Saintandy666 Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Michael Gove was ridiculous in his comments earlier. No-one is itching for a fight over this. Many people are going on strike for the first time, and every teacher takes their responsibility seriously. Too many people think schools are some sort of creche. If you want decent schools and decent education for our kids, which after all is integral to our future, we have to treat them fairly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 I certainly think there is a case for redressing the private/public sector imbalance, but I'm not sure I'd agree with your idea that they have a God given right to better treatment etc. Hundreds of thousands of Public Sector jobs being culled plus an across the board effective 10% pay cut over the last two years suggests they have played their part (I'll be £100k worse off as a result of this effective pay cut). Additionally many have taken a further pay cut. So I think they have a decent shout in saying they have already played their part in contributing to the national interest. And I'm also not sure about throwing the baby out of the bathwater and downgrading the roles and rewards of those who will stay in the Public Sector is the way to go. I'm certainly concerned that an effective 10% pay cut for teachers plus a massive alteration to their pensions will influence those who might on the future choose to go in to a profession that is so intrinsic to the future national interest. My friend, if we are to compare tales of hardship then I'm only just earning a tad above the legal minimum wage, I've got no workplace pension at all, and I've received 3 (small) pay rises in the last 9 years - and lets just say the prospects for the next 12 months don't exactly look too rosy either. I know there are plenty on here (but not you I trust) who view the poor as the authors of their own misfortunes, but it's been my life experience that a working man theses days just has to take what he can get. So the pain out there is universal, and although I can only agree with you that every working person should have a decent wage and retirement income, in reality that happy day seems further off than ever I'm afraid. In my view it's not sustainable for this county that the gap that already exists between low payed private sector workers and their better off public sector equivalents should just continue indefinitely. I say again, if we don't cut public spending then where else is the money coming from ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 28 November, 2011 Author Share Posted 28 November, 2011 I dont disagree that now we have got into the mess we need to manage our way out of it - and that means balancing the budget (although we can debate how far and how fast cuts should go). I was replying to ther poster who said the cuts was nothing to do with the banks - which is clearly nonsense. I know bankers that pay over £200k a year in tax (at 50% of income), they have never lost their bank money (if they did they'd get sacked), and spend vast amounts in cars, clothes, restaurants, house upgrades, services etc. You should be on your knees begging them to turn down the offers they are currently getting from Switzerland to move abroad - without their hardcwork and brains earning them big money that they spend, we will sink as a nation even quicker than we are already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Well missus is very excited about Winchester on weds, easy day tomorrow as no lesson planning required after school for the next day. she has spent the evening making a cake as all the women are doing them to "celebrate" their mini week. As an NQT she feels pressurised to go along with it even though the head isn't striking. No kids will be in her school so she's having to lose a days pay and go shopping. Personally think it's insane, our contracts (my private company) have been changed 3 times in 9 years because we are skint and making less money than we used to (much like UK plc), people are living longer so we need to work longer and pay more - so what? Deal with it, Im not moaning and I enjoy working hard - watching these moaning spongers in their 70's time warp infuriates me - for a minute or two. The country's skint, chin up sleaves up and dig in without complaining. That attitude gave us an empire, today's "I'm owed a living by everyone one else that I'm jealous of" attitude will bring us in line with the lazy med country's before we know it! When (if??!) the good times return, will you recieive the benefits? Will your company make an effort to reward you for your hard work and loyalty during the tough times? Genuine question. Because you can bet your bottom dollar that as soon as they return, I'm pretty sure the governement of the time won't be rushing to reinstate the pensions the public sector are currently receiving. They will only ever get worse, regardless of the economic climate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 28 November, 2011 Author Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Michael Gove was ridiculous in his comments earlier. No-one is itching for a fight over this. Many people are going on strike for the first time, and every teacher takes their responsibility seriously. Too many people think schools are some sort of creche. If you want decent schools and decent education for our kids, which after all is integral to our future, we have to treat them fairly. Sorry but that's rubbish! Don't know about your school but my missus is being strong armed by older teachers into "showing solidarity" and striking so they can go christmas shopping on pay day! The head is against it but peer pressure is pretty big to nqt's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 I know bankers that pay over £200k a year in tax (at 50% of income), they have never lost their bank money (if they did they'd get sacked), and spend vast amounts in cars, clothes, restaurants, house upgrades, services etc. You should be on your knees begging them to turn down the offers they are currently getting from Switzerland to move abroad - without their hardcwork and brains earning them big money that they spend, we will sink as a nation even quicker than we are already! yeah so Fred Goodwin really didnt lose any money for his bank or the country?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 28 November, 2011 Author Share Posted 28 November, 2011 When (if??!) the good times return, will you recieive the benefits? Will your company make an effort to reward you for your hard work and loyalty during the tough times? Genuine question. Because you can bet your bottom dollar that as soon as they return, I'm pretty sure the governement of the time won't be rushing to reinstate the pensions the public sector are currently receiving. They will only ever get worse, regardless of the economic climate. Ha, no chance! I'm not moaning though, happy to work longer hours for a competitor if need more money, onwards and upwards! Hopefully though people will continue to live longer - a good thing surely? So we have to face facts that we need to work longer and pay more to our pensions. Small price to pay to live 10 years longer than our patents though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Yeah but knowing my luck I'll retire one day and drop dead the ****ing next! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Ha, no chance! I'm not moaning though, happy to work longer hours for a competitor if need more money, onwards and upwards! Hopefully though people will continue to live longer - a good thing surely? So we have to face facts that we need to work longer and pay more to our pensions. Small price to pay to live 10 years longer than our patents though? Id rather live to 80 working 40 hours a week retiring at 65, than live to 90 working 60 hours a week retiring at 70. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 28 November, 2011 Author Share Posted 28 November, 2011 yeah so Fred Goodwin really didnt lose any money for his bank or the country?! Not one of my mates? Err read my post again and you'll see I said my mates didn't lose their banks money, if they did they get sacked. What happened to Fred the shred again? oh yeah, he got sacked. Hope you don't own/ work for a company that requires the public to spend money on it? If so you'd gate my mates as they spend more in a month than I do in a year, always on local businesses too. Seriously you should be bowing to them as they get out if their mercs with their bulging wallets ready to spend cash (well their wives actually as they work 18 hour days). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Sorry but that's rubbish! Don't know about your school but my missus is being strong armed by older teachers into "showing solidarity" and striking so they can go christmas shopping on pay day! The head is against it but peer pressure is pretty big to nqt's. Well your missus needs to have a word with her Headteacher PDQ. No one should be forced to strike and she has as much right to work as others have to withdraw their labour. If the Headteacher is worth his salt then he will see that she will not lose a days pay. As for your anecdotal story, then I'm afraid I don't have much respect for the handful of teachers you may be referring to. Any teacher using this strike as a jolly "day off" shouldn't really be in the profession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 28 November, 2011 Author Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Yeah but knowing my luck I'll retire one day and drop dead the ****ing next! I'll be happy with one day of retirement my friend! every day is a bonus - could be worse, could be living in a mud hut in India but instead I'm on a iPhone putting the world to rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/1998/08/babysitting_the_economy.2.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 28 November, 2011 Author Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Id rather live to 80 working 40 hours a week retiring at 65, than live to 90 working 60 hours a week retiring at 70. Unfortunately without relaxed laws on euthanasia that is a mere pipe dream. People are living longer and we need to make sure they have a decent standard of living, to suggest otherwise is selfish. We need to buckle down and work harder until our time comes (if ever at all). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 My friend, if we are to compare tales of hardship then I'm only just earning a tad above the legal minimum wage, I've got no workplace pension at all, and I've received 3 (small) pay rises in the last 9 years - and lets just say the prospects for the next 12 months don't exactly look too rosy either. I know there are plenty on here (but not you I trust) who view the poor as the authors of their own misfortunes, but it's been my life experience that a working man theses days just has to take what he can get. So the pain out there is universal, and although I can only agree with you that every working person should have a decent wage and retirement income, in reality that happy day seems further off than ever I'm afraid. In my view it's not sustainable for this county that the gap that already exists between low payed private sector workers and their better off public sector equivalents should just continue indefinitely. I say again, if we don't cut public spending then where else is the money coming from ? I'm certainly not trying to get in to the Public Sector Vs Private Sectir *****fest and have already made it clear that I think this race to the bottom shows up our society in a very poor light. I was merely responding to the false notion that public Sector workers think they have a "God given right" and that they have not contributed. I'm not sure of the gap between the Public and Private Sector and would argue that the disparity between the real "high earners" and the rest is much more corrosive http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15827683 I think there has to be a redressing of the balance between the current imbalance and hundreds of thousands of public sector job losses, pay freezes and pay cuts have played their part in addressing this. I'm just not convinced that further "taxes" to fund a short term over ambitious deficit reduction programme are just or equitable. Plus of course it's easier to slash and burn, but I would argue the Government haven't been successful with the over side of the coin, namely promoting growth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Unfortunately without relaxed laws on euthanasia that is a mere pipe dream. People are living longer and we need to make sure they have a decent standard of living, to suggest otherwise is selfish. We need to buckle down and work harder until our time comes (if ever at all). Are you having a work-induced nervous breakdown? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 28 November, 2011 Author Share Posted 28 November, 2011 (edited) Well your missus needs to have a word with her Headteacher PDQ. No one should be forced to strike and she has as much right to work as others have to withdraw their labour. If the Headteacher is worth his salt then he will see that she will not lose a days pay. As for your anecdotal story, then I'm afraid I don't have much respect for the handful of teachers you may be referring to. Any teacher using this strike as a jolly "day off" shouldn't really be in the profession. The headteacher is a she and my girlfriend and I admire her immensely, however my missus has to go into the school and work with her fellow teachers on a daily basis and the moaning shop stewardesses amongst them are putting the pressure on. They are all baby boomers with mortgages paid off that want security so they can keep shopping at waitrose rather than sainsburys. Her union (NASUWT) didn't get her ballot paper out in time for her to vote - a disgrace btw! My missus loves her job and works hard, very hard! But these strikes are a joke, the only ones really losing out are the kids! Edited 28 November, 2011 by JackanorySFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 28 November, 2011 Author Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Are you having a work-induced nervous breakdown? No but well aware I could get any one of a number of diseases or even hit by a bus tomorrow. But no point crying over spilt milk - hope for the best, prepare for the worst! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 The headteacher is a she and my girlfriend and I admire her immensely, however my missus has to go into the s hook and work with her fellow teachers on a daily basis and the moaning shop stewardesses amongst them are putting the pressure on. They are all baby boomers with mortgages paid off that want security so they can keep shopping at waitrose rather than sainsburys. Her union (NASUWT) didn't get her ballot paper out in time for her to vote - a disgrace btw! My missus loves her job and works hard, very hard! But these strikes are a joke, the only ones really losing out are the kids! She should tell the Headteacher she is willing to work, ask the Head to keep that confidential and she should not lose any pay. Your girlfriend has no obligation to tell anyone whether she went on strike or not. In fact, with the school being closed no one has any idea who is officially on strike and who is offically getting paid. I did not have to tell my Head I was striking, but out of courtesy I did (so that he had an idea if he could keep the school open) and I also have no idea who else in my school has withdrawn their labour and who is "working from home" or even going in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 You can't possibly be that thick? Now who's being thick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Where can I invoice you? I think you might want to look at a few histories of the current crisis to see where you've gone horribly wrong. I'd recommend Gillian Tett's 'Fool's Gold: How the Bold dream of a Small Tribe at JP Morgan Was corrupted by Wall Street Greed and Unleashed a Catastrophe'. This traces the roots of the derivatives crisis which remains at the heart of everything going on now. And for a British perspective: Philip Augar's 'Chasing Alpha: How Reckless Growth and Unchecked Ambition Ruined the City's Golden Decade'. Then come back and say you can't blame the banks... There were many causes. It is still not completely understood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Public spending is going to be £100 Billion over what the government planned, according to their own figures, due to the high levels of unemployment that their, frankly stupid, cuts have caused. Instead of saving money, they are costing us all more. How many times? These are only cuts in projected increases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 Of course dinner ladies .. etc aren't to blame for the recession, and neither are ordinary working people in the private sector for that matter. What is true however is that all the pain from our current situation just can't be carried on the overburdened shoulders of private enterprise yet again. Any decent economist will tell you that the public sector in this country has grown far too large for the good of the productive economy as a whole, and (as this thread amply demonstrates) many of the workers within it still see themselves as having some God given right to better treatment than other working people, people who (much like myself) are very often significantly worse off than they are. I don't blame people at all for striking in a attempt to protect their privileges as it is clearly in their self interest to do so, it is not however in the national interest that they should get their way. As Bod Dylan once said: the times they are a changing ....... Utter boll*cks- countries have managed to prosper with far larger public sector/welfare states (i.e. the Scandies). Depends on citizens preferences to taxation = in this country, the preference is for lower taxes and lower public spending, so there is a limit on how big the public sector can become. The idea that the public sector doesn't 'produce' is also boll*cks -if services like health and education weren't being delivered publicly, the private sector would be delivering them. They're not deadweights. The more important question is which sector -public or private- has a comparative advantage in which activities. Having worked in both public and private sectors, the answer isn't clear-cut. There are some things I would never trust the public sector to do; just as I could never imagine the private sector doing other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 28 November, 2011 Share Posted 28 November, 2011 She should tell the Headteacher she is willing to work, ask the Head to keep that confidential and she should not lose any pay. A teacher at my other half's school said she couldn't afford to go on strike so the Head is letting her 'work from home' on Wednesday. Strangely I bet a lot of teachers on strike will end up doing some work at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 A teacher at my other half's school said she couldn't afford to go on strike so the Head is letting her 'work from home' on Wednesday. Strangely I bet a lot of teachers on strike will end up doing some work at home. This. Im marking year 11 controlled assessment (coursework in old money) after demonstrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 This. Im marking year 11 controlled assessment (coursework in old money) after demonstrating. I trust you aren't being paid for this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 The headteacher is a she and my girlfriend and I admire her immensely, however my missus has to go into the school and work with her fellow teachers on a daily basis and the moaning shop stewardesses amongst them are putting the pressure on. They are all baby boomers with mortgages paid off that want security so they can keep shopping at waitrose rather than sainsburys. Her union (NASUWT) didn't get her ballot paper out in time for her to vote - a disgrace btw! I'm hearing quite a few stories from 'friends of friends' saying they they never received a strike ballot paper...I'm beginning to understand why the turnout was so low now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Too many people think schools are some sort of creche. If by "crèche" you mean "a place where working families leave their children while they go out to work" then I'm guilty as charged m'lud. What else do you suggest we do with school age children during the working week? Sigh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 This. Im marking year 11 controlled assessment (coursework in old money) after demonstrating. Will you have one of those whingey left wing placards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 yeah so Fred Goodwin really didnt lose any money for his bank or the country?! The very same Fred Goodwin that was revered and knighted by the union funded Labour Party...? I must have missed the strikes and protests on the streets that week... Sigh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Will you have one of those whingey left wing placards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 No-one is itching for a fight over this. Unions? Itching for a fight? What a ridiculous notion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Tories? Itching for a fight with the unions? What an equally ridiculous notion... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 If by "crèche" you mean "a place where working families leave their children while they go out to work" then I'm guilty as charged m'lud. What else do you suggest we do with school age children during the working week? Sigh Not my point. What I meant was some parents seem to think schools are there to do their job. Sent from my HTC Hero using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Not my point. What I meant was some parents seem to think schools are there to do their job. I don't understand what you mean. Example perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I don't understand what you mean. Example perhaps? How about dropping them off at 8:00 half dressed and having had no breakfast, ( and, please note, this is parents who are unemployed so it's not as if they are trying to get to work ), and then sending an 'auntie' or even a taxi round just before 17:00 to collect them. This is everyday behaviour at my wife's school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 (edited) How about dropping them off at 8:00 half dressed and having had no breakfast, ( and, please note, this is parents who are unemployed so it's not as if they are trying to get to work ), and then sending an 'auntie' or even a taxi round just before 17:00 to collect them. This is everyday behaviour at my wife's school. Ah, ok. Thanks for the clarification. Yes, I would agree, that unemployed parents dropping off children without getting them ready for school properly isn't right. (Andy's statement that led me to question the "creche" remark was a rather sweeping statement, hence seekign clarification). So, what we can conclude is that all decent parents don't use schools as a "creche"? p.s. out of interest, does your wife's school actually offer an 8am - 5pm drop-off / pick-up service or are these bad parents taking the michael on the time front too (regardless of how well looked after their children are)? Edited 29 November, 2011 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Those of you in the private sector with p*ss poor pensions to come will have to rely on the state to provide you with a pension. pension credits and other state benefits so that you have a barely comfortable retirement. Now who will pay for that? Your children, my children etc. etc. in the form of tax. If public sector workers decide they can't afford to contribute to their pension schemes, they, too, will rely on pension credits and other state benefits when they retire. With the current rates at which they contribute, some of them will be able to retire without state support. As the Guardian article pointed out, the government's proposals are, in effect, a 3.2% tax rise for public sector workers. How many of you would be happy to pay another 3.2p in the pound in tax? And instead of moaning about the public sector workers, why aren't you organising and demanding that your employers offer you decent pension plans. The good ones do. Why does it have to be a race to the bottom?So who pays for the public sector pensions? It will be our children and childrens children. The money has to come form somewhere and if you pay £100 a week into your pension now and retire in 5years time expecting a return of say £300pw where does the growth come from to provide that. The pension companies cant promise returns like that , you cant get invested money with those returns.Please do not try and say you have been paying in for 35 years and so you have paid lots in. In that time any taxes you and I have paid have been eaten up by our use of the NHS, our childrens education caring for the elderly and sick, keeping us safe etc etc etc. The fact is that if you spend as a nation mare than you earn you are in trouble. It's not anti public sector (although i will admit a % of them do get on my nerves) it is a case of basic budgeting. The public sector pensions has been a timebomb that governments have all pushed into the future and sooner or later it has to be addressed. The growth of the public sector has made it nye impossible for the country to pay. I feel that there should be a timeline to when the new pension agreements come in, e.g if you have only 5 or less years to retirement then perhaps the terms should stay but only if they retire the same age as the private sector Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 p.s. out of interest, does your wife's school actually offer an 8am - 5pm drop-off / pick-up service or are these bad parents taking the michael on the time front too (regardless of how well looked after their children are)? Generally it's the latter, - I drop my wife off at 5 to 8 and some kids are there already. Also, an interesting bit on the Beeb : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15925017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Generally it's the latter, - I drop my wife off at 5 to 8 and some kids are there already. Why does the school let them get away with it? I thought schools were supposed to be bastions and champions of disciplined behaviour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I feel that there should be a timeline to when the new pension agreements come in, e.g if you have only 5 or less years to retirement then perhaps the terms should stay but only if they retire the same age as the private sector There is a timeline cushion for these current reforms.....anyone within 10 years of retirement will stay on existing terms. One of the compromises that gets conveniently swept under the carpet when 'justifying' strike action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 So who pays for the public sector pensions? ........ A lot of it is funded by contributions from the employees - the percentage varies but, in my case, it was 6% of my salary. Some are higher. I would ask the same question of people participating in private sector schemes. And I would have no problem with the answer. The truth is that many public sector schemes are self-funding and some of those schemes are in profit. The government is seeking to use those surpluses to reduce the government's debt (still rising, I notice - even after 18 months of the Coalition). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddog Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 My wife was in the same situation, union rep and senior teachers trying to give her a hard time but she stood her ground and with couple of teachers who where also against the strike they went to see the head. They are not striking and so out of 15/20 classes around 5 are in tomorrow. You just need to stand your ground as hard as that may be. She needs to approach the head and inform her of her right not to strike. People have a right not to strike just as much as chosing to strike. Why should she lose a days pay and do something she doesnt agree with just because of peer presure by the older generation who are more affected by these changes. As much as i dont agree with they way the government are going about changing pensions, i think things need to change as its not affordable. Like i said in a previous post, changes should be made to NQTs contracts coming into the system and say new teachers within the first 5 years of a career rather than wholesale changes which do affect people very close to retirement. The headteacher is a she and my girlfriend and I admire her immensely, however my missus has to go into the school and work with her fellow teachers on a daily basis and the moaning shop stewardesses amongst them are putting the pressure on. They are all baby boomers with mortgages paid off that want security so they can keep shopping at waitrose rather than sainsburys. Her union (NASUWT) didn't get her ballot paper out in time for her to vote - a disgrace btw! My missus loves her job and works hard, very hard! But these strikes are a joke, the only ones really losing out are the kids! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I think I've asked this question many moons ago, but can't remember the answer.... Does "the state" invest a percentage of public section pension fund(s) in private investment schemes? If they do, doesn't that bring us full circle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 My wife was in the same situation, union rep and senior teachers trying to give her a hard time but she stood her ground and with couple of teachers who where also against the strike they went to see the head. They are not striking and so out of 15/20 classes around 5 are in tomorrow. Is the school staying open as a result? (just for those classes whose teachers are in) My son's school is closing completely because they can't provide a "safe environment" for the children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 A lot of it is funded by contributions from the employees - the percentage varies but, in my case, it was 6% of my salary. Some are higher. I would ask the same question of people participating in private sector schemes. And I would have no problem with the answer. The truth is that many public sector schemes are self-funding and some of those schemes are in profit. The government is seeking to use those surpluses to reduce the government's debt (still rising, I notice - even after 18 months of the Coalition). True, but the rest (and the far more substantial amount it is too) is provided by the taxpayer, both now and in the future. The trouble with them is the shear scale of the generous schemes that are guaranteed irrespective of economic conditions. Instead of forcing change through contributions, the Government should give each section of the public sector the chance to invest the funds currently sat around doing not very much. That way, for instance, councils could reduce the burden on the taxpayer whilst maintaining values and adding to their asset base. There is a council in London which wants to use pension funds to invest in affordable shared ownership housing. Good idea, if they can loosen the bureaucracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 I think I've asked this question many moons ago, but can't remember the answer.... Does "the state" invest a percentage of public section pension fund(s) in private investment schemes? If they do, doesn't that bring us full circle? Off the top of my head (and I haven't got time this morning to google to double-check) I suspect the public sector schemes are managed by a Pensions Board but the appropriate Minister or Secretary of State is legally responsible for the governance of the schemes. Some, but not all, schemes have Trade Union representatives on their boards. The Local Government Pension Scheme certainly invests and according to the Hutton report (I think) does so efficiently and transparently. I think, from memory, it has received a good report from the Audit Commission (as an aside, I wonder who will audit pension schemes both public and private once the Audit Commission has been abolished). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stu0x Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 True, but the rest (and the far more substantial amount it is too) is provided by the taxpayer, both now and in the future. Except that simply isn't true. As has been said earlier in the thread, the government has point blank refused to release the results of a review into the actual balance sheets of public sector pensions, after they commissioned the very same review to justify their reforms. What does that tell you about what that review might say? There is very strong evidence to suggest that many of the public sector pension schemes are in surplus, not deficit. The government just relies on the public/private sector divide to stir up ridiculous vitriol in order to hide the facts. One can't exist without the other. Public sector pension schemes are not only sustainable, they are sustainable in the private sector too. But you're so busy getting foamy-mouthed about the perceived unfairness of it all and demanding the public sector shouldn't benefit, you haven't stopped to think that maybe the solution is demand the private sector does too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Off the top of my head (and I haven't got time this morning to google to double-check) I suspect the public sector schemes are managed by a Pensions Board but the appropriate Minister or Secretary of State is legally responsible for the governance of the schemes. Some, but not all, schemes have Trade Union representatives on their boards. The Local Government Pension Scheme certainly invests and according to the Hutton report (I think) does so efficiently and transparently. I think, from memory, it has received a good report from the Audit Commission (as an aside, I wonder who will audit pension schemes both public and private once the Audit Commission has been abolished). I guess what I was trying to get at (somewhat provocatively just for once) is whether the size of public pension schemes ultimately depend on (in part) a bouyant banking system. As such, and stretching the credibility of my logic somewhat (if indeed there was any credibility in the first place) for striking public sector workers to be calling for swinging tax grabs on the banks to fill the various gaps that exist in our economy is ultimately self defeating. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 29 November, 2011 Share Posted 29 November, 2011 Except that simply isn't true. As has been said earlier in the thread, the government has point blank refused to release the results of a review into the actual balance sheets of public sector pensions, after they commissioned the very same review to justify their reforms. What does that tell you about what that review might say? There is very strong evidence to suggest that many of the public sector pension schemes are in surplus, not deficit. The government just relies on the public/private sector divide to stir up ridiculous vitriol in order to hide the facts. One can't exist without the other. Public sector pension schemes are not only sustainable, they are sustainable in the private sector too. But you're so busy getting foamy-mouthed about the perceived unfairness of it all and demanding the public sector shouldn't benefit, you haven't stopped to think that maybe the solution is demand the private sector does too Oh dear, i think you are the one getting "foamy mouthed" old love. Of course the public purse pays for pension contributions. And if you read the rest of my post you'll see that i don't disagree that some schemes are in surplus, but these are only local authority schemes, which imho, can be used by forward thinking councils to generate revenue, if they are allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now