The G Man Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 i don't like the fact i'm having to pay for someone elses feck ups in the private sector banking world. We all are Rich. i know, but why use my pension to pay for it? i'd rather see benefits cut first, turf all the lazy gits out and let them fend for themselves. if you haven't paid taxes, you can't claim benefits. that should mean those who have worked hard, and paid taxes, get help. and those that scrounge off the state don't. Would that include unemployed teachers? Or do we just go with what the "general" feeling of what a "scrounger" is? Shall we just turf all the families that depend on benefits due to a severe lack of jobs, out into the wilds? I'm sure your not advocating that, but it's a far more complex situation than the current pension thievery. Let's start making a prison sentence for first offenders only, think about it, 2nd offence and your out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted June 30, 2011 Author Share Posted June 30, 2011 In theory I only work six months of the year Rich, I get the same comments, normally over one of the 52 weekends a year. i think the contracted days for a teacher is something like 167 days a year working. but... i don't get paid at lunch, and I'm only paid up till 3.45 pm i usually work through my lunch and break with kids doing clubs, i stay after school till at least 5.30 doing more clubs, or marking, or meetings. i normally do at least 2-3 hours of other work or marking a night, and i normally work most of my Sunday as well. all of which are unpaid. that doesn't include the weekends i give up for free to help with things like duke of Edinburgh awards etc. and in the summer i usually spend about a week and a half to 2 weeks prepping for the next year. and probably about 3-4 on average per holiday outside of summer marking work or prepping. there is a bloke 2 doors down from me who works a the docks that always used to take the mick and say how much of an easy life i have as a teacher until we worked out he earns more than me and works less days of the year than me (thats the contracted ones) he went a bit quiet after that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted June 30, 2011 Author Share Posted June 30, 2011 i don't like the fact i'm having to pay for someone elses feck ups in the private sector banking world. We all are Rich. i know, but why use my pension to pay for it? i'd rather see benefits cut first, turf all the lazy gits out and let them fend for themselves. if you haven't paid taxes, you can't claim benefits. that should mean those who have worked hard, and paid taxes, get help. and those that scrounge off the state don't. Would that include unemployed teachers? Or do we just go with what the "general" feeling of what a "scrounger" is? Shall we just turf all the families that depend on benefits due to a severe lack of jobs, out into the wilds? I'm sure your not advocating that, but it's a far more complex situation than the current pension thievery. Let's start making a prison sentence for first offenders only, think about it, 2nd offense and your out by scrounger i mean someone who has never paid a days tax in more than 10 years. and who doesn't have any medical reason not to work. but yes your right its another can of worms and far more complex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinmac Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 I dont think there is an easy life anywhere anymore, self employed is a major worry, anyone salaried has to be very careful they can justify their job. Savings are needed in all sectors. Its a long road out of this situation but we are better off than many countries. In my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Husky Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 basically it high lights what a lot of us teachers say that what we do is extremely stressful. its very hard when people think we get all this holiday time but we work a lot of hours when not on holiday. I can confirm that when i nag rich for a game on the xbox he is never free as he is marking work ALL THE F***KING TIME nobber My mum is also a teacher and she puts vast amounts of hours into the job. In the private sector you do extra time you claim overtime, when you clock off you clock off. As a teacher you simply never clock off and never claim overtime. From my point of view on pensions, I got one of the last final salary pensions available in britain so i was very lucky. They do seem to faff about with it in the background though and i have no idea what it all means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The G Man Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Yes I read the taxes bit, so a child or a pensioner can't BENEFIT from the NHS, if they haven't paid taxes, remember, the NHS is a BENEFIT, but as you agree it's a complex situation. I remember the teachers calamatous strikes of the late 70's early 80's, all the extra time that teachers put in for clubs/sports/marking etc was withdrawn, in Scotland anyway, for years, it totally destroyed a whole generation of youth developement. That was an important part of the teaching profession's contribution to society. And for that I applaud them. Oh and I wasn't at school then, I was paying taxes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 I think a small minority still think teachers only work x amount of weeks a year. Most people I know are intelligent to know they have to prepare stuff outside of working hours, but then again its the same for everyone, I work more than my 7.2 hours every single day without pay for that extra time but it comes with the life and times of living in the UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 basically it high lights what a lot of us teachers say that what we do is extremely stressful. its very hard when people think we get all this holiday time but we work a lot of hours when not on holiday. I can confirm that when i nag rich for a game on the xbox he is never free as he is marking work ALL THE F***KING TIME nobber My mum is also a teacher and she puts vast amounts of hours into the job. In the private sector you do extra time you claim overtime, when you clock off you clock off. As a teacher you simply never clock off and never claim overtime. From my point of view on pensions, I got one of the last final salary pensions available in britain so i was very lucky. They do seem to faff about with it in the background though and i have no idea what it all means. Ruddy nora Husky, you seriously don't think that the majority of the private sector really clock on and off do you? Lots of private sector work ridiculous hours, even more so with mass redundancies going on and work still to be done. I have had a little run of work over the last two months, paid for 38 of the 70 hours a week I have been putting in ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted June 30, 2011 Author Share Posted June 30, 2011 i would love to claim overtime, if i could i'd be driving a ferrari by now i don't mind the time i put in, i do it becuase i want to and felt that the pay and pensions made the effort worth while. if it changes, then maybe it isn't worth the effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 I wouldnt even know how to spell payd ovartyme... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Anyway night chaps, 5:30am rise...erm...today...for work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Husky Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Ruddy nora Husky, you seriously don't think that the majority of the private sector really clock on and off do you? Lots of private sector work ridiculous hours, even more so with mass redundancies going on and work still to be done. I have had a little run of work over the last two months, paid for 38 of the 70 hours a week I have been putting in ... I work in the west midlands, like one giant land of clock watchers as far as I've seen Personally I just do as much time as the work I'm doing needs, sometimes less sometimes more not really fussy about the clock tbh. The overtime is there if I want it but I don't abuse it like others do and leave it unless I need it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liam42whu Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 For my 10 pense worth I do not believe in stricking, I'm not alowed to! However I do believe that when you start a job you know what the pay and pension is, therefore it shouldn't change, for example train drivers know their pay before so shouldnt moan after. The teachers side to me is differant as they knew the pay ect and now it's been taken away which is wrong. Problem is everyone is in a bad way right now, and something has to be done, the goverment can't win! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetSet Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 My ex wife is a head teacher so I know just how many hours teachers put in. She's over 50 so she won't have to switch to a career average pension but she will have to work till she's 66 as her birthday is a couple of months past the cutoff date for retiring at 65 (April 2020). Incidentally, Caroline is just 4 years older than my ex but will get her state pension next year! Teachers pensions as they stand now are already poor compared with industry they are based on 1/80ths mine is based on 1/60ths. I don't have any problems with them going on strike, but I really don't think a one day strike is going to make a lot of difference, its really up to the teaching unions to come to an agreement with the Government on a way forward. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The G Man Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 getting paid for OT is not all it's cracked up to be, couple of months ago I worked @ 20hrs OT, the following month I worked zero hrs, lost most of the OT in income tax, NI and pension contributions I don't do a lot of OT, but I'll be doing less now, it's just not worth it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Husky Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 getting paid for OT is not all it's cracked up to be, couple of months ago I worked @ 20hrs OT, the following month I worked zero hrs, lost most of the OT in income tax, NI and pension contributions I don't do a lot of OT, but I'll be doing less now, it's just not worth it you're right there, i worked a weekend a while ago to get an important job done, looked at the pay for it after and thought... "where did it all go..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Husky Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 have to say, the rest i then spunked on mods for the zed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The G Man Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 have to say, the rest i then spunked on mods for the zed me too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chesterfield Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Apologies if this offends anyone in the public sector, but having been subject to it on Sky News all day in the office, I was wondering if this would come up on the forum. When I started work I thought Id be retiring at 65 - now its 68. Why should I retire later? Because if we dont accept these changes, then its bad news for everyone. Public sector pensions even after any proposed changes will be massively more generous than private sector pension schemes. A typical contribution of 6% is now being proposed to go to 9%. For the average salary job in the private sector to pay out the same benefits upon retirement, the contributions from the employee would have to be nearer 40%. Why should the public sector have this culture of guaranteed pay rises too? If you have a large visa bill that you are struggling to pay off, why would you decide to start spending more on luxuries? Thats exactly what Public sector employees are expecting to happen while country is running at massive debt. If my company starts losing money this year, exactly how much of a pay rise am I going to get, or any of my staff for that matter? If the amount of money being spent on pensions is greater than the amount going in - where do we get the rest from? The taxpayers that have been living with pay freezes, increased costs of living and massive redundancies? I really hope there werent any economics or maths teachers on strike today - if there were, then they shouldn't go back. If you take a larger number away from a smaller one, you end up with a negative number. If you spend more than you earn, things get tricky. This basic concept remains the same even when talking about pension funds worth billions. More out than in = pension fund going pop alltogether. Even after the changes, 9% contriubtions for an average salary pension and something like a 25-40k lump sum sounds like a bloody good deal to me. There is a reason that private sectors wiped out final salary pension schemes, and it was due to the same basics that now mean public sector pensions have to be revised. People are living longer after retirement and wages are higher. End result is that the money starts to run out. Its not so they can make a huge profit, as the pension schemes have been ringfenced from genereal company accounts since Maxwell jumped off his boat. Its because if they dont change, the scheme will go bankrupt, leaving everyone out of pocket. If public sector pensions arent changed, anyone working in the public sector who isnt retiring in the next 15 years will not get a pension anyway, as the whole ponzi scheme will have come crashing down by then due to those who cant see their hand in front of their face. Apologies if this offends anyone working in the public sector, but for way too long these Union bosses have been yanking the puppet strings of the masses, spinning all sorts of crap to justify their own existence. Its those on £100k plus in the public sector that will see the biggest financial changes from any reform, and its those people who pull the strings of all the others. If they ge their way and convince the goverment to back down, they will simply delay the inevitable of the funds going bankrupt. Which of course wont bother them one jot, as they will have their nice tidy private schemes they have been able to afford being on the money they are. Heres a few figures taking a teachers pension scheme as an example: Current retirement age of 65 (if joined the scheme after Jan 2007, otherwise its 60) Final Salary Scheme employee contribution 6.4% employers (taxpayers) contribution = 14.1% Newly qualified teacher salary is around £21,000 - so they pay £1,344 per year into their pension. Employer (taxpayer) pays £2,961 per year Total contributions = £4,305 per year. Lets say they never get a pay rise, and retire after 40 years service on that same £21,000. (in the real world they will get rises, but then the contributions go up too, so lets keep it simple) After 40 years they will have paid in 40 x £1344 = £53,760 The employer will have paid 40 x £2961 = £118,440 Total input over 40 years = £172,200 They have an acrual rate of 1/60th final salary - so 40/60 * 21000 = pension of £14,000. Now, lets say the live a long and happy life from 65 to 85. Thats 20 years x £14,000 - or £280,000. So. £280,000 out and £172,200 in. Problem starting to make itself clear yet? That doesnt even account for the good old "you got a pay rise two years before you retire on your final salary scheme, now hows about that for lucky" routine that is rife - hence the proposed average salary schemes. So back to the example - Where do we get this extra £108,000 from? Hows about the good old taxpayer?....... Average household income in the UK aparantley stands at around £30,000. Tax payable (inc NI) on earnings of £30,000 is about £7250 a year. So to cover that £108,000 gap in a single persons pension scheme in the public sector, it would tae the total tax revenue generated by one household in just under 15 years. 15 years worth of household tax revenue for a single public sectoremployees pension scheme. What about the libraries, roads, health service, even the salaries of public sector workers. If public sector workers think the changes being proposed are bad for their pension schemes, then I suggest they sit down wit a mug of coffee, a calculator and some figures from the office of national statistics and work out exactly what the funds will look like in 15 years from now if they dont make any changes. A damned sight worse than they are proposing now, thats for sure. They will carry on striking though no doubt - oblivious to complete destruction of the pension funds if they dont change, and when it all comes crashing down like a house of cards no doubt the Union leaders at the time will have found someone else to blame, and they will all be out with placards again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Husky Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 informative chris Considering I haven't been around as long as some of you lot, think what the retirement age will be for me when i finally get there! How i envisage retirement.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted July 1, 2011 Author Share Posted July 1, 2011 chesterfield i found that extremely helpful, your there first person thats expalined the numbers and put some of the terms in a way i can understand. if i'm honest i don't understand alot of the pension talk and waht 1/60 meant etc and how it panned out. like i said i don't know which way i'm going with my decisions, but its nice to see some straight numbers. what i don't understand is that the old scheme used to work for teachers and has done for many decades, so where did it go wrong. isn't the pot smaller as it was raided on several occassions for other things and the mney never put back in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetSet Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 The problem is that if you starting paying into the teachers pension scheme before 2007 then the pension is based on 1/80 and not 1/60, makes a 5K per year difference for a teacher with 40 years service on 30k. I sourced this info from the teachers pension page so I'm sure its right. My ex is on about 50k so despite earning about 10k a year more than me (when i was working) her pension will be about 2k less than mine and we both paid in roughly 7%. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted July 1, 2011 Author Share Posted July 1, 2011 i started my teachers pension in 2005-2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spursmaddave Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Without getting into the public vs private sector debate as an economy needs people that support it financially and those that serve it, but we ALL have to accept the people are living longer and therefore have to work longer, around 1 in 5 will now live to 100+!!! Thats a 35 year pension which could never ever be covered by 45 years of contributions, simple maths (sorry teachers). Fat Pensions are just not going to happen unless you are a banker or such so get real and accept the inevitable. I have heard people interviewed moaning about getting small pay increases that are not inline with inflation WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD my company have made over £500m profit but i get a 2% rise because they are terrified of going under and rightly so! Striking doesn't solve anything and never really has, a few of my staff had to take a day of their holiday or not get paid to look after their kids so ask them if they support strikes. Nothing against teachers as i did some lecturing to pay my way through uni, just think they need to be realistic with their aims, the economy cant afford to let them retire early on a final salary pension plain and simple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 I think that's the crux of it, you can argue the government can't change what it promised etc decades ago but the world has changed, the private sector has changed massively along with it (over the last 8 to 10 years I don't know many people that have had annual pay increases in line with in inflation, certainly in my industry annual pay increases have pretty much disappeared altogether - you have to rely on promotion pay increases to keep up and negotiate hard on it). It's a case of adapting, adapt or fail at the moment, it's not nice, you can argue principles but the harsh reality of the world was nicely spelt out by chesterfield earlier. Unfortunately it is a case of union leaders defending their huge salaries, if they didn't have a 'call to arms' they would be seen to be not acting on behalf of its members. The other side are the turn outs for the voting were terrible, how can you call a general strike when less than 40% of your members bothered to vote in the ballot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.