Strikes take 2

[Berrichonne shrimper]

Care to elaborate how my point suggests this?

At work I model the behaviour I want to see in my students. I dress smartly, arrive on time, prepared, work hard, pick up litter, smile, hold open doors, meet deadlines... If I didn't I'd be a hypocrite. Is it too much to ask our leaders to set an example for the rest of us?

Two points scream out at me here...
1/you had me at hold open doors and
2/so thats how you spell hypocrite.
Kay you are a hypocrite.

 

[osymandus]

This is your standard technique. Unless a discussion follows your exact terms of reference then you aren't interested and will dismiss any alternative viewpoint.

I think I'll leave you to it. I'm going to follow the coverage of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission chaired by the cast of TOWIE.

Lol no your mistaking Rusty technique , im not leaving Im just pointing out your point is generalised and a straw man .
By your own word s

The Pensions Policy Institute puts the median public sector salary at £25,600 and the median private sector salary at £25,300. In April 2010 the ONS found that public sector workers were paid 7.8% more than private sector workers on average.

So specific there , a fine cross comparison of relevant vocations in the private and public ... oh wait no its just an average . Also you state you reference another report . Where are the links ? You say

Statistics are always illustrative, but in their absence, what do we have? Supposition. Study after study shows there is a pay gap in favour of the public sector. The ONS is a reputable, independent body who have access to all data. What more do you want? Lovely which study ?

The BBC link is as generalised as your argument its for easy reading and sound bites . You understand teh concept (or appears not )

Your ONS link is titled Estimating differences in public and privatesector pay 2011 Im guessing here they dont know for sure given the title again from your link, its you believing its relevant (Estimating by the way means an educated guess).

A side note to YB here , yes Neil does believe it as he links to teh BBC website above using it as evidence .

So your points are , made from your own questions generalised none specific backed up by similar related data ?

Now if you were to actually go away look at say the pension contributions of a Policeman and say a IT self employed contractor , (or a cross comparison of their industrial equivilants in private or Public sectors ) I might listen to you .

 

[Mad Cyril]

My pension is tied up in disposable lighters and counterfeit sportswear.

 

[Davros]

Kinga Karolczak in the meantime has been working on a thesis regarding the effects of alcoholism and binge drinking on the female teen society. The study came to a temporary halt when, true to form, she got a wine bottle stuck up her XXXX

 

[Napster]

My pension is tied up in disposable lighters and counterfeit sportswear.

any kappa or lotto?

 

[osymandus]

My pension is tied up in disposable lighters and counterfeit sportswear.

A true herald of entrepreneurial spirit,

 

[Firestorm]

A true herald of entrepreneurial spirit,

My ex girlfriend was a true Herald of free Enterprise

Ended up on the bed with her back doors in tatters

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Jealousy and self-entitlement - the two predominant character traits evident from the lefties on this forum.

Got any evidence for that opinion?:unsure:

 

[applelover]

I had a great post protest curry at the lahore kebab house in commercial road. They do the best chops :)

 

[Hotman]

The idea that the cuts are somehow 'essential' is pretty hard to swallow when financial providers and banks continue to make huge profits and pay out unbelievable bonuses. My guess is that those who are striking aren't just doing so because of the cuts (I think most would admit they've had it pretty good, and the welfare state in this country has turned into a bloated messy), but because of the feeling that the public sector workers are suffering where as the main culprits continue to live of the fat of the land. Some might call it jealousy, but there is a real feeling that we're not in it all together. I took a walk down Barnsley high street the other day on the way to a meeting, it was literally deserted, towns are dying and there isn't a light at the end of the tunnel.

Don't disagree with that at all really. I don't really see it as a public/private battle, but a 1% vs the rest of us

Had an interesting chat about this at break today in the staff room.

As I've stated before, I think some reform is necessary, but I've seen figures from both sides about the financial feasibility of the pensions and both sides widely disagree about the cost. An open investigation like the one for teachers in 2006 (which claimed they were sustainable) needs to happen - why is anyone reluctant to do this? Surely if the governments figures are correct, this would work in their favour and weaken the unions position?

The second thing, and this is perhaps the key thing, is that teachers and schools have been under constant attack since Gove took over. It's already perhaps the only profession where *everyone* is an expert... How many people go to their GP, lawyer etc and tell them how to do their job?

Then you get 'helpful' OFSTED comments like this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/e...eachers-a-holiday-says-inspector-6255852.html

Can you spot the comedy of what he is saying?!

I'm not saying schools, or the education system, or certainly all teachers are perfect... but when you're told you're doing a crap job and then you're effectively having a pay cut, that people will be happy?

I think teachers are being influenced by everything that is going on in education and the pensions is just the final straw and perhaps the Unions are just capitalising on this.

Personally I'm quite lucky as in I am in the pre-2007 scheme.

Every teacher is getting a pay cut effectively. Wages are frozen, inflation continues, contributions rise. You have less pounds in your pocket and you can buy less stuff with those pounds... I know the first two are true of most people but the third is why people are striking. Even the best teachers in the country are in the same boat.

I'm one of those (more fool me). I can see that figure going down next election because you can't get a Rizla paper between any of them as they all cosy up to big business and the city.

first few pages delivered this...

 

[Napster]

If I was told I was doing a crap job, forget the pay cut, I wouldn't get paid full stop. Some professions have it so easy!

:net:

 

[Hotman]

If I was told I was doing a crap job, forget the pay cut, I wouldn't get paid full stop. Some professions have it so easy!

:net:

And certainly no pension!! Would be a whole lot easier to strike though

 

[Reg Martin]

‘Public pensions come out of our taxes’ – no they don’t, they come out of the pension investment that public sector employees and employers have paid into as a form of wages for however long they have worked there. .

I largely embelished from the Evening Standard's Anthony Hilton:

Nor are local authority pensions, modest though they are, usually paid by the taxpayer. Like the LPFA , most local government schemes in this country are funded - the pensions are paid from a pot built up by the contributions of members and their employers during their working lives. It is quite wrong to claim that such pensions are paid directly out of taxes.

You should have read the article more closely as you will see that he was only referring to local authority schemes - which was exactly the point I was making. No other public sector pensions to my knowledge are funded in this way
He also makes the mistake of stating that employers contributions are not taxpayers contributions. Whoever he is he doesn't know what he is talking about - how does he think local authority and other public sector employers are funded?
Sorry if the above sounds rude but I do work in finance in the public sector so as I mentioned before I do have half an idea what I am talking about on this.

 

[Pubey]

If I was told I was doing a crap job, forget the pay cut, I wouldn't get paid full stop. Some professions have it so easy!

:net:

As I said before, this is why I'm not a union member (universities are a kind of public/private hybrid, and Unison and UCU are very strong unions here). I have a massive issue with how unions can make getting rid of under-performing staff such a difficult task. I guess one of the reasons people get disinfranchised and 'lazy', is either they see co-workers slacking and getting away with it, or they spend all their time jumping through the hoops to get rid of bad staff.

Rather than being sacked, most crap staff end up being re-deployed, and the problem passed on. This is an inherent attitude in most civil services... but it's borne out of difficult employment laws and strong unions. I'd like to see these relaxed, as I'm sure it'd increase productivity, get graduates into the work place, reduce the need for a certain level of bureaucracy (HR/management/union reps).

 

[pickledseal]

There isn't really a simple solution though is there? If we sack people all over the place, we solve a few problems (incompetent staff, some unemployment when replacing them) but create others... ie people who have been sacked are effectively unemployable living off the state!

In secondary teaching, as I've said before, a disproportionate number of those who don't do as good as a job are those who are in their late 50's. Prolonging retirement for them means more unsatisfactory teachers.

 

[steveo]

There isn't really a simple solution though is there? .

Yes there is. The people who are so unhappy with their terms of employment that they feel the need to strike, can always resign and go and do something else.

 

[pickledseal]

Yes there is. The people who are so unhappy with their terms of employment that they feel the need to strike, can always resign and go and do something else.

Brilliant.

I'm trying to decide on my favourite banner:
http://m.guardian.co.uk/society/gal...ike-protest-placards?cat=society&type=gallery

 

[Neil_F]

So specific there , a fine cross comparison of relevant vocations in the private and public ... oh wait no its just an average . Also you state you reference another report . Where are the links ? You say

Of course it is an estimate, I said all along it was. The ONS study is also an estimate, but a pretty good one. The link sets out the methodology and explains its weakness. How else do you propose to model the issue?

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_233736.pdf discusses the methodology and its limits as an estimate.

see p8 onwards of this for another estimate: http://www.ifs.org.uk/budgets/gb2011/11chap7.pdf there is a good section on the regional disparities (and illustrative of the problem created by national pay bargaining)

The BBC link is as generalised as your argument its for easy reading and sound bites . You understand teh concept (or appears not )

What do you want? The Trust Deed and Rules? I linked to the BBC article because it clearly states the funding position for a range of sectors. In post #300 you said that teachers' pensions are not funded out of general taxation, but the BBC link directly contradicts that. As usual you've taken the position that anyone contradicting you must be wrong and so dismissed it. You still haven't demonstrated that there is a relevant trust that manages the liabilities on an actuarial basis.

Now if you were to actually go away look at say the pension contributions of a Policeman and say a IT self employed contractor , (or a cross comparison of their industrial equivilants in private or Public sectors ) I might listen to you .

I've given a broad overview of the decline of DB schemes in the private sector, as well as the increased risk of the ultimate provision. The Hutton Report goes into detail about the trends in private sector plans. For example, in 1997, 30% of private sector employees were in a DB scheme. By 2009 that had fallen to 11%. About 67% of private sector employees have no pension of any kind, compared to 16% of public sector employees.

The growth of DC schemes is simply without comparison to DB schemes. Most will offer employer contributions up to a low level (typically up to 5%), in addition to employee contributions. The employee also bears the investment risk as I have stated previously and billions were wiped off DC pension funds in 2008. This directly impacts employees in such schemes by reducing their future benefits. Those in DB schemes i.e. the public sector were entirely insulated from those losses by the taxpayer.

Personally I think it is obvious that public sector pensions are much more generous than the private sector. Even with the changes proposed I still think they are generous. Are you going to say this is all vague and worthless or are you going to offer your own opinion of the fairness of public sector pensions?

 

[steveo]

Brilliant.
[/url]

Thanks for noticing.

 

[Holy Joe]

A couple of people have asked why private employees didn't strike etc when losing a DB pension. In my case the pension wasn't a contractual right - it was a discretionary benefit, so removing it didn't break any contract - the past benefit was essentially frozen and future contributions went into a DC scheme. I think there was also a recognition that the pension fund liabilites was actually putting the future of the company at risk.

Are pensions in the public sector a contractual right or a benefit?