No.
yes
Very big no!
Yes if the pensions are self funding.
No if they are not.I haven't been able to find any honestly independent information to confirm on way or another
Same here, I think the schemes are unfunded which basically means money paid in now is paying todays pensioners. The real issue with final salary schemes is they lock the employer into a set payout regardless of how a normal, i.e. not public sector scheme invests the money leaving the employer to pick up the tab.
If I'm right the public sector schemes are even worse and need more people paying in than being paid to stay in the black or else the tax payer picks up the deficit.
The key word here being indpendant information, I don't trust a lot of the information posted on here as it's quite clear certain individuals have an obvious agenda. Trouble is neither the government or unions can be trusted to be straight forward either......
Yes for police, nhs, fire service. No for teachers, sorry
Hmm, well I took a days annual leave rather than the potential of crossing a picket.
But I didn't exercise my right to 'show solidarity' and join in.
My pension pot isn't worth it, most likely exit the scheme if it goes the we are all in it together* way
* unless you're a funder for the Tory party in which case why help yourself. Because you deserve it...
Oh that's a yes (but not actually do anything about it)
No.
Simple
Yes
Yes (again so I can say this) from me.
Yes for police, nhs, fire service. No for teachers, sorry
Thats just daft. The teacher's scheme is probably equally or more sustainable than the rest of them. Is it just coz you don't like teachers? (not one, btw)
yes
No - Pensions are just another wage benefit. They should be striking for a big enough wage rise to fund a private pension that would be equal to what they are set to loose from the current system. Would also help competition for jobs.
Yes
Absolutely no.
And both me and my girlfriend are in the public sector.
Yes
No - Pensions are just another wage benefit.
Alternatively, if your pension contributions collectively exceed the pensions being paid and there is no fund as such so any excess goes to the treasury then, in the NHS at least, your pension contributions are an additional [u]tax[/u].
I am sure that there are people who will still feel that it is reasonable to tax public sector workers more heavily than private employees on the same salary - although I reserve the right not to agree with their reasoning - but I suspect that if the government put it that way rather than trying to spin the idea that this tax was actually in some way going to be put to one side to pay out pensions in years to come, then the radio reporters I heard trying to explain why they couldn't find anyone to slag off the strikers will have an even harder time in the future.
Alternatively, if your pension contributions collectively exceed the pensions being paid and there is no fund as such so any excess goes to the treasury then, in the NHS at least, your pension contributions are an additional tax.
So in a private scheme if the current contributions are more than is currently being paid out, is that going into the company's profit? Strangely despite contributions being more than payments in the fund I'm in, the fund is supposedly in massive deficit - they must be making that up, mustn't they?
Or maybe you don't get the concept of future liabilities.
I am sure that there are people who will still feel that it is reasonable to tax public sector workers more heavily than private employees on the same salary
So do you think it's reasonable to "tax" private sector workers more than public sector workers on the same salary? Because given the level of pension obtained for the amount paid in, that is effectively what the real situation is (and will still be after these changes).
No
Yes.
No
No
yes
So in a private scheme if the current contributions are more than is currently being paid out, is that going into the company's profit? Strangely despite contributions being more than payments in the fund I'm in, the fund is supposedly in massive deficit - they must be making that up, mustn't they?Or maybe you don't get the concept of future liabilities.
I think this is the point. In a private scheme there is - usually - a fund and so the answer to your question is that yes, any additional payments made should be going into the private fund to meet future liabilities. The whole reason private pensions/savings plans/endowments are in a mess is because this got ignored/ misunderstood/ miscalculated and I am with you in thinking that that is and was indefensible.
The major public sector pensions and specifically the NHS one don't work like that. There is no fund. There are no assets. There is no carry over year to year. The purpose of the 2008 renegotiation was to raise contributions and put back retirement age as well as agreeing that if there was any shortfall it would be met by the employees and not the government/taxpayer. That was agreed without fuss and on the governments's own figures meets all the concerns regarding sustainability which they are giving as the reason for needing to renegotiate again now.
Because there is no carry over, any additional contributions over and above the liabilities go to the treasury to bail out the bankers or whatever. If you put up the contributions further it increases the treasury's takings in the current financial year but come April 5th from the pension point of view it is a blank sheet of paper and we all start again. Therefore, any annual excess will not be available to meet any future liability by definition and design. Instead those liabilities will still have to be met by the employees at the time.
There are views on both sides, but many would struggle to see how an additional payment deducted from ones salary and given to the government to spend as it sees fit with no additional benefit for the payer over and above what they already get differs from any other tax. And many do struggle.
What may happen in a nightmare scenario however is that a lot of those who are close to retirement may decide to get out before their terms become less favourable and those early on in their careers may decide that the pension scheme is not affordable, attractive or trustworthy. In that case it may be impossible for the employees to fund the liabilities and one way or another the government and the taxpayer will have to pick up the tab - either by bailing out the scheme or through the cost of social care. Ironic if they have to tax the banks to do it.
Finally, though I am not personally at my wits end because I am towards the top of the pay scale, the average pension is currently £7,000 p.a. so this is in no way a gilt edged pension for the vast majority of those who keep the NHS going and upon whose hard work and skill your family and mine may need to rely.
I am towards the top of the pay scale,
Must be a manager, writing all that for a "yes or no" thread.
😉
Yes. People who can't see why we should support should never complain.
Neither, although I am in full support of their right to strike.
no
Yes, by Gawd.
NHS here - and the day that Gideon, BarCap & the entire [i]Daily Fail[/i] staff waltz into A+E and help clean up a serious PR bleed (for which, read blood [i]and[/i] sh!te, leaking fast) will be the day that I accept that we are "all in this together."
Yes.
Private sector. Cr*p pension.
If you take on a job and are promised a pension (or xxxxx) you can't just say "sorry we spent your money on xxxxx so you can't have it now"
When I was younger many people who entered the public sector did so knowing the wages were generally worse than the private but you got a half decent pension.
we are all living longer.
life expectancy continues to ride.
labour increased the public sector by over 1 MILLION in 12 years(!)
HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO PAY FOR THE PENSIONS???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
If you take on a job and are promised a pension (or xxxxx) you can't just say "sorry we spent your money on xxxxx so you can't have it now"
I hope by 'we', you are referring to the labour party?
When I was younger many people who entered the public sector did so knowing the wages were generally worse than the private but you got a half decent pension.
Yet now the opposite appears to be the case?
Something has to give.
The fire service one is self funding and the Hutton report said as much and suggested we were left alone. The rise in payments of 3.6% for us is apparently going straight into the govt coffers rather than ours which is a bit off tbh
HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO PAY FOR THE PENSIONS?
Ho I don't know.
More taxations on the stock exchange.
Less gifts to companies through tax breaks.
Increase VAT on electronic goods.
More tax on petrol.
Decrease the amount of money given to the MOD
Top up wages. Anything you ear above goes to the piggy bank of public funds.
Plus any public servant earns at least half of what he would earn in the private.
Do you really think you could do without a public sector...?
Yes - workers should have the right to strike.
And employers should have the right to fire them or change their employment conditions to reflect the economic situation they find themselves in.
Ho I don't know.
More taxations on the stock exchange.
Less gifts to companies through tax breaks.
Increase VAT on electronic goods.
More tax on petrol.Decrease the amount of money given to the MOD
er...
1) no, companies will just list elsewhere, and the major traders too.
2) companies will just shift their main operations elsewhere with more favourable tax rates
3) Ye-es, but it's not going to fill the gap
4) er... no - it's currently 2/3 of the price of petrol. It ain't gonna help.
5) Yes, perhaps, but the MoD was barely able to run sorties to Libya due to mis-spending of budgets. These are all things that take YEARS to solve any immediate problem with pensions.
But then those on the continent have a different way of doing things, eh? 😉
[i]And employers should have the right to fire them or change their employment conditions to reflect the economic situation they find themselves in.[/i]
Nice one, can employees do the same ? Due to various reasons I'm a bit skint and want less hours so I'll just work less for more . How's that sound ?
While were at it you know that mortgage I signed up for well I'm gonna pay 3% less for 5 years less seeing as how house prices have dropped.
That should be ok shouldn't it ?
no
No
NO
Yes or no only, leave opinions at the door.
NO
Yes or no only, leave opinions at the door.
No (won't).
NO