30/11 Strikes.

Rotty said:
It's ridiculous, according to BBC today the average employer private sector pension contribution is 3% and even after cuts 14% in public sector

Public sector pay is now higher than private sector

It's time these folks got real, we would love what you are being offered, why should the rest of us have to subsidise selfish people :mad:
Click to expand...

It sounds like a no brainer then - get a job in the public sector. They still exist btw, I see them advertised all the time (IT industry) but personally I wouldn't consider a job in the public sector, even with the pension on offer.
 
A new revised proposal is being formulated into an improved formal written offer for presentation to the Unions on Friday. Initial indications are that it's likely to be recommended for acceptance by PCS, NUT, ATL and Prospect. No indications from other Unions yet.
 
scorza said:
It sounds like a no brainer then - get a job in the public sector. They still exist btw, I see them advertised all the time (IT industry) but personally I wouldn't consider a job in the public sector, even with the pension on offer.
Click to expand...
That's hardly a solution to long term sustainability and debt reduction.
Such packages simply shouldn't be avilable.
 
If today has achieved anything it's to highlight how unjust some existing pension arrangements are. The more I look into the figures the more unbelievable it gets. Deficit, surplus, boom or bust something should have been done long ago.
 
Rotty said:
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
Click to expand...

True. Hence why I went to the public sector after my outsourcing job got outsourced again to India just after the boom years...

Glaucus said:
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.
Click to expand...

Care to back that up with something from a credible source?

I've made my position plain at least twice in this thread already. I'm not going to keep repeating myself.
 
I've already posted the articles. Go look. Or do a google

Tps deficit
Lgps deficit one I post early examined the released documents of 50 out of the 81 schemes.
 
scorza said:
What do you mean? The public sector shouldn't employ anyone? :confused:
Click to expand...

How can you come to that conclusion.

Such benefits shouldn't be avilable. The books should be made to balance.
Andtherfore all applying for public job positions isn't a solution.

As already said employment contracts are subject to change. This isn't retrospectively changing anything. Employment contracts do not stay the same. Companiess can and do change them as the world/situation changes.

Public pensions pots on the whole are in deficite, therefore something needs to change.
 
Glaucus said:
How can you come to that conclusion.

Such benefits shouldn't be avilable. The books should be made to balance.
Andtherfore all applying for public job positions isn't a solution.

As already said employment contracts are subject to change. This isn't retrospectively changing anything. Employment contracts do not stay the same. Companiess can and do change them as the world/situation changes.

Public pensions pots on the whole are in deficite, therefore something needs to change.
Click to expand...

I didn't come to any conclusion, I asked a question (hence the question marks) because your initial post wasn't clear.

I don't think they'll give a public sector job to everyone who wants one lol - they do have public sector vacancies however because they need high quality people to do a valuable job for a public sector organisation. Why shouldn't those people be given attractive packages to lure them to the job?
 
Last edited:
I saw this, and lol'ed.

392147_963696532871_61014998_45839391_1268676140_n.jpg
 
Glaucus said:
Nothing wrong with atractive packages. If they can afford them. They can't, over the entire public sector, the pension pot is short by just over £1000billion
Click to expand...

Got a source for those figures. The only people claiming that we can't afford public sector pensions are the government as far as I'm aware, but the government are a bunch of liars. It's a fact that as a percentage of GDP, pensions payments are predicted to go down, making public sector pensions entirely sustainable.
 
scorza said:
Got a source for those figures. The only people claiming that we can't afford public sector pensions are the government as far as I'm aware, but the government are a bunch of liars. It's a fact that as a percentage of GDP, pensions payments are predicted to go down, making public sector pensions entirely sustainable.
Click to expand...

Again posted lots of articles and they certainly aren't all bupy the government. Also by private fund people.

Even lgps admit they are short. By 23billion, with others saying as much as 100billion.
Do you believe the unions?
http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2010/12/latest-lgps-deficit-forecast-challenged/
Unions also rejected Ralfe’s report, claiming the LGPS deficit was in fact somewhere between £30bn and £40bn and it had a positive annual cash flow of more than £4bn on top of the £132bn assets.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom