On 30/11/11 16:53, Dave Cornwell wrote:
Graham P Davis wrote:
On 30/11/11 15:54, Eskimo Will wrote:
Perfect weather for a strike and for picket line duty!
Sun, and temperature around 10C.

Great turnout at Exeter City Centre rally with just under 4000 union
folk and families/supporters on the rally with all unions represented
including mine - PROSPECT www.prospect.org.uk . Many met Office
colleagues were with us too fighting for a fair *negotiated* pension
settlement, not a government imposed one. First strike in the Met Office
for over 30 years.

Red Will :-)

The one and only time I was on picket duty, I got a sunburnt nose. I
was Red Graham! ;-)

Whist I was on duty, A Roller crawled past in heavy traffic and a
bloated plutocrat in the back harrumphed, "why don't you go and do
some work?" The heavy traffic was because it was race day at Ascot and
he was off to the races.

A few years after I joined the Office, I realised that the
final-salary pension scheme was iniquitous and a scheme based on
average earnings throughout one's working life would be fairer. I also
realised that a so-called non-contributory scheme was going to serve
us ill and should be replaced by one that where contributions were in
the open and not removed from us during salary comparison exercises.
Chickens have finally come home to roost.

---------------------------
How do you factorise average earnings to take inflation into account?
For example my £750 per annum starting salary would be approximately
£18K to someone starting the same job today. Surely if a scheme wants to
pay out less it would be more straight forward to make it say, a 30/80th
scheme instead of a 40/80th based on final salary.
Dave
Dave

I don't see what the problem is with producing an average salary
corrected for inflation, especially since you've just done it with your
example.

The idea I had was not to pay less but to give a fair payment.
Final-salary schemes are too open to chicanery. For example, someone
works shifts almost all their working life but then the strain tells on
their health and they are limited to day work for the last few years.
Another person starts their working life with a note from their doctor
saying they can't work shifts. A few years away from retirement and they
stage a miraculous recovery and work shifts for the last year or so. If
their basic salary was £30,000 each, say, the first would retire on
£15,000 and the skiver would have about £21,000. Under my system, the
balance would be reversed. [The calculations are based on old ideas of
shift pay and may not hold true now.]

--
Graham Davis, Bracknell, Berks. E-mail: change boy to man
Teach evolution, not creationism: http://evolutionnotcreationism.org.uk/

Nick wrote:


Col wrote:



Wake up and smell the coffee, and start to understand just how poor
the pension provision is for others, and how selfish you are being
in expecting the taxpayer to bankroll a pension most in the peivate
sector can only dream about.
--
Col

rant
If the pension provision is poor for the private sector the problem is
the private sector is too stingy, not the public sector is too
generous. Taxpayers with a capital T are the ones being selfish,
hoarding all the money for themselves and resenting their money being
put on public services. Remember also that pensions are only a part of
many people's issues with this government, cuts to public services are
another. All that crap that the loathsome George Osborne comes out
with about us "all being in this together", yeah right like he is lol.
What Osborne is all about is pleasing his friends in the city and the
world of international finance.
/rant

And how much do you think it would cost employees for private sector
pensions to be brought up to current public sector levels?
The taxpayer is effectively subsidising public sector pension provision.

And no, I don't resent my taxes going to fund the public sector.
But what I *do* resent is them going to fund public sector pensions
that are far more generous than myself and most employees in the
private sector is likely to recieve.
How on earth can that be considered 'fair'?
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

On 30/11/11 18:01, Col wrote:
"Eskimo wrote in message
...
Perfect weather for a strike and for picket line duty!
Sun, and temperature around 10C.

Great turnout at Exeter City Centre rally with just under 4000 union folk
and families/supporters on the rally with all unions represented including
mine - PROSPECT www.prospect.org.uk . Many met Office colleagues were with
us too fighting for a fair *negotiated* pension settlement, not a
government imposed one. First strike in the Met Office for over 30 years.


No sympathy whatsoever.
The public sector have had it too good for too long with regards
to pensions. And even the offer on the table at the moment is
far better than the deals most private sector employees get. My
pension terms were reduced some years ago, I've had one
(small) pay rise in three years and there is the constant threat of
redundancy.

So basically, be thankful for what you've got.
There are millions of workers in a far worse position than those in
the public sector.

I return to my argument that Public Servants should have had an openly
contributory scheme so that the payments we made were visible to the
general public.

I started with payments of 1.5% of my salary. In the last few years, I
chose a system that bore 3% costs. Sounds cheap, doesn't it. What is
hidden is that, during Civil Service Pay Reviews, our pay was compared
with outside industry. About halfway through my working life, this meant
our salaries were adjusted downwards by 7% compared with outside
workers. This means my contributions then were 8.5%. By the end of my
working life, I understand the mark-down figure was 10% which suggests
my final contributions were around 13%.

But wait a minute, I haven't finished yet. Those salary comparisons were
with like jobs in the Private Sector. As I was in the Scientific Civil
Service, our pay was compared with that of scientists in the Private
Sector. Just one snag with that - pay in the Private Sector for
scientists was based on what the government paid its scientists! So,
every time there was a pay comparison, almost all scientists marked time
for a year.

When I had been working for three or four years and had had a promotion,
I found I was still earning less than the tea-boy/floor-sweeper in a
local factory. Never mind, I thought, at least I've got a good pension
to look forward to. Luckily, I've now got that but please don't try to
tell me that I've had it too good!

Also, don't blame Public Servants for the fact that Private Sector
bosses did a Maxwell with your pension funds when the Stock Market was
booming.

--
Graham Davis, Bracknell, Berks. E-mail: change boy to man
Teach evolution, not creationism: http://evolutionnotcreationism.org.uk/

On Nov 30, 7:29*pm, "Col" wrote:
Nick wrote:

Col wrote:

Wake up and smell the coffee, and start to understand just how poor
the pension provision is for others, and how selfish you are being
in expecting the taxpayer to bankroll a pension most in the peivate
sector can only dream about.
--
Col

rant
If the pension provision is poor for the private sector the problem is
the private sector is too stingy, not the public sector is too
generous. Taxpayers with a capital T are the ones being selfish,
hoarding all the money for themselves and resenting their money being
put on public services. Remember also that pensions are only a part of
many people's issues with this government, cuts to public services are
another. All that crap that the loathsome George Osborne comes out
with about us "all being in this together", yeah right like he is lol.
What Osborne is all about is pleasing his friends in the city and the
world of international finance.
/rant

And how much do you think it would cost employees for private sector
pensions to be brought up to current public sector levels?
The taxpayer is effectively subsidising public sector pension provision.

And no, I don't resent my taxes going to fund the public sector.
But what I *do* resent is them going to fund public sector pensions
that are far more generous than myself and most employees in the
private sector is likely to recieve.
How on earth can that be considered 'fair'?
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

But isn't it the case that everybody at one time or another had the
choice to apply for a public sector job? I *could* have chosen to be a
fireman - but decided to take a different path in life. When you sign
up for a job, public or private, you sign a contract and abide by the
terms of that contract, including what pension you get when you
retire. The issue of public sector pensions being more generous than
private sector pensions being 'fair' is beside the point. Any employer
reneging on the terms of a pension contract has to be brought to
task...

On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:47:06 +0000, Dave Cornwell
wrote:

Col wrote:
"Eskimo Will" wrote in message
...
"Col" wrote in message
...
"Eskimo Will" wrote in message
...
Perfect weather for a strike and for picket line duty!
Sun, and temperature around 10C.

Great turnout at Exeter City Centre rally with just under 4000 union
folk and families/supporters on the rally with all unions represented
including mine - PROSPECT www.prospect.org.uk . Many met Office
colleagues were with us too fighting for a fair *negotiated* pension
settlement, not a government imposed one. First strike in the Met Office
for over 30 years.

No sympathy whatsoever.
The public sector have had it too good for too long with regards
to pensions. And even the offer on the table at the moment is
far better than the deals most private sector employees get. My
pension terms were reduced some years ago, I've had one
(small) pay rise in three years and there is the constant threat of
redundancy.

So basically, be thankful for what you've got.
There are millions of workers in a far worse position than those in
the public sector.
It's not a race to the bottom Col.

Pay where I work has always been below median of comparable private sector
which we have accepted given the good pensions to make up the shortfall.
Now the government want to impose another real terms pay cut over and
above the pay freeze *and* cut our pension too as well as asking us to pay
more and work longer. My union and other unions can try and do something
about it and we are and will. I'm sorry that you are not in the same
position but that doesn't mean that we should be clobbered unfairly as
well if we can do something about it.

Unfortunately it's 'fair' that everybody is clobbered. Cuts need to be made
and you can't argue with demographics. We are living longer and one
way or another, that has to be paid for.
-------------------+
How many people do you know in the private sector who've paid 6% of
their salary into a pension scheme like I did for nearly 40 years? Not
many I can assure you. No performance bonuses, PAYE, no overtime, no
expenses and a salary well below the equivalent in the private sector
during that period. The builder opposite moans about my pension. He
started his in a private pension at age 50, has a big 5 bedroom house
against my 3 bedroom semi, 3 holidays a year, does cash jobs, has an
accountant to reduce his real tax burden and drives a Porsche. I don't
begrudge myself the benefit of a £21k a year pension after doing a job
that the public the needed desperately and helps me from relying State
support in my old age! That's why I support Will and his ilk.
Dave

I was trying to keep out of the fray but nicely put Dave ...

I also know people in the private sector who had their pensions raided
but you have to blame the company directors and the government
(Conservative I believe) for allowing pension pots to be plundered or
at best to go on pension contribution holidays ...

Graham P Davis wrote:
On 30/11/11 18:01, Col wrote:
"Eskimo wrote in message
...
Perfect weather for a strike and for picket line duty!
Sun, and temperature around 10C.

Great turnout at Exeter City Centre rally with just under 4000 union
folk
and families/supporters on the rally with all unions represented
including
mine - PROSPECT www.prospect.org.uk . Many met Office colleagues were
with
us too fighting for a fair *negotiated* pension settlement, not a
government imposed one. First strike in the Met Office for over 30
years.


No sympathy whatsoever.
The public sector have had it too good for too long with regards
to pensions. And even the offer on the table at the moment is
far better than the deals most private sector employees get. My
pension terms were reduced some years ago, I've had one
(small) pay rise in three years and there is the constant threat of
redundancy.

So basically, be thankful for what you've got.
There are millions of workers in a far worse position than those in
the public sector.

I return to my argument that Public Servants should have had an openly
contributory scheme so that the payments we made were visible to the
general public.

I started with payments of 1.5% of my salary. In the last few years, I
chose a system that bore 3% costs. Sounds cheap, doesn't it. What is
hidden is that, during Civil Service Pay Reviews, our pay was compared
with outside industry. About halfway through my working life, this meant
our salaries were adjusted downwards by 7% compared with outside
workers. This means my contributions then were 8.5%. By the end of my
working life, I understand the mark-down figure was 10% which suggests
my final contributions were around 13%.

But wait a minute, I haven't finished yet. Those salary comparisons were
with like jobs in the Private Sector. As I was in the Scientific Civil
Service, our pay was compared with that of scientists in the Private
Sector. Just one snag with that - pay in the Private Sector for
scientists was based on what the government paid its scientists! So,
every time there was a pay comparison, almost all scientists marked time
for a year.

When I had been working for three or four years and had had a promotion,
I found I was still earning less than the tea-boy/floor-sweeper in a
local factory. Never mind, I thought, at least I've got a good pension
to look forward to. Luckily, I've now got that but please don't try to
tell me that I've had it too good!

Also, don't blame Public Servants for the fact that Private Sector
bosses did a Maxwell with your pension funds when the Stock Market was
booming.

------------
Exactly!

"Dave Cornwell" wrote in message
...

Col wrote:
"Eskimo Will" wrote in message
...
"Col" wrote in message
...
"Eskimo Will" wrote in message
...
Perfect weather for a strike and for picket line duty!
Sun, and temperature around 10C.

Great turnout at Exeter City Centre rally with just under 4000 union
folk and families/supporters on the rally with all unions represented
including mine - PROSPECT www.prospect.org.uk . Many met Office
colleagues were with us too fighting for a fair *negotiated* pension
settlement, not a government imposed one. First strike in the Met
Office for over 30 years.

No sympathy whatsoever.
The public sector have had it too good for too long with regards
to pensions. And even the offer on the table at the moment is
far better than the deals most private sector employees get. My
pension terms were reduced some years ago, I've had one
(small) pay rise in three years and there is the constant threat of
redundancy.

So basically, be thankful for what you've got.
There are millions of workers in a far worse position than those in
the public sector.
It's not a race to the bottom Col.

Pay where I work has always been below median of comparable private
sector which we have accepted given the good pensions to make up the
shortfall. Now the government want to impose another real terms pay cut
over and above the pay freeze *and* cut our pension too as well as asking
us to pay more and work longer. My union and other unions can try and do
something about it and we are and will. I'm sorry that you are not in the
same position but that doesn't mean that we should be clobbered unfairly
as well if we can do something about it.

Unfortunately it's 'fair' that everybody is clobbered. Cuts need to be
made
and you can't argue with demographics. We are living longer and one
way or another, that has to be paid for.
-------------------+
How many people do you know in the private sector who've paid 6% of
their salary into a pension scheme like I did for nearly 40 years? Not
many I can assure you. No performance bonuses, PAYE, no overtime, no
expenses and a salary well below the equivalent in the private sector
during that period. The builder opposite moans about my pension. He
started his in a private pension at age 50, has a big 5 bedroom house
against my 3 bedroom semi, 3 holidays a year, does cash jobs, has an
accountant to reduce his real tax burden and drives a Porsche. I don't
begrudge myself the benefit of a £21k a year pension after doing a job
that the public the needed desperately and helps me from relying State
support in my old age! That's why I support Will and his ilk.
Dave

====================

£600 a month.... from the age of 21.... for 40 years. That may get you a
£21K pension these days - if that's 6% then a 21 year old would need a GOOD
job!

"Scott W" wrote in message
...

On Nov 30, 7:29 pm, "Col" wrote:
Nick wrote:

Col wrote:

Wake up and smell the coffee, and start to understand just how poor
the pension provision is for others, and how selfish you are being
in expecting the taxpayer to bankroll a pension most in the peivate
sector can only dream about.
--
Col

rant
If the pension provision is poor for the private sector the problem is
the private sector is too stingy, not the public sector is too
generous. Taxpayers with a capital T are the ones being selfish,
hoarding all the money for themselves and resenting their money being
put on public services. Remember also that pensions are only a part of
many people's issues with this government, cuts to public services are
another. All that crap that the loathsome George Osborne comes out
with about us "all being in this together", yeah right like he is lol.
What Osborne is all about is pleasing his friends in the city and the
world of international finance.
/rant

And how much do you think it would cost employees for private sector
pensions to be brought up to current public sector levels?
The taxpayer is effectively subsidising public sector pension provision.

And no, I don't resent my taxes going to fund the public sector.
But what I *do* resent is them going to fund public sector pensions
that are far more generous than myself and most employees in the
private sector is likely to recieve.
How on earth can that be considered 'fair'?
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

But isn't it the case that everybody at one time or another had the
choice to apply for a public sector job? I *could* have chosen to be a
fireman - but decided to take a different path in life. When you sign
up for a job, public or private, you sign a contract and abide by the
terms of that contract, including what pension you get when you
retire. The issue of public sector pensions being more generous than
private sector pensions being 'fair' is beside the point. Any employer
reneging on the terms of a pension contract has to be brought to
task...

==================================

Surely this change must have been allowed in the contract, though, or there
would be 2 million tribunal cases?

How many people do you know in the private sector who've paid 6% of
their salary into a pension scheme like I did for nearly 40 years? Not
many I can assure you. No performance bonuses, PAYE, no overtime, no
expenses and a salary well below the equivalent in the private sector
during that period. The builder opposite moans about my pension. He
started his in a private pension at age 50, has a big 5 bedroom house
against my 3 bedroom semi, 3 holidays a year, does cash jobs, has an
accountant to reduce his real tax burden and drives a Porsche. I don't
begrudge myself the benefit of a £21k a year pension after doing a job
that the public the needed desperately and helps me from relying State
support in my old age! That's why I support Will and his ilk.
Dave

====================

£600 a month.... from the age of 21.... for 40 years. That may get you a
£21K pension these days - if that's 6% then a 21 year old would need a
GOOD job!

--------------
Sorry, not quite following that. What is the £600 per month?

cupra wrote:
"Scott W" wrote in message
...

On Nov 30, 7:29 pm, "Col" wrote:
Nick wrote:

Col wrote:

Wake up and smell the coffee, and start to understand just how poor
the pension provision is for others, and how selfish you are being
in expecting the taxpayer to bankroll a pension most in the peivate
sector can only dream about.
--
Col

rant
If the pension provision is poor for the private sector the problem is
the private sector is too stingy, not the public sector is too
generous. Taxpayers with a capital T are the ones being selfish,
hoarding all the money for themselves and resenting their money being
put on public services. Remember also that pensions are only a part of
many people's issues with this government, cuts to public services are
another. All that crap that the loathsome George Osborne comes out
with about us "all being in this together", yeah right like he is lol.
What Osborne is all about is pleasing his friends in the city and the
world of international finance.
/rant

And how much do you think it would cost employees for private sector
pensions to be brought up to current public sector levels?
The taxpayer is effectively subsidising public sector pension provision.

And no, I don't resent my taxes going to fund the public sector.
But what I *do* resent is them going to fund public sector pensions
that are far more generous than myself and most employees in the
private sector is likely to recieve.
How on earth can that be considered 'fair'?
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

But isn't it the case that everybody at one time or another had the
choice to apply for a public sector job? I *could* have chosen to be a
fireman - but decided to take a different path in life. When you sign
up for a job, public or private, you sign a contract and abide by the
terms of that contract, including what pension you get when you
retire. The issue of public sector pensions being more generous than
private sector pensions being 'fair' is beside the point. Any employer
reneging on the terms of a pension contract has to be brought to
task...

==================================

Surely this change must have been allowed in the contract, though, or
there would be 2 million tribunal cases?

-----------------------
It wasn't in mine and there may be!
Dave