30/11 Strikes.

Rotty said:
If you work for a company that cannot afford to fund the scheme your benefits / contributions change, the government are the employer and cannot afford this so the solution is more tax revenue or higher contributions, so who should pay for the pensions the recipients or the tax payers ? It may not be nice but it's the way things are, I do not work my nuts off to subsidise other peoples pensions when mine has been cut to a level where I cannot afford the contributions needed to maintain the benefit I was originally promised
Click to expand...

Fair point as regards some Civil Service pension schemes.

The vast amount of discontent is from employees in the LGPS and Teachers pension schemes, both of which are funded and can meet their future commitments with huge reserves to spare. There is no reason to impose a 50% increase on employee contributions to members of these schemes.

As soon as they start making sensible proposals for the LGPS I'll be back at my desk.
 
MagicBoy said:
Fair point as regards some Civil Service pension schemes.

The vast amount of discontent is from employees in the LGPS and Teachers pension schemes, both of which are funded and can meet their future commitments with huge reserves to spare. There is no reason to impose a 50% increase on employee contributions to members of these schemes.

As soon as they start making sensible proposals for the LGPS I'll be back at my desk.
Click to expand...

No they can't.
 
Biohazard said:
Why don't you guys fight back for yourself instead of calling for everyone to be equally as poor?
Click to expand...
Because we'll be told to go and find another job. It's comments like this that just go to reinforce the notion that public sector workers have no idea.
 
Last edited:
Biohazard said:
Why don't you guys fight back for yourself instead of calling for everyone to be equally as poor?
Click to expand...

because there isn't the cash to pay for it and we would just be outsourced if we did, most of my team have had no pay rise at all for 10 years, I would like everyone to get a great deal but that just isn't going to happen, so why should folks that have been battered into the ground have to sit and watch greedy people complain about an offer the rest of us would love to get and then be taxed for the privilidge of it
 
Rotty said:
most of my team have had no pay rise at all for 10 years
Click to expand...

So they've been at the same role for 10 years being paid 2001 level salaries and at no point thought to look elsewhere, even though 7 of the last 10 years were boom years, especially in the IT sector?

They sound like an employers dream!
 
Glaucus said:
They are in deficit, already posted several articles showing lgps is in deficit and remains so.
Click to expand...

That's a redundant point as there is no LGPS as such, it's a collection of regional schemes. Now if the government had rolled them all into one it might have some merit.
 
[TW]Fox;20690079 said:
So they've been at the same role for 10 years being paid 2001 level salaries and at no point thought to look elsewhere, even though 7 of the last 10 years were boom years, especially in the IT sector?

They sound like an employers dream!
Click to expand...

the boom years of IT were over 10 years ago, the IT sector has been a mess for many years with reducing salaries, less job security and ever decreasing benefits
 
MagicBoy said:
That's a redundant point as there is no LGPS as such, it's a collection of regional schemes. Now if the government had rolled them all into one it might have some merit.
Click to expand...

Of course it has merit, most if not all are in deficit.

But then again why would would you agree when you don't even know they are in deficite.

Are you part of union, or just anti government.

Even the tps is in deficit, from end of 2010 figures, can't find 2011 figures.
 
Last edited:
The reason you don't find pensions in the private sector to the same level is because private sector business are run for profit and operate on the price mechanism. If they do not do well or they spend too much money everyone loses their jobs.

In the public sector, there is the idea that there is a never ending faucet of funding that just needs to be allocated to the correct place. Some people even go as far to say that certain organisations or individuals should pay more taxes to fund their salaries and fund their pensions and fund their spending whims. Of course this is looking with blinkers, the bigger picture involves other countries, national debt levels, debt ratings. Which could in fact lead to even more cuts to the public sector. A similar effect does exist but the private sector are just much more aware of it.

This is the contrast between public sector and private sector pensions. Maybe if the private sector was not taxed so much then the business could afford to offer their employees better benefits.
 
MagicBoy said:
Fair point as regards some Civil Service pension schemes.

The vast amount of discontent is from employees in the LGPS and Teachers pension schemes, both of which are funded and can meet their future commitments with huge reserves to spare. There is no reason to impose a 50% increase on employee contributions to members of these schemes.

As soon as they start making sensible proposals for the LGPS I'll be back at my desk.
Click to expand...

If this is the attitude of the teaching profession, there's no hope for the youth of today. Your supposed to be "intelligent", if so, look outside at the bigger picture. We all need to work as a team and ride out the rough. This country doesn't need a ragtag rebel crowd holding the country to ransom.

The private sector are having an equally bad time. We also know that the country is in a bad state and just get on with it, instead of crying about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom