Unison strike action.

[Floogie]

It hasn't been discredited, even Lord Hutton has pointed out that the unions who claim to have discredited it can't actually read...

Hold on, didn't we discuss this 2 months ago in SC and it was painfully apparent you had no clue what you were talking about?

In the absence of factual credibility, continue regardless with the lies in order to try dominate the narrative. Can't fault your commitment there kid.

 

[LordSplodge]

I'd be somewhat annoyed too. Then I'd look at the new deal, realise it's still fantastic (and unfair to the people funding it) and bite quickly at the new deal before it gets worse...

But then, I'm a rational individual able to evaluate all the options.

Yes the new deal is probably the best we will get. That doesn't man I don't have to be annoyed (I was looking forward to retiring at 60) and it doesn't mean the Unions won't screw it up.

 

[MagicBoy]

I'd be somewhat annoyed too. Then I'd look at the new deal, realise it's still fantastic (and unfair to the people funding it) and bite quickly at the new deal before it gets worse...

But then, I'm a rational individual able to evaluate all the options.

Looked at rationally you (the council taxpayers) are not funding it. It's not the gold plated civil service pension where it's a perk included for free and somehow it's funded out of income taxes when I retire. It's a voluntary scheme where the contributions go out of my wage packet and into a managed pension fund, just like the company pensions that were common until a few years ago from big employers such as IBM, ICI etc. The employers contribution essentially makes up for the lesser rates of pay you get in the public sector.

Now the LG workers are expected to make that up out of our frozen pay that was uncompetitive to start with.

I'd agree to an increase in the retirement age and perhaps the CPI change. The 3.5% increase in contributions to pay off debt and keep council tax down is unacceptable as it's nothing to do with pensions.

How would you private sector employees like it if the Government created a pension tax of 50% on employee contributions for all employers schemes then used it to pay off the national debt?

 

[Dolph]

Hold on, didn't we discuss this 2 months ago in SC and it was painfully apparent you had no clue what you were talking about?

In the absence of factual credibility, continue regardless with the lies in order to try dominate the narrative. Can't fault your commitment there kid.

No, we did it in SC, you claimed to know the report better than the person who wrote it, and it was realised that you are irrational and therefore pointless to argue with.

Here's the link to Lord Hutton's statement again.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/15/unions-and-hutton-exchange-angry-words-over-pensions

Hutton told the Guardian the chart assumed that reforms agreed with the previous government would be implemented. Those changes include a "cap and share" system that set a ceiling on pension costs. If that ceiling is reached, unions would accept increases in contributions or working longer – issues that are now the subject of deadlocked discussions.

Hutton said the chart "includes the assumptions that people work longer and pay more" and warned that reform would be needed to make the 1.4% figure a reality. He added: "It's fundamentally dishonest for people to cite those figures and reach the conclusion in my report that everything is fine."

Here's the quote again. Please stop spouting the thoroughly discredited union crap.

 

[Dolph]

Looked at rationally you (the council taxpayers) are not funding it. It's not the gold plated civil service pension where it's a perk included for free and somehow it's funded out of income taxes when I retire. It's a voluntary scheme where the contributions go out of my wage packet and into a managed pension fund, just like the company pensions that were common until a few years ago from big employers such as IBM, ICI etc. The employers contribution essentially makes up for the lesser rates of pay you get in the public sector.

Now the LG workers are expected to make that up out of our frozen pay that was uncompetitive to start with.

I'd agree to an increase in the retirement age and perhaps the CPI change. The 3.5% increase in contributions to pay off debt and keep council tax down is unacceptable as it's nothing to do with pensions.

The 3.5% average increase is the result of socialising the costs of protecting the lower paid workers from the increase....

How would you private sector employees like it if the Government created a pension tax of 50% on employee contributions for all employers schemes then used it to pay off the national debt?

Gordon Brown did just that, long before the public spending crisis, to pay for more public sector workers. It is the reason why private sector pensions have been decimated so much...

 

[shoes]

Yes the new deal is probably the best we will get. That doesn't man I don't have to be annoyed (I was looking forward to retiring at 60) and it doesn't mean the Unions won't screw it up.

Go and get a proper job in the private sector then if it's the mecca you think it is

 

[MagicBoy]

The 3.5% average increase is the result of socialising the costs of protecting the lower paid workers from the increase....

No. They're using it as crude tool to reduce employers contributions.

Assuming for a second you were correct, most of the lower paid workers are not in the LGPS. The LGPS are indicating that they believe over 30% of members will leave when the changes are implemented as they cannot afford the increased contributions. Where's the long term benefit for the country in that? We'll end up with a load of ex-public sector workers claiming benefit...

 

[Floogie]

No, we did it in SC, you claimed to know the report better than the person who wrote it, and it was realised that you are irrational and therefore pointless to argue with.

Here's the link to Lord Hutton's statement again.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/15/unions-and-hutton-exchange-angry-words-over-pensions



Here's the quote again. Please stop spouting the thoroughly discredited union crap.

Appears it still hasn't clicked. So I'll try this:

The cost projection fan chart was not produced by Hutton and was only reprinted in his report. So neither is he authorative on it. Ok?

 

[Westyfield2]

Go and get a proper job in the private sector then if it's the mecca you think it is

Bingo!


For anyone in the public sector that can't look at the new deal and realise it's still fantastic and something the majority of people would be delighted with... http://www.mcdonalds.co.uk/people/join-the-team/join-the-team.shtml

 

[Deleted member 66701]

I'm not one for mandating statutory turnouts for strike ballots to be valid but a turnout of 29% is shocking.

 

[afraser2k]

Looking increasingly likely that higher education support staff going on strike over pay offer (£150 lump sum) along with UCU academic staff (over pensions) with our ballot due for the 7th and results on the 14th. Going to be a fun winter for the students.

 

[RabbitHutch]

Why do morons insist on posting things like 'well you earn more than temp staff at McDonalds so what are you complaining about?'

How utterly stupid to you have to be to post that kind of drivel?

Don't you know there's kids in Africa who starve to death every day? Forget complaining about your job or suggesting the government ever fails - at least your child isn't dying from malnutrition via drought.

 

[RabbitHutch]

It hasn't been discredited, even Lord Hutton has pointed out that the unions who claim to have discredited it can't actually read...

Furthermore, unaffordable is a subjective metric. In theory, the public sector can afford anything through forcibly removing money from individuals and the private sector, and through borrowing. In practice though, such behaviour creates massive unfairness and is therefore practically unaffordable if you are someone who believes in fairness.

I believe in fairness.

Pay me as much as my private counterpart then. Drop this pension malarkey all-together.

It would cost you significantly more than to pay me my pension of course.

That's fair isn't it? You still won't agree with it of course.

 

[MagicBoy]

So what about the supermarket checkout worker on near on minimum wage? They cant afford their own pension but is supposed to pay their taxes so public sector workers can?

Besides a lot of the structural deficit is due to Labour employing more people into the public sector in areas of low employment, so the debt is in part caused by the public sector itself.

They probably voted for Labour. I didn't, therefore it's not my fault.

Anyway, as previously stated they're not paying my pension. It's a optional contributory scheme. I'm paying the supermarket workers pension by buying food from <insert supermarket here>. You don't see me complaining about it.

Agreed to under a labour govt who lie and lied and deceived us.
Everyone i going to be crunched in this mess, you won't escape it, striking might help if you go out long enough and forego your pay.

Quite prepared to do that, assuming I can earn enough to keep up my mortgage payments.

I actually feel that I'm doing some good in the public sector. Can't say that about my previous jobs for private companies.