpayer even at the new rates. You are still getting a better deal than the people who's money you are demanding is taken to pay for it.
 
MrMoonX said:
3.5% how do you pay into yours?

all i know based on my last statement that even before the changes im getting **** all at 60 and from 2015 im gonna be working longer paying in more and still getting **** all
Click to expand...

tough life isn't it.

still much better than what your grand parents had....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom