[Closed] All those wingeing about public sector workers and pensions

Your "could be more efficient" claim is a complete red herring. Is there a single area of human activity where there couldn't be any improvements ? I can't think of any.

Drinking beer in the Speedwell Bar.

Acually, not true - returning it to the days before The Hun At The Till and when it was called Mennie's would be a massive improvement.
speaking as someone who worked in Mennie's and refuses to recognise the validity of the name Speedwall bar.

And one day all of Lochee will be free, free, I tell you, and we will continue in ways of our fathers and their fathers, throwing spears at buses

Sancho - Member
No what Im saying is that whilst youre negotiating a deal I dont think you should be going on strike, its not helping matters and simply entrenches both sides.
Same as government saying thats the last offer etc, none of it helps and just enflames the problem.
If negotiations break down and the "final offer" is unacceptable then you have something to consider whether you want to accept it or not and go on strike.

OK; In Scotland, the pay and conditions is part of a tri-party agreement consisting of COSLA( local authorities) the Government, and the unions. Only two of these groups discussed the change to teacher's pensions. Only two commisioned the Hutton report on pay and conditions (which suprise,suprise, favours massive cuts to both) Can you guess which two Sancho? Discussions are NOT on-going. The two Government bodies have refused to talk to the teaching unions for 18 months and indeed launched their compromise deal two weeks ago without telling the unions they were going to do so.Of course I can only give the teaching perspective, but we have seen about 33% of the terms of the MacCrone act (the T&C agreed in 2003 by all three groups) removed in the last 12 months,with no consultation OR prior warning.

Christ bickeirng about NHS waste is pointless, it is the civil service/government that wastes the money in all these areas, Nuclear power, IT systems,Road buiulding, Rail networks, defence, the waste is staggering and yet, Ive never heard of people being sacked from senior positions in the civil service for say wasting a million pounds on a rotor blade review for the westland helicopter, following westlands own review, or a £50 million pound upgrade to magnox reactors when it could have been done for £5million with another software, not to mention the billions wasted on failed IT and other projects.
I want these useless tw*ts sacked and competent people put in place.

I followed your advice and got a job in the public sector. They then decided we would be in the private sector instead. Our pensions got worse (harsh commercial reality of what the company could afford - something public sector workers are insulated from - or think they should be), we got lower pay rises than those who'd been our immediate colleagues but remained in the public sector, oh and they also got their pensions improved. I also look back on the days when we were in the public sector and realise just how cushy the work was.

For those who missed the point when I put something similar in the other thread - in my experience at least the public sector does give better pay and conditions, but that it isn't necessarily possible to get a job in it if you wanted. I issue the opposite challenge - if you work in the public sector and think the private sector is so wonderful (and that you're being shafted), then why don't you try switching?

Apologies if I'm repeating stuff - IDRATS

So duckman are you going on strike?
Are the changes unacceptable to you?

BigButSlimmerBloke - Member

Your "could be more efficient" claim is a complete red herring. Is there a single area of human activity where there couldn't be any improvements ? I can't think of any.

Drinking beer in the Speedwell Bar.

Acually, not true - returning it to the days before The Hun At The Till and when it was called Mennie's would be a massive improvement.
speaking as someone who worked in Mennie's and refuses to recognise the validity of the name Speedwall bar.

Agreed, as a Harris rugby boy who learned what real beer was in Mennies under the "gentle" instruction of the Ron Greigs of this world. However, Callum returning would not exactly be an improvement,IMO and not meaning to speak ill of the dead.If you are talking about before aforementioned Germanics you must be going back some. I left school in 1984 and started drinking with the FP's and she was long established then. I like it now; at least they turn the heating on in winter.

I followed your advice and got a job in the public sector. They then decided we would be in the private sector instead. Our pensions got worse (harsh commercial reality of what the company could afford - something public sector workers are insulated from - or think they should be), we got lower pay rises than those who'd been our immediate colleagues but remained in the public sector, oh and they also got their pensions improved. I also look back on the days when we were in the public sector and realise just how cushy the work was.

What area of work? Assuming someone somewhere was making some profit, was a better job done for the tax payer money going in?

Both public and private sector pensions are subsidised by the taxpayer. Public directly and private indirectly by the state topping up shite private sector pensions with winter fuel allowance etc. The Conservatives friends in big business just want the public sector pensions cut so they don't look as bad. We all work and we all deserve a decent pension, its a question of whether we all decide to pay for it. At the moment the private sector do not want to and therefore want the public sector's pensions cut.

private indirectly by the state topping up shite private sector pensions with winter fuel allowance etc.

And the tax relief. The biggest beneficiaries of which are higher rate tax payers, who you're more likely to find in the private sector.

Who are the public sector workers?

Here it is, We collect your bins; We plan, build and maintain your roads; We make sure company’s maintain certain compliances; We make sure restaurants don’t poison you; We run your libraries; We care for the children no one else can or will; We safeguard vulnerable adults and children; We manage the residential care homes that you put your relatives in when you can no longer cope; We heal and care for you when you are sick; We fight your fires; We police your streets; We strive to communicate with communities in the best way we can; and We do all this on lower-than-average salaries, ever-decreasing funds and expectations of savings to be delivered.

Think about this, I mean really think about this, [url= http://paulcoxonsmoments.wordpress.com/2011/11/24/a-message-from-a-public-sector-worker/ ]read it again if you need to[/url]…now think about this: Do. Not. F***. With. Us.

Sancho; On strike;although a holiday up here. The changes proposed are draconian.

End to chartered teaching, probationers work 90% of a teacher's timetable, end to permanent contracts,supply to be paid at lowest rate NOT according to their salary scale,Classroom assistants to take "some" classes which teachers have provided work for. On top of the pensions,replacing members of staff with the cheapest person to employ NOT the best for the job.
Now...Chartered was designed to keep good teachers in the classroom, rather than them moving into management.
Probationers are learning the job, they need trained and to make up resources. Putting them up to two periods a week less than a FT member of staff, seriously erodes their ability to do both in what is a VERY stressful year.Both the above were implemented with no discussion.
Supply are necessary. Paying them lowest rate for 5 days means they will not travel to outlying schools. Classes then end up doubled up.Again; no discussion
Classroom assistants to teach a subject they are not an expert in,need I explain?
As experienced staff leave they are replacing them with the cheapest applicant for the job, often with NO experience of the level of subject they will be taking.
Contracts; I agree the dead wood should go, however; Top of scale in teaching is £34,700. Bottom is £25,000 so end of your year contract...bin 10 experienced teachers, save best part of £100,000.
The proof for the above would be that I don't know any experienced teacher in my school who has gone for a post in another school and even been interviewed in the last year.

If you are talking about before aforementioned Germanics you must be going back some.

they turn the heating on in winter.

Good luck with your action duckman, sounds like youre in a difficult position.

THE psychological cost of being forced to verbally interact with striking council workers far outweighs any financial loss, experts have claimed.

As thousands of public sector types prepare to take to the streets, people with real jobs are making contingency arrangements to avoid listening to a social worker harangue them about pensions.

Carlisle factory worker Wayne Hayes said: "Ordinarily they’re safely contained inside their offices, drinking tea and posting peevish comments on the Guardian website."

"But my trip to work takes me right past a housing office and I know one of the strikers is going to corner me and try to compare themselves with the demonstrators in Egypt.

He added: "God knows how drunk I’m going to have to get to obscure the irritation but it’ll probably mean I have to take a couple of days off work with a hangover, thus costing me the moral high ground."

Businesses also fear that if public sector workers’ demands aren’t met, they may look for jobs in the private sector, costing billions in incompetence-related mistakes.

Employment lawyers are now frantically searching the Human Rights Act to see if it's legal to burn the CV of anyone who's ever been to an encounter group, or been paid to raise awareness of anything.

Julian Cook, chief economist at Donnelly-McPartlin said: “Like buying a child a PS3, agreeing to pension demands will be an expensive but effective way of ensuring council workers won’t get under anybody’s feet for a while.”

“You know deep in your heart that the little devils don’t deserve it, but you just want to avoid a full-blown screamy tantrum.”

back then they didn't have to, it was busy enough to generate it's own heat, like penguins huddled together in the Arctic.

😀

Mcboo; daily mash?

That's quality! 😀

Less whinging on public sector pc's during office hours and more work then?

You could up your productivity.

Carlisle factory worker Wayne Hayes said: "Ordinarily they’re safely contained inside their offices, drinking tea and posting peevish comments on [s]the Guardian website[/s] STW."

Err Hora; has talk of revolution and your browsing of the Soldier of Fortune website made you forget the Armed Forces ARE public sector workers?

Hora.....military pensions are so generous the mathematical equation that would generate those numbers hasnt been discovered yet. Shhhh.

Brilliant ...a great play on stereotypes! (and maybe a shade too close to the bone) 😐

still waiting...... 🙄

There are so many figures bandied about it's hard to find any produced by someone that doesn't have a vested interest

So...........
Is this the contribution offer that's on the table?
If so, how does it compare with where they are now, what's the difference we're talking about here?

[img] [/img]

Whoever put that tag about TJ's missus is a ****ing coward - if that's what you think at least have the guts to say it and not post an anonymous tag.

Whoever put that tag about TJ's missus is a **** coward - if that's what you think at least have the guts to say it and not post an anonymous tag.

Agreed

I think all you public sector bashers are missing the point, all people want is what they were promised and have worked and saved for.

Think of it lke this-

you've worked hard and saved up and now your in the local LBS ordering your new bike, you pay up and agree pick up the following week

You go back and the man wheels out your bike

err...hang on you say thats not the bike I ordered thats a much lower spec.

Ah says the man, after you paid and left I realised my pricing structure was no longer financially viable so you have two choices:
You can take this bike or pay me an extra £1000 and I'll get the bike I agreed to get you in the first place

I bet you wouldnt put up with that about a bike so why should people put up with being shafted over somthing so important as their pension.

And as for the 'there all lazy ****ers' tell that to my radiographer wife whos just come home from a 17 hour shift!

fastindian, thats a terrible analogy. We, as a nation have overspent for years. Over a decade. We are £1trillion in debt.

How do you propose we get out of such massive debt? The Pension bill is mammoth as is the forward commitment for this.

It just seems a case of NIMBY'ism when it comes to asking public sector workers to pay higher contribution.

Final salary schemes aren't affordable in any industry. ANY industry either.

I have no objection for paying people to work for 35 years and I believe the public sector is generally very good.

I can not afford to pay people not to work for the next 35 years.

Lifer - Member
Whoever put that tag about TJ's missus is a * coward - if that's what you think at least have the guts to say it and not post an anonymous tag.

Posted 13 minutes ago # Report-PostBenHouldsworth - Member

Whoever put that tag about TJ's missus is a * coward - if that's what you think at least have the guts to say it and not post an anonymous tag.

Agreed

That was me. And agreed it's not fair and not clever. I tried to delete it soon as I posted it but it won't let me. Apologies Jeremy, uncalled for.

Wifes brother works for one of the big unions as an officer and he is earning between 40 to 50 k a year and he has an amazing pension. Who's the mug here then. Unions are are a business that look at their profits too.

How do you propose we get out of such massive debt?

Stop spending billions on foreign wars of dubious (at best) legality and 'benefit'.

Scrap trident renewal.

Renegotiate the ridiculous PFI terms.

Abandon the 'too big too fail' mantra.

Crack down on tax evasion and reduce loopholes for tax avoidance.

Fair play for saying so McBoo, many wouldn't.

Pugwash, quantify 'amazing'.

Lifer - Member

How do you propose we get out of such massive debt?

Stop spending billions on foreign wars of dubious (at best) legality and 'benefit'.

Scrap trident renewal.

Renegotiate the ridiculous PFI terms.

Abandon the 'too big too fail' mantra.

Crack down on tax evasion and reduce loopholes for tax avoidance.

Combined with taking a realistic view to affordable pensions and we will make a difference.

Stop spending billions on foreign wars of dubious (at best) legality and 'benefit'.

Scrap trident renewal.

Renegotiate the ridiculous PFI terms.

Abandon the 'too big too fail' mantra.

Crack down on tax evasion and reduce loopholes for tax avoidance.

Difficult to argue with any of that

Stop spending billions on foreign wars of dubious (at best) legality and 'benefit'.

Scrap trident renewal.

Renegotiate the ridiculous PFI terms.

Abandon the 'too big too fail' mantra.

Crack down on tax evasion and reduce loopholes for tax avoidance.

Just remember this the next time you are at the ballot box.

All on Labours watch wasn't it.

Here's the thing......I don't at all blame the public sector workers for fighting for what they have, even going on strike, it's your right to do so. But ultimately you have to win the argument. There is clearly a split between public and private sector workers and there is a pretty strong (but not 100%) correlation between where you work and what your view on this is.

This is the editorial from today's Independant.

Leading article: The wrong time for mass industrial action
Even with the reforms, public-sector pensions are better than private sector equivalents

There is no denying that public-sector workers are facing difficult times, and no denying that the Government's proposed pension reforms add to an already heavy burden of wage freezes, inflation and redundancy threats. Even so, now is no time to strike. With the economy back on the brink of recession, and chill winds from the euro crisis whipping dangerously through public and private sectors alike, the prospect of up to two million teachers, immigration workers and civil servants bringing Britain grinding to a halt is a dismaying one. The trade unions should act responsibly, and call their action off.

That is not to say that the implications of the pension reforms are insignificant. Staff are being asked to pay more and work longer, and may still receive less when they retire. Such a prospect would never be welcome. In the context of £83bn worth of spending cuts and economic stagnation, it is grim indeed. But to portray the situation as a typical Tory-led government using any excuse to hack back the state is a characterisation as lazy as it is false. The proposed reforms are no ideologically driven, back-of-a-napkin policy whim. They are based on analysis from John Hutton – a former Labour minister, no less – with the inescapable conclusion that the generosity of the current pension arrangements is simply unsustainable. With people living longer, and the demographic balance tilting towards the elderly, there is no alternative but for individuals to take on more of the financial load that currently rests on taxpayers' shoulders.

The case for reform is only part of the issue, however. That public-sector workers, galvanised by their unions, are ready to cause national havoc to defend terms and conditions that compare so favourably with those of their private-sector counterparts, only adds to the sense that state employees are out of touch with the damage that recession has already wrought elsewhere.

It is grossly mistaken to take recent "business as usual" double-digit pay increases at the very top of the private sector as an index of the rest of the commercial world. Executive greed apart, rank-and-file private-sector workers have been, and continue to be, sharply squeezed.

Although wage increases have picked up slightly this year, they are still languishing at 2.5 per cent, less than half the inflation rate. And that follows several years of pay freezes, and even cuts, as employees bargained hard to hold on to their jobs. Such developments render the common claim that public-sector benefits make up for comparatively low salaries hopelessly outdated. In fact, the gap between public and private pay has reversed in recent years, particularly at the lower end of the scale. A comparison of pension arrangements tells a similar tale. Even with the proposed reforms, public-sector plans remain considerably more generous than their equivalents in the private sector, where final salary schemes have long been off-limits to new entrants, if not closed altogether.

Neither is the public sector uniquely threatened by either the spending cuts or the worsening economic climate. As many as two million jobs have been lost since the start of the recession – the vast majority of them in business – and the worst may not be over. Not only has the past week alone seen hundreds more private-sector job losses, but problems at Thomas Cook and Arcadia do not bode well for the high street.

Against such a background, it is impossible to justify the biggest strike since the Winter of Discontent in 1979. Faced with a slew of gloomy indicators, any avoidable economic drag is inexcusable. The trade unions must go back to the negotiating table, hammer out a deal and avoid industrial action. This is not about an ideological battle over the size of the state. It is about what the taxpayer can afford. Now is the time for some realism from the public sector. It is time that we were all in it together.

See what I mean? If you cant get the Labour Party to support you, and a newspaper like the Indy comes down 100% AGAINST you, what chance have you of getting this turned around?

@jota180 that chart is misleading, it states taxpayers instead of the employer as the pension contributor. If that's how it works look at some of the salaries payed by taxpayers below.

Nick Buckles, the chief executive of security group G4S, took home a £3.8m package; Chris Hyman, head of outsourcing firm Serco, received pay of more than £5m. In 2008, Paul Pindar, the chief executive of Capita, took a package including share options of £5m. It said the frequency of such salaries could increase as the government increases outsourcing.

@jota180 that chart is misleading, it states taxpayers instead of the employer

I'm interested in the numbers rather than the column headings, hence 'vested interest' quote
I know where from and what the Taxpayer column refers too

That article would suggest it is only pensions we are concerned about.

Wifes brother works for one of the big unions as an officer and he is earning between 40 to 50 k a year and he has an amazing pension. Who's the mug here then. Unions are are a business that look at their profits too.

I can understand striking in Duckmans case.

The Indy artcle is probably the best analysis i've read of the current situation both balanced and credible.

....certainly more credible than most responses to this thread 😯

duckman - Member
That article would suggest it is only pensions we are concerned about.

That article suggests you are losing the argument. Every time Mark Serwotka speaks in public, you lose.

hora - Member
Just remember this the next time you are at the ballot box.

All on Labours watch wasn't it.

PFI was a Tory invention, and the rest were immediately upheld by CallMeDave .

They are based on analysis from John Hutton – a former Labour minister, no less – with the inescapable conclusion that the generosity of the current pension arrangements is simply unsustainable. With people living longer, and the demographic balance tilting towards the elderly, there is no alternative but for individuals to take on more of the financial load that currently rests on taxpayers' shoulders.

Hutton, who also said:

"We have to avoid a new race to the bottom here."

"If these reforms have any chance of succeeding then people need to know that they are being treated fairly … there should be full and proper consultation and discussion with the trade unions. That is how we do things in Britain – the public would take a very dim view of any government that fails to honour this basic requirement.

"We must try and avoid the confrontation and division that marked previous decades and must not turn the clock back."

Remember this?

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jun/18/unions-strikes-minister-pensions ]Danny Alexander jumps the gun[/url]

Months of talks to negotiate a new pension deal for public servants are on the brink of collapse after unions reacted with fury to the government's surprise confirmation of the new scheme weeks before talks had concluded.

Union leaders were incensed after Danny Alexander, the Liberal Democrat chief secretary to the Treasury, appeared to undermine talks by announcing crucial details of the new pension plan for 6 million public servants ahead of a meeting with union representatives this month.

Frodo - Member
The Indy artcle is probably the best analysis i've read of the current situation both balanced and credible.

....certainly more credible than most responses to this thread

Of course it is (to you), because it supports your view.

How do you propose we get out of such massive debt?

If the budget deficit is such a serious problem, then why is the basic rate of income tax [u]still lower[/u] than it was during the boom years ?

OK, maybe there was a argument back in the boom years which said that the UK could afford to lower the basic rate to 20%, although I would dispute it, but surely there is no justification whatsoever to keep it at that when the deficit is so high ?

Britain today has a basic tax rate considerably lower than it was during the Thatcher years, and people wonder why the government is skint ? .....where do they expect the money to come from ffs ?

You can't have services without paying for them.

You could also reduce the deficit by getting people back to work. If Britain can't afford a one day token strike by public sector workers, then it certainly can't afford to have 2.7 million people unemployed every day.

You could further reduce the deficit by nationalising the utilities and using their vast profits.

Of course I fully realise that those suggestions are ideologically unpalatable for the government, but that is the only reason why they are not implemented. And the only reason why the government persists with their attacks on public sector workers.

Off course it is (to you), because it supports your view.

No I'm saying that as we have a left leaning paper which has presented what appears to be a fair and balanced article. If this appeared say in the mail or telegraph then it may be just as factual but in many peoples eyes less credible.

Some of the vitriol and dogma spouted on here is quite frankly unpleasent and certainly not credible.

Some of the vitriol and dogma spouted on here is quite frankly unpleasent and certainly not credible.

Such as?

hora - Member
Just remember this the next time you are at the ballot box.
All on Labours watch wasn't it.

his political analysis makes flashearts looks open an impartial- i dont knw why i am surprised he has gone for something simplistic though
PS is everything that happens now the current govts fault or does this sort of deep analysis only hold up for Labour govts? Perhaps its dave fault about the Euro crisis for example?

The 'Independent' article raises an interesting point. I'll be on strike on Wednesday, but i'd prefer we all worked to rule.

PFI was a Tory invention, and the rest were immediately upheld by CallMeDave .

PFI is actually a very useful financial method of funding projects. The fact that it was badly managed by the previous 'Labour' government does not mean that used on the right projects with the right risk management and planning cannot provide value for money.

Think of it as a mortgage. Most people cannot afford to buy a house with cash. A mortgage however allows the purchase for little more and less than renting an equivilent house would be. Its a similar principle.

Lifer.....why arent you winning the argument? Why does the Indy (and Guardian) not come out in support of strikes?

Such as?

The opening post onwards! Page 1 is particularly bad.

No specifics?

Labour aren't in power anymore, one of my suggestions of how to save money was to renegotiate it. Who started it, and who did what to it is inconsequential.

PS is everything that happens now the current govts fault or does this sort of deep analysis only hold up for Labour govts? Perhaps its dave fault about the Euro crisis for example?

The really sad this is you CANT tear up PFI contracts. They tend to be longterm and to buy out of them, well.

Its not like me with bike frames, you can't flip flop and change your mind in the real world!

Very difficult to renegotiate contracts that have alraedy been signed. You don't have a legal leg to stand on. You could use repeat business as leverage but many of the problems were projects that were rushed without the full risks been known.

Hence the high price tag, now on some of these projects the risks may have been realised and hence the contractor would not have made anything more than a modest profit.

Where the contractor sucessfully managed these risks large profits could be made.

The onus must be on the client to define and manage risks and liability to maximise value for money. The government of the day failed. I'm not saying any other administartion would have done better but they surely could not have done any worse.

Perhaps one of the hard done to strikers can look after my son whilst school is shut yet again

How about popping him round to the local Liberal or conservative club and getting them to look after him? I think you'll find its their fault theres going to be a strike. If they would stop a moment and actually discuss the matter with the unions you'll find they will cancel it in favour of talks.

How about popping him round to the local Liberal or conservative club

You are suggesting leaving him in a pub?

jota180 you missed out 1 group there

MPs final salary scheme.....

Taxpayer........Employee
28% ..............11.9, 7.9 or 5.9%

Why does the Indy (and Guardian) not come out in support of strikes?

I'm not sure that the Guardian has ever supported a strike, although to be fair I very rarely waste my time reading their editorials.

The Guardian is always quick to create a sing and dance about 'social injustice' and express their displeasure at government policy, but when push comes shove they always fall on the wrong side of the fence.

They can talk the talk but have been proved to be totally incapable to walk the walk.

They are the paper for 'after dinner activists' who prefer to waffle than do anything.

And I'll remind you that the Guardian urged their readers to vote LibDem last election. ****ers.

I wonder how many public sector STW'ers on strike will be posting on here on strike day?...

jota180 you missed out 1 group there

I didn't miss out anything, I copied and pasted from a gov site and simply asked if the figures were correct

I still don't know, are they?
I've got no angle here, I'm just interested to know the correct figures

Very difficult to renegotiate contracts that have alraedy been signed

PMSL : Apparently it isn't, apparently CallmeDave and the lads can do it at the drop of a hat when it suits them. Haven't you understood any of what this is about????

Posted 5 minutes ago # Report-Posternie_lynch - Member

Why does the Indy (and Guardian) not come out in support of strikes?

I'm not sure that the Guardian has ever supported a strike, although to be fair I very rarely waste my time reading their editorials.

The Guardian is always quick to create a sing and dance about 'social injustice' and express their displeasure at government policy, but when push comes shove they always fall on the wrong side of the fence.

etc etc

I don't think you really care to win the argument for public opinion Ernie. Everybody out, mass action and so on......in the real world you can't force the taxpayer to do what you want.

I wonder how many public sector STW'ers on strike will be posting on here on strike day?

What's that got to do with anything?

Ernie wrote - They are the paper for 'after dinner activists' who prefer to waffle than do anything.

I wonder how many public sector STW'ers on strike will be posting on here on strike day?...

I wonder how many public sector STW'ers on strike will be posting on here on strike day?..

What's that got to do with anything?

Hora likes to concern himself with the more pressing problems which everyone else ignores.

If the budget deficit is such a serious problem, then why is the basic rate of income tax still lower than it was during the boom years ?

OK, maybe there was a argument back in the boom years which said that the UK could afford to lower the basic rate to 20%, although I would dispute it, but surely there is no justification whatsoever to keep it at that when the deficit is so high ?

Britain today has a basic tax rate considerably lower than it was during the Thatcher years, and people wonder why the government is skint ? .....where do they expect the money to come from ffs ?

You can't have services without paying for them.

You could also reduce the deficit by getting people back to work. If Britain can't afford a one day token strike by public sector workers, then it certainly can't afford to have 2.7 million people unemployed every day.

You could further reduce the deficit by nationalising the utilities and using their vast profits.

Of course I fully realise that those suggestions are ideologically unpalatable for the government, but that is the only reason why they are not implemented. And the only reason why the government persists with their attacks on public sector workers.

Ernie - I'm assuming you lean towards the left politically? Why are you advocating a rise in taxation for the people who earn the least?

The economy is screwed because there is too much public and private debt, and the resultant deleveraging is squeezing disposable incomes. Do you really think raising the basic rate of tax will solve that?

Everyone knows you have to pay taxes to get public services - can't you at least recognise the viewpoint that a decent proportion of the taxpaying population thinks they are paying too much for too little? Even worse, they feel like they are paying through their noses not just for services, but to keep public sector employees more comfortable in retirement than they will be!

I also love your proposal that the 2.7m unemployed should be placed in work to reduce the deficit...perhaps some public sector jobs could be created?

kimbers - Member

jota180 you missed out 1 group there

MPs final salary scheme.....

Taxpayer........Employee
28% ..............11.9, 7.9 or 5.9%

my point wasnt that you had been lax in your research its simply that MPs get at least 10% more taxpayer contribution than any other public sector worker, not to mention their benefits scheme ....

Even worse, they feel like they are paying through their noses not just for services, but to keep public sector employees more comfortable in retirement than they will be!

dave and the right wing press thanks you for getting on message and not wanting better conditions for yourself but worse/equally bad conditions for others ...WELL DONE

You've reached the final stage - accusations of false consciousness...

Do you think it is conceivable that every working person in the UK economy could have the same entitlements as those in the public sector? How would we fund this? I don't need a costed proposal, just a basic idea so I can tell George Osborne.

Ernie - I'm assuming you lean towards the left politically?

Ever so slightly.

my point wasnt that you had been lax in your research its simply that MPs get at least 10% more taxpayer contribution than any other public sector worker, not to mention their benefits scheme ....

And my point is I can't find a list of figures from somewhere I can trust not to put a spin on it - hence the question and the attached jpg

Are those number correct? or spun - I accept that other numbers may well of been omitted from that table of given a confrontational column heading

The economy is screwed because there is too much public and private debt, and the resultant deleveraging is squeezing disposable incomes. Do you really think raising the basic rate of tax will solve that?

Under the proposed pension changes, my take home pay will be reduced by 5%. That's money I'll not be spending on stuff. Is this a good time to be reducing the spending power of public sector workers?

Is this a good time to be reducing the spending power of public sector workers?

I'd say so. They'll only go spanking it on organic veg and hemp clothing

They'll only go spanking it on organic veg and hemp clothing

Our local mung bean supplier is really struggling.

Why are you advocating a rise in taxation for the people who earn the least?

A rise in the basic rate of tax will affect everyone, and those who earn more will end up paying the most, albeit there will be cap. If you think about it is the fairest way of increasing the tax take because it really will impact just about everyone and in a propoortional way; those that earn the most will pay the most. It also gets round the rather small minded of attitute of "raise taxes for group X because I don't belong to group X"

I'm not going to read all of this thread (no time at the moment althoguh I read most of the previous one ref pensions) but it seems a real shame that most people on this thread are genuine working people, be they public or private. The reality and truth is that most of are being shafted by those in the upper echelons of society. The only people profiting out of the current turmoil are the politicians and thier buddys, the party that happens to be in power doesn't make much difference, especially in todays modern society. I don't know the best cure for our ills but if all of us, whether we are being shafted by the government or our private employers could find some common harmony and work together only then do we have any chance of ridding society of the giant leeches that are sucking us dry whilst gorging themselves on our toils.

I am not allowed to strike or even talk about striking in my job and I already pay more than pretty much anyone into my pension (12 percent), is this fair? To top it off I have also had a day off cancelled so that everyone else can have a voice next week and strike!

Trevor.