If you shift everything overseas how does the country survive when nobody has a job?

SbZ, your point is? we live in a global market, there will be jobs but you will have to compete with vietnamese, Indians, etc.

This is my point, and the problem, the country will survive, but when all your money is spent on surviving and not consuming how does a market function?

And when the private workers are earning £5per hour, public servants will face there wages be slashed as the cost will be unaffordable. There will be some with money, the same at the top of the tree now will still be there erecting their fences and employing guards to protect their wealth.

I hope i am wrong by the way, i just don’t see any effort by any party to protect people in this country to ensure a reasonable standard of living.

mrmo – completely irrelevant

I think what mrmo is getting at is this whole rolling ball of s**t is turning into a race to the bottom.

The real problem is not public sector pensions, it’s crap private sector pensions.

No.

Private companies cannot guarantee that they will still be in existence six months into the future, nor can they legally levy taxes on the entire population to cover any guarantees they make. Private companies can and do fail, leaving their creditors wanting.

As such, private sector pensions have to be fully funded and affordable, at all times. With a good margin for error. Why can some people not grasp this simple concept?

A private company cannot pay its workers whatever they want today, nor can it make silly promises for tomorrow. There is a limited pot. Private companies cannot require 3rd parties to take over and make good any foolish promises they make.

Public sector schemes must also become fully funded. They will do. Whatever unions think.

The fella I feel sorry for is the guy at Birmingham City Council working on regeneration and trying to pursuade companies Brum is a good place to do business. Must have been a tough day when his own organisation made him look like a chump.

not irrelevant Tandem, so far many jobs have gone from the private sector and been sent abroad, it is starting to happen in the public sector. As has been pointed out how can you compare like for like across public and private because in a lot of cases there is no duplication of duty.

Where there could be duplication, ie customer services, back office, alot of this has gone.

And at the end of the day the public sector is paid for by the private sector, you may not like it but driving down costs and keeping wages low in the private sector will force the public sector the same way. The first step is the easy one, drive pensions down, it isn’t in your pay today so easier to do.

The few jobs i have seen over the last year job hunting have paid more in the public sector than similar jobs in the private sector, this is admin type work.

dmjb4

What you don’t get is they have been reformed and (mostly) have a limit on any taxpayers contributions.

For example the NHS pension fund is in surplus – more is taken in each moth than goes out. this has been the case for decades. this money is used as revenue by the exchequer not invested – so this money has to be paid back by the exchequer in future

No union is saying all reform is off the table – but it must be reasonable and proportionate and not punative

The scandal is crap private sector pensions that the taxpayer will have to pick up the tab for in benefits. Private companies should be made to make reasonable pension provision. If it applies to all companies there is no competitive disadvantage to them in doing so.

TJ – I thought the NHS scheme had a rather large deficit, not a surplus as you suggest? The telegraph reported a £165B black hole only 2 years ago…

NHS Black Hole

Thats the lies and propaganda. The surplus is a current surplus. More money is paid in in contributions than is paid out now. that report a theoretical worst case scenario in the future. If everyone lives to 100+ taking their pensions and no increase in contributions – of course what that doesn’t say is the scheme has been revised to stop this happening

The current surplus is used as revenue by the exchequer as its a revenue scheme – this money is not invested. Thus if there is a deficit in the future the government has to make it good as it has not saved or invested the current surplus.

Thus if there is a deficit in the future the government tax payer has to make it good as it has not saved or invested the current surplus.

Fixed that for you.

[TJ – in fact that the current NHS pension scheme is not a “fund”, payments go into general treasury revenues, and current and future payments out of the same, unlike a hypothecated pension “fund”. The NHS Scheme is, by definition, “unfunded”

The fact that the scheme is currently in suplus is irrelevant This has occurred because increasing staff numbers have generated higher total employer contributions, leading to the current net cash surplus but giving rise to higher future pension obligations – which stand at about 287 billion quid total liabilities. The only ways for the NHS scheme to remain in “surplus” into the future are for the NHS headcount to continue to grow exponentially, for the contributions in per head to rise, or the benefits out to reduce.

Simple economics! Look upon it as similar to the First law of Thermodynamics.

The surplus is a current surplus. More money is paid in in contributions than is paid out now

So what! The actual issue is whether the people currently contributing are contributing enough to cover future payments.

There are some very gullible people on here who believe tory lies and propaganda as the truth

I feel rather sorry for you

The NHS pension fund has been reformed

those liabilities are over many decades and are a tiny % of GDP ie very easily affordable.

Reduce the pensions and benefit payments will have to be made instead – the average NHS pension is hardly enough to take people oput of benefits as it is.

dmjb4

I suggest you actually read up on how the NHS scheme works and apply a little scepticism to the tory propaganda you accept so willingly

There are some very gullible people on here who believe tory lies and propaganda as the truth

I feel rather sorry for you
Why does everyone who disagrees with you have to be a tory?
I feel sorry for the blinkered.

TJ – there are currently 1.3million active NHS pension scheme members, there are about half a million deferred members, and there are about 650k pensioners in payment at the moment.

Can you not see, that in the future, the NHS scheme will have to find enough money to pay for nearly three times as many people as are currently being paid – the fact its currently in surplus is completely and utterly irrelevant!

I suggest you actually read up on how the NHS scheme works

Actually TJ – it might be worth you taking your own advice, since you’ve claimed above that there is an NHS pension fund!

tiny % of GDP

Oh, you can tell what future GDP is now can you TJ? I mean, after all, you are aware that UKGDP can fall as well as rise?

those liabilities are over many decades

That is exactly the problem. We’ve had the maths discussion on another thread. No one is actually arguing to simply reduce public sector pensions – we are simply saying that the current promises are unfunded and unaffordable. Either they must become funded (i.e. defined contribution) or the contributions must rise massively to reflect the promises and the cost of the implicit guarantee provided by the Govt OR, yes, the pension terms must be reduced.

Do you know how much the cost of a guarantee takes from the returns on such a bond or equity fund?

dmjb4 – Member

No one is actually arguing to simply reduce public sector pensions –
Yes you are

we are simply saying that the current promises are unfunded and unaffordable.

No they are not. You need to stop believing the propaganda

Interesting thread but very few close comparisons to get anything meaningful from.

Can’t say I’ve got much to add but I do work in the private sector (IT consultancy) and have recently been trying to recruit a couple of mid-level server analysts and it’s a bit of an eye-opener when you get people applying from the public sector. They’re usually much more experienced and seeking a lower wage however that experience is usually in out-dated technology or very specific (not in demand) areas and they don’t have certs to back it up with. I get that the public sector likely don’t fund much training/certification but if you want to move on you need to take some personal responsibility.

That said most of the people applying from the private sector were jokers to (inexperienced yet asking for top whack pay). The only CVs I was impressed with were from Indians over here on Tier 1 visas, they all seem to have relevant experience, good certs and realistic pay demands…

Interesting thread but very few close comparisons to get anything meaningful from.

Yup. Plenty banging their drums but they’ve not committed to the original question, rather they’ve gone on again about we should have our pensions effected.

Back to the original post
I was NHS. left to go to the private sector for a similar job, technical. Result was
– nearly £10k wage boost
– company car
– company phone
– lost around 5 days/year holidays
– out of pension fund and had to make own arrangements
– conditions of work changed without consulatation
– worked on a saturday to help company move premises, paid in pizza and beer
– overtime paid as money (when it was for clients), time off in lieu not allowed
– did a couple of courses, got certified
– paid an on-call allowance

Left that job, frelanced for a while then found myself going back in to the NHS,
– about the same wasges as the private sector, but now as a manager with several staff
– project management work as well
– responsibility for £Million project
– got my 5 days holidays back
– no paid overtime, it’s time off in lieu
– no certification on courses (and not many external courses)
– back in NHS pension
– not paid for out of hours work or on-call, but as the machinery I’m responsible for impacts directly on patent care, I am contactable (using my personal mobile) and will do what I can

So, the money’s worse in the public sector, but the conditions were better. I suspect that may be changing though.

I see that’s pretty much how it is, the public sector have very good terms and conditions. These are under threat so if we loose those and have lower wagers then it’s not as nice balance.

No they are not. You need to stop believing the propaganda

NHS fund about 2 billion in the black, I understand, all paid for by current employees and surplus will be being used by the government. By my reckoning that makes it the very opposite of unfunded and unaffordable.

You need to stop believing the propaganda

Right back at ya! 😈