|
Derek Smith
16,015 posts
117 months
|
Elroy Blue said: 10 Pence Short said: Things have changed. Everybody has to take on some of that problem. There's no reason you should be exempt. I notice you quote one line of my post and completely ignore the rest. Very selective. Your post beat mine.
|
|
|
Lunablack
2,839 posts
31 months
|
I actually sympathise with the Police on this.... It's a hard job and you signed up to do the job and in return, there was a decent pension and an early retirement age... Simple.. I don't buy the argument that the pension money isn't available.... The government can always find money for other countries, wars and other lost causes.... So they should look after the police... What I don't get though, is why the police are taking this lying down?? The Olympics are coming up why not work to rule, refuse all overtime, and make a stand?? If you allow the government to s  t all over you..... They will continue to do so..
|
|
|
10 Pence Short
27,552 posts
86 months
|
Advice from DirectGov: Government said: "Credit card and payment fraud
These common frauds usually involve stealing or copying (‘cloning’) your card or stealing your pin-code to access your account.
Unfortunately, if somebody has cloned your card, it could take some time before you notice something is wrong. Many people don't discover the crime until they receive their bank or card statements.
As soon as you notice your cards have been stolen or used illegally, report it to your bank or credit card company. They may ask you to file a police report." Advice from the MET (with my bold): Metropolitan Police said: If your credit card, bank debit card, cheques or bank details have been used by fraudsters, your bank or other financial Institution must be informed, they make a report to the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB).
|
|
|
vonhosen
27,104 posts
86 months
|
Lunablack said: I actually sympathise with the Police on this.... It's a hard job and you signed up to do the job and in return, there was a decent pension and an early retirement age... Simple.. I don't buy the argument that the pension money isn't available.... The government can always find money for other countries, wars and other lost causes.... So they should look after the police... What I don't get though, is why the police are taking this lying down?? The Olympics are coming up why not work to rule, refuse all overtime, and make a stand?? If you allow the government to s t all over you..... They will continue to do so.. Because in lieu of the promise of a 2/3rds pension after 30 years, they agreed to conditions of service that meant the employer had a lot of control over their personal life.
|
|
|
ED209
Original Poster
2,904 posts
113 months
|
10 Pence Short said: Advice from DirectGov: Government said: "Credit card and payment fraud
These common frauds usually involve stealing or copying (‘cloning’) your card or stealing your pin-code to access your account.
Unfortunately, if somebody has cloned your card, it could take some time before you notice something is wrong. Many people don't discover the crime until they receive their bank or card statements.
As soon as you notice your cards have been stolen or used illegally, report it to your bank or credit card company. They may ask you to file a police report." You are deviating massively away from the topic. I really couldnt care less who deals with credit card fraud at this point in time.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
GC8
9,488 posts
59 months
|
Back on topic: why do police pensions need reviewing?
I thought that retired officers pensions were paid for by the contributions of serving officers, making the arrangement very different form conventional public sector pensions?
|
|
|
10 Pence Short
27,552 posts
86 months
|
Derek Smith said: the private sector pay more, with better conditions, and give a better pension/lower premiums than the public sector, at least as far as the police are concerned. How do you extrapolate that point from your anecdote? Your one story does not support the supposition that private sector employees enjoy better conditions and higher pay than the Police. It just tells us a story about a job you didn't take.
|
|
|
Citizen09
629 posts
40 months
|
GC8 said: Back on topic: why do police pensions need reviewing? Because they were last reviewed and amended in 2006, and the last great unreformed public service is ripe for yet more upheaval and change. Contradiction? I don't know whether I'm coming or going, anymore.
|
|
|
vonhosen
27,104 posts
86 months
|
GC8 said: Back on topic: why do police pensions need reviewing?
I thought that retired officers pensions were paid for by the contributions of serving officers, making the arrangement very different form conventional public sector pensions? When it started there would have been a surplus from income over outgoings. The government never invested that income, they'll have just spent it elsewhere. Over time the income did just go straight to outcome for paying those who'd retired, but then the income started to fall short of the outcomes & the government (who'd never invested the income) had to find the shortfall. The shortfall is getting bigger & bigger as people live longer.
|
|
|
Lunablack
2,839 posts
31 months
|
vonhosen said: Because in lieu of the promise of a 2/3rds pension after 30 years, they agreed to conditions of service that meant the employer had a lot of control over their personal life. Yes... But it appears that the agreed conditions no longer apply.... So why should the employer maintain that level of control?? The feeling of betrayal within the police is I imagine pretty strong, so instead of moaning about bad reps, and being crapped on, why not put up a bit of a fight....
|
|
|
ExFiF
18,363 posts
120 months
|
10 Pence Short said: God forbid you have to work until 60 to get a cast iron pension. How terribly awful.
I realise that might sound glib, but the pay and conditions (including pension) for the Police are pretty good compared to the majority of those of the private sector, particularly when you consider the relatively low academic requirements to join. Yes, the job has its difficulties and risks, but the conditions offered go towards making up that risk.
There is always the alternative of moving to the private sector if you don't like the conditions offered by the Government. 10PS, coppers in Sweden have a retirement age of 65. Someone who shall be nameless was 60 last year and the prospect of scurrying around well into 60s is / was so utterly enthralling that folks don't want it. Equally the public don't want to call for assistance and get a near OAP rolling up. Agree, you are being glib. Re OP, need to read and study that letter more, it only tells part of the picture as to how they will deal with accrued benefits. New accruals are on top of that, looks complicated way of doing things.
|
|
|
GC8
9,488 posts
59 months
|
vonhosen said: GC8 said: Back on topic: why do police pensions need reviewing?
I thought that retired officers pensions were paid for by the contributions of serving officers, making the arrangement very different form conventional public sector pensions? When it started there would have been a surplus from income over outgoings. The government never invested the income, they'll have just spent it elsewhere. Over time the income did just go straight to outcome for paying those who'd retired, but then the income started to fall short of the outcomes & the government (who'd never invested the income) had to find the shortfall. The shortfall is getting bigger & bigger as people live longer. I see - so Im out of date then? I didnt realise that there was a shortfall.
|
|
|
vonhosen
27,104 posts
86 months
|
Lunablack said: vonhosen said: Because in lieu of the promise of a 2/3rds pension after 30 years, they agreed to conditions of service that meant the employer had a lot of control over their personal life. Yes... But it appears that the agreed conditions no longer apply.... So why should the employer maintain that level of control?? Because they can get away with it, how can the Police officers reduce that level of control once the government has it ?
|
|
|
Dibble
7,609 posts
109 months
|
GC8 said: Back on topic: why do police pensions need reviewing?
I thought that retired officers pensions were paid for by the contributions of serving officers, making the arrangement very different form conventional public sector pensions? Retiring officers are living longer now, so the pension pot is getting smaller. An increasing part of Police budgets is used to pay pensions.
|
|
|
Lunablack
2,839 posts
31 months
|
vonhosen said: Because they can get away with it, how can the Police officers reduce that level of control once the government has it ? Well moaning about terms and conditions on PH isn't going to change anything is it...? I'm sure that with a bit of imagination, and organisation, a message could be sent.......
|
|
|
Milky Joe
3,851 posts
73 months
|
Lunablack said: Well moaning about terms and conditions on PH isn't going to change anything is it...?
I'm sure that with a bit of imagination, and organisation, a message could be sent....... I'm heading up to the big smoke tomorrow for the May 10 march.
|
|
|
sebdangerfield
646 posts
40 months
|
Let's have a march or something? Could do it tomorrow? I'm free if anyone else is?
|
|
|
Lunablack
2,839 posts
31 months
|
Milky Joe said: I'm heading up to the big smoke tomorrow for the May 10 march. See I have my finger on the pulse  ..... Well I hope it goes well, a message gets sent, and you get well supported...
|
|
|
Milky Joe
3,851 posts
73 months
|
|
|
kaf
323 posts
16 months
|
Dibble said: so the pension pot is getting smaller. An increasing part of Police budgets is used to pay pensions. There is no 'pension pot' because successive governments since 1960 have ducked the issue and failed to set aside money, instead lumbering the current tax payer with the bill. Any private company trying to run a pension scheme this way would have failed it's annual audit.
|
|
