30/11 Strikes.

No they haven't.

Can any teacher, NHS or civil servant public sector worker on here show me the letter that the government has sent you that details in writing what the offer is?

No, didn't think so.
Shouldn't that be part of your job, being a union representative, given that you're allegedly striking for your members? Or is it easier to pursue your political agenda if you don't keep your members informed? There has been plenty of information floated around, and announced by various members of the treasury.
 
None of them, the new proposal remains an unfunded ponzi scheme with unfair taxpayer liability for the difference between what is paid in and what is paid out.

Precisely.

I know for a fact that the Unions (at least Unison, Unite and PCS) would accept any of those three poposal and at least two of those (I forget which ones exactly) have been proposed by the Unions as a solution. Both were dismissed by the Government.
 
Shouldn't that be part of your job, being a union representative, given that you're allegedly striking for your members? Or is it easier to pursue your political agenda if you don't keep your members informed?

+1 RMT is great at not informing us, that's why few years ago I strikes first day, the other two days I didn't as I found out a lot of info :mad:
 
No they haven't.

Can any teacher, NHS or civil servant public sector worker on here show me the letter that the government has sent you that details in writing what the offer is?

Why would they do this? It is the responsibility of those involved in the negotiation to pass the offers on to their members. However, given the dishonest representation so far...

No, didn't think so.

The Unions have contonuously asked the Government to put these proposals into a written offer so that they may ballot thier members on rejection or acceptance. The government have so far refused to do so.

And the unions were asked no to strike during negotiations, but for political reasons they did it anyway...
 
Shouldn't that be part of your job, being a union representative, given that you're allegedly striking for your members? Or is it easier to pursue your political agenda if you don't keep your members informed? There has been plenty of information floated around, and announced by various members of the treasury.

The unions have not been presented with a written offer so how would they present that to thier members? Or do you suggest the Unions present a "proposal" for ballot?

Oh, and btw, enough with "my job", "you're striking for your members" - my members are not involved in this.
 
No reply from my SU President justifying the mailshot to every student urging that we support the strike. Unsurprisingly, his ultimate goal on the SU website is "To become Prime Minister". I don't think that we need two guesses to ascertain what political party he is likely a member of.
 
Why would they do this? It is the responsibility of those involved in the negotiation to pass the offers on to their members. However, given the dishonest representation so far...

The Unions would be quite happy to present any offer to it's members for ballot - if and when they actually recve one :rolleyes:

You're not paying attention are you Dolph. :p

And the unions were asked no to strike during negotiations, but for political reasons they did it anyway...

They haven't taken strike action during negotiations ;)


Dictation != negotiation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No reply from my SU President justifying the mailshot to every student urging that we support the strike. Unsurprisingly, his ultimate goal on the SU website is "To become Prime Minister". I don't think that we need two guesses to ascertain what political party he is likely a member of.

Re email and copy to your Uni’s vice chancellor.
 
Pension forecasts are based on current salary projected to normal retirement age. Anything else would be impractical. She may be earning a lot more at retirement.

Also as said add 7k for the proposed flat rate state pension at todays value.
 
The state pension isn't £8000 a year though, is it?

c. £5500 for singles or £9000 for couples apparently. Plus pensioners have a higher tax code than those of working age.

They can also qualify for housing benefit and council tax benefit potentially, depending on their overall income and living costs.

It might not make them wealthy but they can live just fine on that, and certainly better than pensioners in most of the rest of the world. And before you say, oh but pensioners in Europe are better off etc. - yes, for now. But it is all utterly unsustainable and is destined to collapse without significant reform.

For example in Italy there are actually more pensioners than workers. Italy is being crushed under the weight of its debts and the deficits it needs to run each year just to pay its bills.
 
Last edited:
They haven't taken strike action during negotiations ;)Dictation != negotiation.
Indeed. As a neutral, the behaviour of the unions appears to be anything but negotiating.

Oh, and btw, enough with "my job", "you're striking for your members" - my members are not involved in this.
So how do you know what has and what hasn't been passed between the Government and the Unions involved in this strike?
 
At this rate I'm never going to retire, I would expect my pension to at least equal what I earn when I worked lol. Good thing I'm paying into a private pension aswell
 
Public sector employment numbers are reducing, not increasing, so the Ponzi scheme doesn't work (relies on ever increasing membership).

I would fully agree that the new funding model is still flawed, in the past I have advocated a move to a fully funded pension fund with a choice of pay in/pay out approaches:

  • Defined contribution pension with fixed employer/employee contributions
  • Defined benefit scheme based on career averages and regular revaluation and variable employee contributions (fixed employer contributions) to ensure the finance is there.
  • Defined benefit scheme based on final salary with revaluation and variable employee contributions

That would prevent any re-occurrence of these problems and ensure fairness to both taxpayers and public sector employees.

I disagree that it's a ponzi scheme, you could design a similar setup with a flat membership, all you need is that people continue to join as others leave.

Regardless of that, none of what you suggest is being proposed. The current proposals are for increased contributions with decreased payout and can't even be justified with being in the long term interests of the pension schemes involved.
 
The Unions would be quite happy to present any offer to it's members for ballot - if and when they actually recve one :rolleyes:

You're not paying attention are you Dolph. :p

They haven't taken strike action during negotiations ;)


Dictation != negotiation.

I agree, the problem is the Unions refuse all attempts to negotiate by focusing on things that won't change and ignoring the things that could ;)
 
At this rate I'm never going to retire, I would expect my pension to at least equal what I earn when I worked lol. Good thing I'm paying into a private pension aswell

You would need a gigantic pension pot for that.

Also you should have a house paid for by then, so no rent and possible downgrade freeing up capital.
 
At this rate I'm never going to retire, I would expect my pension to at least equal what I earn when I worked lol. Good thing I'm paying into a private pension aswell

Good luck with that, you'll need to pay probably half your salary into a pension for your whole working life to make that a reality.
 
Back
Top Bottom