I’m lost as to why people are thinking that the public dont understand averages. Can someone please explain it to me.

Well they don’t understand most things, so I can’t see why averages would be any different.

£15,000 per year for everyone tax-free – public transport and household utility bills all paid. Leaving money for clothing and food and leisure…

When I say everyone I mean everyone in the country irrespective of what they do…

The money they make during their working careers will be (hopefully) more than £15k and therefore offsets the costs incurred for looking after them once retired…

I’m bored, @rsed off with life and thinking this might be workable…suspect the reality is far more complicated and ‘selfish’…

I think we should let politicians sort their pensions out first then the rest of us can copy them and have the same pension. Sound fair?

I have no idea what I will end up with. My current one is very good, no complaints, with what would be considered large suns as a lump and pa, but then I do pay in a lot each month. But why should I put in more to get relatively less out in relation to the increase in contributions, although I admit this is probably a misunderstanding on my part. I will have been in 10 years in June, it will change next year, meaning increased contributions, then change again when the final agreements are in place. Possibly meaning I have several pension pots from the same provider, so I’m thinking I could retire at 60 with one of them, then wait 5 years for the others to being to pay out. I’m just chuffed that all in all next year is when all the pay freezes, pension increases etc start to bite.

Meh.

It’s a job that seems like it’s horrific, that seems to be awful, that seems to deserve pots of gold, but it’s not, really.

It is tough sometimes, it demands a lot from you in emotional terms, it changes who you are, and the longer you do it, the more you change. But you get socialised into it, you work with people who think the same way, and ultimately you can get your head around it and get on with it.

No nurses are heroes, we are not special, we are not awesome or wonderful, we are simply people who have chosen to work at a certain job.

…and stop with the chocolates as a token of appreciation; fruit will do!

I think we should let politicians sort their pensions out first then the rest of us can copy them and have the same pension. Sound fair?

Sounds good to me.

Andy

…and stop with the chocolates as a token of appreciation; fruit will do!

I remember my boss in surgical admissions being presented with a basket of fruit – she was visibly stunned. 😀

You got it, people go ‘couldn’t do your job’ – I laugh, but thats just it – it’s my job buys the Bonio for the dog and as say are with like minded folks so it’s relatively speaking normal. It’s just wiping arses at the end of the day and we all do that, except those whose staff do it for them of course.
We once had hamper of fruit from relatives, the look on some of the staff faces was like they were being poisoned 🙂

well my anti co ag nurse says she has an easy life,, 4 day week( at 58 shes working reduced hours preparing for retirement) shes a nursing sister works 9.30 – 4 jacking it in in 18 months .. not exactly poor pay vomit drunks or night shifts..

Those roles are fairly limited/ rare, the majority are on shifts and more ward based work, so poo, pee and vomit. She will have spent many years working up to that role, and who wouldn’t go for an easier option after who knows how many years of the above?
I’m bowing out of ITU after 12 years in January to a mon-fri, 9-5 Occ Health role, no passion for it and fed up with constant trying sort body clock night to day and back again shifts. I will loose all the extra night and unsocial hour premiums so am worse off but physically better.

No nurses are heroes, we are not special, we are not awesome or wonderful, we are simply people who have chosen to work at a certain job.

…and stop with the chocolates as a token of appreciation; fruit will do!

Spot on,same goes for us all.

Pensions? Like to get what I expected in 1990 when i signed up. Dont mind paying extra if the fund is failing to boost the fund but not to ease the woes of the treasury. I’ll do other stuff to address this but not pay more pension and have that diverted to the treasury as is the current plan.

For those who think that their final salary pension is going to be too low, try having money purchase ones…

I have a number of pensions (FS and MP) with the various companies I’ve worked for (plus current); every one is either under-capitalised, reducing the inflation proofing and/or sold to an insurance company – and my current one has barely kept pace in the last year.

Including this one:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/article-24007665-kesa-sells-electrical-retailer-comet-for-pound-2.do

Kesa, headed by chief executive Thierry Falque-Pierrotin, is also paying £50 million to the new owners and retaining the liability for Comet’s pension scheme, presently in deficit to the tune of €46 million (£39.4 million).

Chairman David Newlands was blunt about the terms of the deal. He said: “We had to pay £50 million to get the business away. We will write it off as having no value.”

Well said br…to be able to achieve a money purchase final salary pension of 30k a year you currently need to have about £700k invested…..most of a million!!!!

It should be what I signed up for on the day I joined the scheme.
That is: [number of years service (up to a maximum of 40 years) / 80 ] x final salary in the best of my last 3 years before retirement. Plus a lump sum.
No more and no less.

I wonder if we should aim to have all pensions reduced to the worst we have in the UK whatever that is or the best, again whatever that is.

I guess the target is somewhere less than the currect public sector ,although there is massive variation here, no such thing as gold plating in my experience, and the worst one we can find worth virtually nothing on retirement no matter what we contribute?

I’d say the former for all not the later

30k is not the average NHS pension.

It may be nearer the mark for other public sector workers, not sure.

SBZ –

I think we should let politicians sort their pensions out first then the rest of us can copy them and have the same pension. Sound fair?

Oh, does that mean we (the public) will get to vote on the NHS staff every 4-5 yrs and get rid of those who are rubbish, or disinterested, or don’t give us the answers we want… or if their colleagues and managers in the same “group” don’t appeal any more.

I can’t see Unison liking it though…

get rid of those who are rubbish, or disinterested

I think you mean “uninterested”. As with politicians, we definitely need to cherish the disinterested ones.

I can’t see Unison liking it though…

But they do. Unison fully supports the principle of direct elections to NHS Boards that seek to extend democratic accountability to quangos and other parts of the unelected state.

NHS board election trial outlined

UNISON

For those who think that their final salary pension is going to be too low, try having money purchase ones…

Other jobs with better pension arrangements were certainly available in the past (probably less so now though). I can only think that you believed the overall package with your current and previous employers was better than that available elsewhere.

Ah, Johnners yes I do mean “uninterested” rather than the original meaning of “disinterested”. I note that the dictionary gives both meanings of disinterested, presumably following prologed b*st*rd*s*t**n of the english language by people like me!

Ernie, no not election of NHS boards (I’m not convinced that is necessarily a good idea – as anyone who wants to be on one that much should probably be automatically excluded!), but that NHS staff would lose their employment rights etc and could be booted out overnight if the populous decided they were doing a bad job / too focussed on their own benefits and not enough on the public / wasting money etc…

Whilst I wasn’t being entirely serious – if you want politicians’ pensions then you need to accept the downsides too.

SBZ’s question would really only be relevant or meaningful if it was in some sort of context. E.g. what do the same members of the public think an average shop worker’s pension should be etc? What do they expect their own pension to be, and how accurate is it compared to reality? If they think NHS pensions are too low, how much of their OWN income are they willing to sacrafice to enable that to happen.

With his unquestioning reproduction of the stats/jingoistic-journalism there may however be a career for SBZ in politics!

I’m lost as to why people are thinking that the public dont understand averages. Can someone please explain it to me.

So which average would you like the Median, the Mode or the Mean, All valid averages but all as meaningful or meaningless unless the context is fully understood.

Mean Salary,Median salary and Mode salary are all different.

Back on topic, sort of. Current population forecasts suggest that our population will be getting older which means no money being paid into the pot as money is coming out. Now look at the performance of the city over the last 10 or so years where the FTSE 100 has not yet got back to the level of late 2000. So all the smart over paid bankers have achieved $hit for a decade, other than massive pay rises.

So whilst nurses and doctors should be paid what they have agreed to at the time they started, infact everyone should get a decent pension and the government needs to sort the housing crisis ASAP as this is another time bomb, low pensions high rents, being as so many are now priced out of home ownership etc. I don’t see how we can actually afford to pay the pensions. Investments are not actually making money so if you want a decent return you are going to have to have a vast pension pot. Which isn’t going to be affordable.

So which average would you like the Median, the Mode or the Mean, All valid averages but all as meaningful or meaningless unless the context is fully understood.

What about the one that people who live in the real world think of as an average?

What about the one that people who live in the real world think of as an average?

which is?

You’ve just made my point for me. If you dont know what people in the real world think of as being an average then you clearly dont live there.

I expect he means the mean, whereas for salary the median is the best one as it’s not skewed by randomly high salaries.

The public are thick in my experience.

To answer the OP, I don’t really mind as long as i’m not expected to pay for it (i.e the scheme is self funding from the contributions of the memebers – no idea if this is the case or not).

crikey – Member
Meh.
It’s a job that seems like it’s horrific, that seems to be awful, that seems to deserve pots of gold, but it’s not, really.
It is tough sometimes, it demands a lot from you in emotional terms, it changes who you are, and the longer you do it, the more you change. But you get socialised into it, you work with people who think the same way, and ultimately you can get your head around it and get on with it.
No nurses are heroes, we are not special, we are not awesome or wonderful, we are simply people who have chosen to work at a certain job.
…and stop with the chocolates as a token of appreciation; fruit will do!
POSTED 12 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST

I don’t know how you do it. Looking after me for 5 weeks in ICCU must have been a rubbish job, and the general awfulness of ICCU must take some getting used too.

There were some lazy bastards in the rehab ward though!

The article I read suggested that the public’s opinion on what the average NHS pension should be was £17088, whereas in reality the average NHS pension is £7500.

Opinion based on what? A detailed read of the relevant statistics and fact? Or perhaps an opinion based on nothing except personal perception. How can people who have just qualified for a pension due to minimum years worked be compared to someone with a lifetime of work earned in the scheme? Ridiculous premise to base an arguement on, never mind start a thread.

What about the one that people who live in the real world think of as an average?

IMO whilst most bright people would default average to equate to mean in an unspecified context, the less bright would, in the context of income, say something like ‘what most people earn’ to mean average (thus suggesting mode) then when pushed may well think median was most appropriate.

Anyway, money purchase should be used for all pensions so commitments are known up front rather than lying in wait to bring down the economy in coming decades.

Anyway, money purchase should be used for all pensions so commitments are known up front rather than lying in wait to bring down the economy in coming decades.

For new or existing pensions?

Surrounded By Zulus – Member
You’ve just made my point for me. If you dont know what people in the real world think of as being an average then you clearly dont live there.

But what the typical layman considers an “average” is the arithmetic mean (i.e. take all values add them together and divide by the number of values). That is heavily skewed by either very large values or lots of very small values.

If I was stopped in the street and asked the question, I would assume it meant “for a full time NHS worker, who had worked for 40 years what would I expect their pension to be?”. In reality, many people don’t work for the NHS for 40 years, and many don’t work full time. So clearly they can’t expect the same pension as those who do. That effect is part of the reason why “women” appear to be disadvantaged in the NHS system.

Now a quick Google suggests the average salary in the NHS (in 2004) was about 22k (before any “allowances” are added, which takes them up to 26k). Now you know that the scheme is a 40/80ths of final salary scheme, so its clear to see that an “average” NHS employee retiring after full service (at 7 yrs ago rates) would have a pension of 11-13k (depending on whether the allowances are including in the calculations). And inevitably salaries tend to increase as people get towards retirement, meaning that average salaries of someone about to retire are higher than the average of the wider group. So even a cursory look at your numbers makes it clear that they aren’t really meaningful.

Or to look at it the otherway round, you can’t only get a £4k pension if you retire today, having worked full time and served for 40 yrs…

Union propaganda?

I work for the NHS, but I am in a scheme which although not exactly money purchase, is not final salary either. My earnings each year are recorded, and then on retirement a “dynamising factor” is applied to each year. This means that the pension does reflect my life time earnings and contributions. And there is a cap on how high this can go. Because of the way that the system . Including “employers” contributions the superann currently takes 22.5% of the money paid to me by the NHS. The amount I will get in pension after 36 years working (and my training included 6 unpaid years which prevented me earning until I was 24) will probably be about 40% of my average income.

Now I know that people in private pension schemes have been repeatedly screwed over. “contribution holidays” and schemes going bust, and huge rake-offs by pensions management companies etc etc…

And I’m certainly not complaining about how much I earn or will get as a pension.

But I think SBZ is spot on to show how the public perception of NHS pensions may be rather different from the truth, just as people underestimate the average prison sentence for offences.

In my line of work there is about to be a major recruitment crisis because of the number of people who are retiring now rather than get screwed by impending changes to our pensions.

zulu-eleven
should unemployed teachers get higher benefit rates than unemployed street sweepers?

In France they do. In fact being an actor on films or on stage is an excellent way to get paid half the year for acting and be on the dole for the same money for half the year not doing much at all!

Starting in NHS mental health in 1998, I am one of a relatively small ‘cohort’ of NHS employees in the curious position of being the same number of years off my retirement today as I was the day I started 13 years ago. (retirement reforms and mental health officer status if you’re interested). Of course I will not get those thirteen years of pension that I could have had if I had started four years ago under the exact same terms and conditions, instead I will work until 67-70 and retire on the same (adjusted for inflation, unlike my salary for the next 3 years) pension I would have had right from age 55.

Do any taxpayers out there feel like the “recieving pension contributions in for further 13 years” versus “not paying percentage of final salary for extra 13 years” bit means they are getting a bit better value for money “propping up” my pension now? 👿

But I think SBZ is spot on to show how the public perception of NHS pensions may be rather different from the truth, just as people underestimate the average prison sentence for offences.

But as has been pointed out by several people the question and the answer are both equally stupid. Perhaps it would be better to ask what the pension of an experienced nurse would be retiring today after 40 years service would be. A top band 6 nurse would be getting pretty much exactly the pension the “public expected”…

In my line of work there is about to be a major recruitment crisis because of the number of people who are retiring now rather than get screwed by impending changes to our pensions.

A short term problem that is actually good for the economy by helping get younger people into work? and potentially good for “mid career” people by providing openings to move into – rather that job blocking which can happen when people towards the end of their career just keep working (often ineffectively) to rack up better pensions…

A short term problem that is actually good for the economy by helping get younger people into work? and potentially good for “mid career” people by providing openings to move into – rather that job blocking which can happen when people towards the end of their career just keep working (often ineffectively) to rack up better pensions…

…given that it would take a minimum of 10 years from the end of A levels to train someone to work in my area – probably not relevant in this case.

Mid-career movements are certainly on the up, but only between comparable posts in different areas, which is a good thing, but not generally from other clinical areas.

Despite the number of Drs being trained each year going from 3000 when I qualified, to about 6000 now, the number of people who are willing to commit to a full-time career in General Practice is going down. And don’t even begin to look at the number of UK graduates who want to pursue a career in Psychiatry…

Your statement about people at the end of their career being job-blockers is probably a mite ageist. Actually they have often got tons of useful experience, most remain as up to date as the younger ones, and are usually effective, and often more committed. They just don’t want to be penalised for continuing to work.

…given that it would take a minimum of 10 years from the end of A levels to train someone to work in my area – probably not relevant in this case.

I’ve no idea what you do (I’m guessing possibly GP from the comments you make and as I know they have different pension arrangements as you are not actually NHS employees).

Your statement about people at the end of their career being job-blockers is probably a mite ageist. Actually they have often got tons of useful experience, most remain as up to date as the younger ones, and are usually effective, and often more committed. They just don’t want to be penalised for continuing to work.

perhaps in your small area of expertise this is true, but across the public sector I see a general problem of people “waiting to draw down their pension”. Final salary schemes make this worse, because you might as well hang in their to get the maximum salary, as well a getting your maximum number of years service. I’m not being “ageist”, I have a problem with anyone of any age who isn’t excelling at their job but who is sitting there biding their time. It happens in the private sector too – but in my experience it gets tolerated less.

Back on topic, sort of. Current population forecasts suggest that our population will be getting older which means no money being paid into the pot as money is coming out.

There was a bit of a rush of teachers retiring early 15 years or so ago, before the government changed the pension arrangements to make it harder to retire early. 25% of current outgoings from the Teachers’ Pension Fund are going to those people who will, to be blunt, die soon. In other words, the fund is about to get a whole lot cheaper very soon.

Which is one of the reasons that there’s no such thing as a Public Sector Pension, and nor should there be.

Perhaps it would be better to ask what the pension of an experienced nurse would be retiring today after 40 years service would be. A top band 6 nurse would be getting pretty much exactly the pension the “public expected”…

you are assuming that nurses are all band 6 by the time they retire.
Not really so: Average general hospital, of the trained nurses (I exclude band 2 and 3 healthcare assistants and very few hospitals have band 4 ones yet) the vast majority are band 5, maybe one in six are bands 6 7 or 8. Most 6/7/8 are not there because of their years of service but their skills, and the majority of nurses that retire are still in staff nurse posts whilst their younger colleagues are often their managers. (I was a band 6 three years after I qualified, and the last nurse to retire from my ward was a band 5 on a final salary pansion having given up her hugely stressful ‘h’ grade (about band 7) some years before. The next trained nurse in my ward up for retirement is also a band 5, and the one after her used to be a band 5 who dropped to a band 3 HCA post again because he would rather work at a pace he could handle rather than working himself to death.

I agree that career average is better all round: too many folk burning themselves out in jobs that they are not doing as efficiently as they 10 years before because they are more worried about their final salary pension than about dropping down with a heart attack three months after they retire.