Bob Crow

[Reg Smeeton]

No, what they are supposed to do is get on with their job, and do what they signed up to do !

Unfortunately the government unilaterally changed the goalposts on what teachers signed up for without asking....I'm sure all teachers would happily get on with doing what they signed up for...

[Samdy Gray]

Unfortunately the government unilaterally changed the goalposts on what teachers signed up for without asking....I'm sure all teachers would happily get on with doing what they signed up for...

I know this is a thread about unions rather than pensions, but this argument of "it's not what I signed up for" often crops up when discussing public sector pensions.

Yes it's unfortunate that you and everyone else in the public & civil service have to pay more into your pensions to get the same, or less, income at the end of it. But it's really not a lot different from the private sector.

Annuity rates have bombed due to falling gilt yields and improved mortality, which means we all have to pay more into pensions to get the same income at the end because statistics show we're much more likely to be paid that pension for an extra 5 or 10 years than was expected when you started contributing to it. That extra 5 or 10 years worth of income has to be paid for somewhere, or you have to accept a lower income in retirement.

Public sector pensions are unfunded, there is no pot of money, the government effectively dips directly into the public purse to pay them. And for the same reason of everybody living longer, you can't expect the promise of more income for longer without contributing something toward it.

[Reg Smeeton]

I know this is a thread about unions rather than pensions, but this argument of "it's not what I signed up for" often crops up when discussing public sector pensions.

Yes it's unfortunate that you and everyone else in the public & civil service have to pay more into your pensions to get the same, or less, income at the end of it. But it's really not a lot different from the private sector.

Annuity rates have bombed due to falling gilt yields and improved mortality, which means we all have to pay more into pensions to get the same income at the end because statistics show we're much more likely to be paid that pension for an extra 5 or 10 years than was expected when you started contributing to it. That extra 5 or 10 years worth of income has to be paid for somewhere, or you have to accept a lower income in retirement.

Public sector pensions are unfunded, there is no pot of money, the government effectively dips directly into the public purse to pay them. And for the same reason of everybody living longer, you can't expect the promise of more income for longer without contributing something toward it.

Yes very inconvenient of people to live longer...what's needed is a good war or plague or something.

[jayohaitchenn]

I know this is a thread about unions rather than pensions, but this argument of "it's not what I signed up for" often crops up when discussing public sector pensions.

Yes it's unfortunate that you and everyone else in the public & civil service have to pay more into your pensions to get the same, or less, income at the end of it. But it's really not a lot different from the private sector.

Annuity rates have bombed due to falling gilt yields and improved mortality, which means we all have to pay more into pensions to get the same income at the end because statistics show we're much more likely to be paid that pension for an extra 5 or 10 years than was expected when you started contributing to it. That extra 5 or 10 years worth of income has to be paid for somewhere, or you have to accept a lower income in retirement.

Public sector pensions are unfunded, there is no pot of money, the government effectively dips directly into the public purse to pay them. And for the same reason of everybody living longer, you can't expect the promise of more income for longer without contributing something toward it.

So if you sign a legal contract stating you pay in x and they pay in y and then y decide to change the ratios you just accept it? Fuck that.

[jayohaitchenn]

Although I agree with your broader point.

[Levi lapper]

Fucking hell really ?

You mean that public sector who have been propped up by the private sector for donkey's years ?

That public sector with unrealistic pensions paid out of the private sector ?

Zero pay rises - ahhhhh poor public sector workers ! They should try living in the real world like the rest of us - I would LOVE a pay rise but unfortunately I also understand that when things are bad in the economy I have to suck it up and wait until things improve

And yeah the bankers -- it was ALL their fault that we took more credit than we could afford - fuck me personal responsibility went right out of the window in the Blair/Brown Bust years didn't it......

I guess you'd prefer to live in a world without the public sector, so no doctors, teachers, firemen, ambulance drivers or armed forces but a nation of double glazing salesmen and photo copier engineers. Unbelievable.

[Not that Nice If I'm Honest]

Asking people to strike on their days off is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.
Teachers work very hard and under pressure. Those who strike do not make the rules on taking kids out during term time either. Those rules come from above.

I needed my union when somebody fell from my lorry. I was blameless and followed correct procedure yet an attempt was made to make me the scapegoat. Without my unions help they may have got away with it.

You shouldn't have been people smuggling in the first place

[sonicyouth]

RIP Bob Crow.

[tans]

So if you sign a legal contract stating you pay in x and they pay in y and then y decide to change the ratios you just accept it? Fuck that.

Spot on

[Talk Talk]

I guess you'd prefer to live in a world without the public sector, so no doctors, teachers, firemen, ambulance drivers or armed forces but a nation of double glazing salesmen and photo copier engineers. Unbelievable.

I just can't resist.

Why do these services have to be provided by the public sector? If I had the choice of not paying taxes, or so much tax I would be more than delirious to source all of these through private companies competing against each other for my custom. They are currently monopolies and as such are as bad as private sector monopolies. You get bloated inefficient manager heavy unionised crap organisations with rubbish service because there is no competition whatsoever.

And before I get all of the bollocks about "what about the poor, the sick, the starving" and so on, they were more than adequately looked after by charity and the benevolence of the better off before the state decided to fuck it all up.

As for unions. Well, how much penetration have the unions got in the private sector? About 5%? Why is that then? Because they are not required. Sure, staff should be free to organise collective bargaining if they want to do that, but go on strike or push for stupid pay and conditions increases then the business will go under because costs will go up. Everybody who is in business or works in a company knows this. The difference in the public sector is that there are no other option for the consumer. Also, if you don't like your private sector job, it is a lot easier to go and get a different one somewhere else as living in the real world gives you real world skills, motivation and experience. A public to private move? Good luck with that one, I wouldn't employ you.

As a contractor I have worked for police forces, universities, colleges, schools, local government, blue chip companies, global companies, medium sized businesses and so on. From my experience if you want a job doing mainly fuck all every day at the taxpayers' expense, get a job in the public sector.

[Batch]

Talk talk had exactly the opposite opinion I'd thought he's have when I saw he'd posted.

Not quite sure I'd agree public sector workers do fuck all, but they've had it good for ages. Things like pensions, well I can see why the unions kick off as the Government issues takebacks, but sympathy ends when the "its not what I signed up for" argument kicks in. Of course it isn't, but its certainly no worse than the final salary abolition and miser amounts private sector often pays. So my sympathy is very thin.

[kerry red]

You're all either commie bedwetters or right wing scum.

Can't see why some bloke who dies that a very few people have heard of merits a thread.

Fuck 'em all

[otanswell]

soapy tit wank

[Samdy Gray]

So if you sign a legal contract stating you pay in x and they pay in y and then y decide to change the ratios you just accept it? Fuck that.

Pretty much, yes.

There's not much difference between that and, say, me putting £200 per month into my pension expecting a future annuity of £10,000 per year only to then have to put my contribution up to £400 per month to get that same £10,000 per year.

It's still a contract, if you want to get pedantic about it...

[4D]

I'd not heard of this fella until it was posted on here. Not interested in politics,  not interested in watching the news as it's mostly depressing.