Not blnkered at all. Your jjust emotionaly involved and cant see it.
Your molney is secureed, there simply isnt enough money to ayh what you thought.
Firefighters set to strike.
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
Not blnkered at all. Your jjust emotionaly involved and cant see it.
Your molney is secureed, there simply isnt enough money to ayh what you thought.
+1.
Changes should not be appleid to Firemen who signed up under a different system. They should be applied to new joiners.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,485
Government shafting pensions shocker!
The same thing happened to my Grandad - 47 years down the pit and a few months before retirement they signed him off on 'ill health' and he lost a massive chunk of pension. All those years of service and they screwed him at the last moment.
That's why I avoid pensions like the plague. I know far too many people who have been shafted. To me, they are the biggest scam going.
Times change, this is true, but the government have contracts with x amount of Fire Service personnel, Police and others that they should honour. Fair enough, introduce changes as needed to new pension starters, but to retrospectively change the agreements for current pension holders is not cricket, particularly when there are other areas where Politicians could get money from if they put their foot down. But of course, many have their self-interest to consider so that wont ever happen. The whole system is bent.
Perhaps if they started taking the tax revenue from various sources like they should, there would not be a shortfall
As always, the little people get shafted by the folk at the top. People saying "well that's just the way it has to be" seem to happily gloss over the fact that it is that way because of the actions of the Government - not the Fire Service. So the Government are not only completely unaccountable for their actions, they can also rob hard working honest people blind in order to cover their own mistakes. Democracy eh? Great isn't it?
It is a bit like a Judge picking a random person out of an audience in court and saying "the individual in the dock is guilty of murder, and even though you had nothing to do with it, and it is not your fault - you are going to jail instead! Oh and the fines he owes us, you will need to pay for him. Justice has been served!"
Would we accept that? Should we accept it?
Whilst the analogy is perhaps a poor one, the core principles are the same.
Perhaps the Exchequer should only contribute 1.5 times that of a Politician on a 1/40 accrual rate instead of 3 times, and give the rest to the Emergency service pensions by way of an apology. Even better, maybe the banks want to stump up all of the shortfall with some of their (still) epic profits. A kind of "sorry for 2008" gesture
No politicians/bankers want to take that offer?
No thought not.
Unfortunately striking wont change anything and the Fire Service will end up looking the bad guy, even though they have a right to be very upset. Its a sorry state we find ourselves in.
Cheers
Buff
The same thing happened to my Grandad - 47 years down the pit and a few months before retirement they signed him off on 'ill health' and he lost a massive chunk of pension. All those years of service and they screwed him at the last moment.
That's why I avoid pensions like the plague. I know far too many people who have been shafted. To me, they are the biggest scam going.
Times change, this is true, but the government have contracts with x amount of Fire Service personnel, Police and others that they should honour. Fair enough, introduce changes as needed to new pension starters, but to retrospectively change the agreements for current pension holders is not cricket, particularly when there are other areas where Politicians could get money from if they put their foot down. But of course, many have their self-interest to consider so that wont ever happen. The whole system is bent.
Perhaps if they started taking the tax revenue from various sources like they should, there would not be a shortfall
As always, the little people get shafted by the folk at the top. People saying "well that's just the way it has to be" seem to happily gloss over the fact that it is that way because of the actions of the Government - not the Fire Service. So the Government are not only completely unaccountable for their actions, they can also rob hard working honest people blind in order to cover their own mistakes. Democracy eh? Great isn't it?
It is a bit like a Judge picking a random person out of an audience in court and saying "the individual in the dock is guilty of murder, and even though you had nothing to do with it, and it is not your fault - you are going to jail instead! Oh and the fines he owes us, you will need to pay for him. Justice has been served!"
Would we accept that? Should we accept it?
Whilst the analogy is perhaps a poor one, the core principles are the same.
Perhaps the Exchequer should only contribute 1.5 times that of a Politician on a 1/40 accrual rate instead of 3 times, and give the rest to the Emergency service pensions by way of an apology. Even better, maybe the banks want to stump up all of the shortfall with some of their (still) epic profits. A kind of "sorry for 2008" gesture
No politicians/bankers want to take that offer?
No thought not.
Unfortunately striking wont change anything and the Fire Service will end up looking the bad guy, even though they have a right to be very upset. Its a sorry state we find ourselves in.
Cheers
Buff
The shortfall is on the pension pot, the government isn't spending the pension money on other stuff, every penny paid in, is guaranteed by the government. Servicemen simply haven't paid enough in to their pot. In fact they've paid about 50% of the needed pot size in, thus something has to change.
Pensions are not set in stone and it isn't getting shafted, its changing pension to represent what your pension pot actually has in it.
The sorry state is that a) these gold plated pensions existed and it wasn't just public.
B) people think that its a set contract where nothing can change, thats not the case.
c) things change, growth falls, people live longer, pension pots don't cover the pension liability.
Pensions are not set in stone and it isn't getting shafted, its changing pension to represent what your pension pot actually has in it.
The sorry state is that a) these gold plated pensions existed and it wasn't just public.
B) people think that its a set contract where nothing can change, thats not the case.
c) things change, growth falls, people live longer, pension pots don't cover the pension liability.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,485
So the Government have never 'dipped' into the pension pots for other things then? Ever?
Are the additional cost requirements being split 50/50 between employees/Exchequer?
Why now? We have been a nation that has lived longer year on year for a very long time. So why now? Why haven't changes been brought in with lesser impact over time? Why has the government(s) not taken note of the warnings we have had over pensions for years?
Is the pension deficit the fault of those who signed on, or the result of long standing mismanagement by consecutive governments?
Do you think there is a lot of room for government doctors to be 'writing people off' on medical grounds in order to save the government money? How is the process regulated? The reports available regarding fitness levels suggest that around 50% of personnel will fall below the 35ml kg-1 min-1 standard at age 50. But the government expect them to work till age 60, at which point the nearest estimates put the number unable to obtain the standard at 75%. Could it be argued that the standards are unreasonably high? Given the nature of the work, and the high expectations, can the government justify the pension scheme announced at all? Surely if the majority of the people in the service are not going to be able to meet the requirements at age 55-60 there is a problem with the proposed system? Where is the evidence that the standards are reasonably achievable at those ages?
When they introduced new pensions for personnel in 2006 and increased the retirement age to 60 the government argued that there would be lots of other job opportunities for older fire fighters who were not fit enough, yet these do not appear to have materialised.
Furthermore, it seems they have plucked the new retirement age of 60 out of thin air with no real evidence to show it is a realistic expectation considering the physical demands of front line fire fighting. From what I gather from my limited research, restructuring in the recent years has all but removed redeployment opportunities within the service.
I do not pretend to be a pension expert, but it still looks like a shafting to me, whichever way you cut it.
For those who fancy a read regarding fitness standards, I found this interesting http://therfu.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/130112-NPA-Review-FINAL.pdf
Its not just now, its been ging on for years.
And no, govement do not dip there hands in and never have. Every penny is guarenteed. The differeence is rather than it being invested like a private pension. It oes into the big black goverment pot.
The goverment then guarentee to pay it back as a pension at a latter day + "interest"
So no, goverment hasn't taken any, its not dipping it s hands in or anything.
Fitness is usually dont by a third party, firefighters arent the only one with a physical job and certianly arent the only ones with a fitness level. So it doesnt come into it. Not fit enough, get another job for the last few years, just liek every other industry has to do. Or take the pension and rather than 19k take 10k(or whatever it would be).
And no, govement do not dip there hands in and never have. Every penny is guarenteed. The differeence is rather than it being invested like a private pension. It oes into the big black goverment pot.
The goverment then guarentee to pay it back as a pension at a latter day + "interest"
So no, goverment hasn't taken any, its not dipping it s hands in or anything.
Fitness is usually dont by a third party, firefighters arent the only one with a physical job and certianly arent the only ones with a fitness level. So it doesnt come into it. Not fit enough, get another job for the last few years, just liek every other industry has to do. Or take the pension and rather than 19k take 10k(or whatever it would be).
Nope, £120 a day (day rate) is min ive known on construction sites, unless you are a young lad which earn 60 to 80 a day.
Good for them, I'm 100% behind them.
Some of the stuff they have to witness and clean up after is utterly horrific not to mention placing their lives on the line.
I'm more than happy to pay more tax so that firefighters, policemen, doctors & Nurses and teachers get a fairer wage for the important and extremely demanding work they do.
Some of the stuff they have to witness and clean up after is utterly horrific not to mention placing their lives on the line.
I'm more than happy to pay more tax so that firefighters, policemen, doctors & Nurses and teachers get a fairer wage for the important and extremely demanding work they do.