Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Public Sector Pensions Are Affordable


Recommended Posts

Because they were promised it as part of their contracts.

no they weren't

the facility has long been there to allow pension schemes to change the payout conditions if not fully funded, and was tested in the early noughties by the private sector, so has a decade of accepted legal precedent - funny how the public sector unions didn't object at the time heh...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 704
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Because they were promised it as part of their contracts. I would like to tell scottish power to shove their power bills because I can't afford their latest ridiculous increase, but they get narky and say I've signed the contract and then take action like cutting me off. Bastards.

Similarly, there's contractual guarantees for savers which if they weren't honoured would send this place critical. When santander collapses, "Yeh, i know we said we'd refund the first £50,000 but frankly the money's not there, you can whistle...."

While I take your point about contract, you can drop Scottish power and go elsewhere, that is the power of choice

where would I take my child if I needed to if all the schools were closed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no they weren't

the facility has long been there to allow pension schemes to change the payout conditions if not fully funded, and was tested in the early noughties by the private sector, so has a decade of accepted legal precedent - funny how the public sector unions didn't object at the time heh...

While I am pleased I don't look like your avatar, I wish i had your knowledge :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They were probably hoping the private sector workers had the balls to stand up for themselves. More fool them if they're happy to let slip rights and conditions that unions gained them over the last couple of centuries. Doesn't mean everyone else has to accept the same fate.

I recall at the time they (as we all were) were accepting to pay for their own pension shortfalls as they did not feel they should get someone else to pay, they were p*ssed off, but that is not the same as deliberately wanting to enslave your own children

and therein lies the lack of sympathy with the public sector unions

you really are either stupid or evil

Link to post
Share on other sites

If teachers were any good, they wouldn't be teachers. Those that can do, those that can't teach, and all that.

So completely untrue!

Good teaching is in itself a skill. Being good at e.g. maths does not make you good at teaching maths to others. Not every accountant would make a good maths teacher, any more than every good maths teacher would make a good accountant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall at the time they (as we all were) were accepting to pay for their own pension shortfalls as they did not feel they should get someone else to pay, they were p*ssed off, but that is not the same as deliberately wanting to enslave your own children

and therein lies the lack of sympathy with the public sector unions

you really are either stupid or evil

or both :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

no they weren't

the facility has long been there to allow pension schemes to change the payout conditions if not fully funded, and was tested in the early noughties by the private sector, so has a decade of accepted legal precedent - funny how the public sector unions didn't object at the time heh...

I think that there is a difference with teachers who have accrued rights.As far as I am aware once the pension fund is paid in then pension rights are not removable.Of course you can change the rights from this point on but as I understand it removing already accrued rights isn't possible.Mrs P checked this last week with her union NASUWT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that there is a difference with teachers who have accrued rights.As far as I am aware once the pension fund is paid in then pension rights are not removable.Of course you can change the rights from this point on but as I understand it removing already accrued rights isn't possible.Mrs P checked this last week with her union NASUWT.

Exactly, this isn't about reneging on pension committments for past work; it's about refusing to continue offering such generous terms for future work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that there is a difference with teachers who have accrued rights.As far as I am aware once the pension fund is paid in then pension rights are not removable.Of course you can change the rights from this point on but as I understand it removing already accrued rights isn't possible.Mrs P checked this last week with her union NASUWT.

yes, but the way round this has historically to effectively force the individual to accept new criteria in return for being permitted to continue contributing the scheme, including, say, pushing the retirement age back

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that there is a difference with teachers who have accrued rights.As far as I am aware once the pension fund is paid in then pension rights are not removable.Of course you can change the rights from this point on but as I understand it removing already accrued rights isn't possible.Mrs P checked this last week with her union NASUWT.

Necessitas legem non habet

Link to post
Share on other sites

They were probably hoping the private sector workers had the balls to stand up for themselves. More fool them if they're happy to let slip rights and conditions that unions gained them over the last couple of centuries. Doesn't mean everyone else has to accept the same fate.

Staggering arrogance from our resident public sector troll: you clearly believe yourself to be a superior being and that the rest of us are simply too feckless to stand up for our rights.

The reality is that for the last 14 years it's simply been a case of "do you want a f***ing job or not?"

And if you don't want the job there'll be another boatload arriving from wherever who do.

Edited by Goat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they were promised it as part of their contracts. I would like to tell scottish power to shove their power bills because I can't afford their latest ridiculous increase, but they get narky and say I've signed the contract and then take action like cutting me off. Bastards.

Similarly, there's contractual guarantees for savers which if they weren't honoured would send this place critical. When santander collapses, "Yeh, i know we said we'd refund the first £50,000 but frankly the money's not there, you can whistle...."

Wow, they get contracts for life as well as the other benefits? I wish my work was as secure.

I can remember when they would re-negotiate the contracts for their benefit regularly. Inflation rises and so on. OK to change the terms when it works in their favour.

More seriously, in the private sector people are being realistic and accepting lower pay. They know that companies that go bust often can't pay them redundancy.

I think this argument reveals one of the problems with the public sector; the naive, unrealistic sense of entitlement. Benefits already earned are, after all, being preserved. I wish my pension had that guarantee. Or any guarantee, for that matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Staggering arrogance from our resident public sector troll: you clearly believe yourself to be a superior being and that the rest of us are simply too feckless to stand up for our rights.

The reality is that for the last 14 years it's simply been a case of Robi wy potrzebujecie (chcieć) *f*****ing* praca albo nie? "

Fixed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Staggering arrogance from our resident public sector troll: you clearly believe yourself to be a superior being and that the rest of us are simply too feckless to stand up for our rights.

The reality is that for the last 14 years it's simply been a case of "do you want a f***ing job or not?"

And if you don't want the job there'll be another boatload arriving from wherever who do.

******** (apart from the superior being bit), it's been bad for the private sector for about 3 or 4 years, which is when I've started seen things go tits up for people. Is it 14 years to make it 1997 to fit in nicely with the "it's all labour's fault" mantra?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They were probably hoping the private sector workers had the balls to stand up for themselves. More fool them if they're happy to let slip rights and conditions that unions gained them over the last couple of centuries. Doesn't mean everyone else has to accept the same fate.

Huh?

Economics is more powerful than union power. If the company has no money, due to the obligations of over generous pensions, then workers have a choice, accept change or lose your job.

It is time the public sector enjoyed such equal rights.

And dont think the Public Sector can escape the maths of this, you simply cannot tax the private sector enough to pay for all this, do that and jobs will move out of the white economy into the black economy, and business will set up in other countries where they dont have to pay the tax to support all those public sector pensions. Any attempt to try and pay those obligations through higher tax levels, imposed cos teachers or whoever, go on strike, will cause the state to go bankrupt, and may even lead to the end of the pound through hyper-inflation.

If that happens, and it is likely to if the teachers win the strike, then public sector workers wont lose their accrued benefits, but those benefits will just be worth what the currency is worth, nothing.

The best outcome teachers can hope for is that they settle for what is offered, and hope that the current proposed cuts are enough. I doubt if they will be, but the real cuts you will get are going to be far more savage if you fight and win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

******** (apart from the superior being bit), it's been bad for the private sector for about 3 or 4 years, which is when I've started seen things go tits up for people. Is it 14 years to make it 1997 to fit in nicely with the "it's all labour's fault" mantra?

If everything was fine, this site wouldn't have had a reason to exist. The clue is in the HPI pricing out many a person who missed the boat or was born too late. The last few years are just the fallout.

EDIT: To add, it's not all directly Labour's fault - bigger forces were at play - but (at best) they didn't help either.

Edited by Traktion
Link to post
Share on other sites

******** (apart from the superior being bit), it's been bad for the private sector for about 3 or 4 years, which is when I've started seen things go tits up for people. Is it 14 years to make it 1997 to fit in nicely with the "it's all labour's fault" mantra?

Yes, the '14 years' was a bit obvious. But depending what industry you in, there have been several cycles in the past couple of decades. I can think of 3 dotcom booms and busts, for a start, each bigger than the last.

Personally, i think Labour failed to anticipate, prepare for, or mitigate the crash; and to a considerable extent, allowed, encouraged and exascerbated it. And then denied it.

If you pile tons of straw on a camel's back it's a bit disingenuous to blame the Americans for the final straw, as Brown did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

******** (apart from the superior being bit), it's been bad for the private sector for about 3 or 4 years, which is when I've started seen things go tits up for people. Is it 14 years to make it 1997 to fit in nicely with the "it's all labour's fault" mantra?

Showing just how out of touch with reality you are.

The removal of the dividend tax credit in 1998 was probably the biggest nail in the coffin of private sector pension schemes but there were others.

For most jobs real wages from 1997 to 2010 were pretty much flat and what growth there was got taken away in higher taxes.

But of course you wouldn't have noticed that thanks to Gordon Brown's largesse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Showing just how out of touch with reality you are.

The removal of the dividend tax credit in 1998 was probably the biggest nail in the coffin of private sector pension schemes but there were others.

For most jobs real wages from 1997 to 2010 were pretty much flat and what growth there was got taken away in higher taxes.

But of course you wouldn't have noticed that thanks to Gordon Brown's largesse.

...taken away and then given back in tax credits, child tax credits, etc. etc. Cunning (or not).

Unless you were single and childless and unmarried and under 65 and then you got to bask in the glow of paying for everyone's benefits but your own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 434 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.