More years drawing a pension than contributing?

More years drawing a pension than contributing?

Author
Discussion

London424

12,826 posts

174 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
sidicks said:
Derek Smith said:
I don't take to being called a liar. I view these threads as a sort of argument in a pub. If you would say that to my face in a pub then you are not the sort of person I'd be in a pub with.
Just done a quick search on previous threads - you were claiming 3-5 years, not 3.5 years. Apologies.

My point stands!!
I do enjoy these monthly pension threads smile


sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
London424 said:
I do enjoy these monthly pension threads smile
Me too!

Sway

26,070 posts

193 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
I'm one of those for whom a pension scheme that is any kind of value for money is a complete pipedream...

Mid thirties, in a career that is reasonably well paid but certainly not lavishly so, of a role that by default is designed to be temporary within an organisation. So I've ended up with compulsory contributions to a number of schemes, which combined add up to the square root of feck all. There simply was and is zero point in adding more, as the upper threshold means that by the time I'm looking to retire I've sacrificed quality of life for many years in return for an income that will make bugger all difference.

I'm fine with that, I have other plans to ensure I can fund a lifestyle I'll be happy with in my dotage, but it's really rich to bang on about the promises made in lieu of wages, then be in receipt of a pension that it is impossible to achieve by taking the contributions paid and applying any form of legal investment strategy, whilst talking about percentages rather than absolutes. One where the difference between contribution and income is significantly higher than the differences in wages.

I'd gladly give 30% of my gross to achieve a decent guaranteed annual income in my later years, including the sacrifices I'd have to make in order to do so. Unfortunately, that is absolutely impossible using any type of pension scheme available.

It won't be too many more decades when this will blow up big time. In an age of equality of opportunity, the lack of this principle when applied to later years funding is a fking disgrace.

clockworks

5,292 posts

144 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
I retired at 52, coming up for 7 years ago. I have paid into 2 defined benefit schemes for a total of 27 years. I always paid in the maximum amount allowed that my employer would match (no AVCs or other unmatched top-ups), 6% on one scheme, 9% on the other, IIRC.
We could only contribute based on basic salary, not on overtime, shift premium or on call allowances. Both were private sector IT jobs, paying pretty much the national average wage as a basic salary.

If my back of an envelope calculations are correct, I've already had back more than I contributed, in straight cash terms. In a couple of years I'll be in the black taking account of inflation, and before 65 I'll be better off than if I'd put the money into a savings account.

Maybe it's not as good as a public sector pension, but it's a lot better than the DC schemes that both employers are now offering.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
clockworks said:
I retired at 52, coming up for 7 years ago. I have paid into 2 defined benefit schemes for a total of 27 years. I always paid in the maximum amount allowed that my employer would match (no AVCs or other unmatched top-ups), 6% on one scheme, 9% on the other, IIRC.
Aren't you getting confused between DB and DC?

Why would you pay extra on a DB scheme?
Why would the employer 'match' contributions in a DB scheme?

clockworks said:
We could only contribute based on basic salary, not on overtime, shift premium or on call allowances. Both were private sector IT jobs, paying pretty much the national average wage as a basic salary.

If my back of an envelope calculations are correct, I've already had back more than I contributed, in straight cash terms. In a couple of years I'll be in the black taking account of inflation, and before 65 I'll be better off than if I'd put the money into a savings account.
If you're ignoring investment income, that's hardly surprising, it is?

clockworks said:
Maybe it's not as good as a public sector pension, but it's a lot better than the DC schemes that both employers are now offering.
Yes.

anonymous-user

53 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
... the money taken from pay was greater than the cost of pensions....
Let's be clear. Over the course of a year the money taken from the pay of working officers was greater than the cost of paying the pensions of retired officers. So what? There were multiples more working than retired. The money taken from an average officers pay has only ever contributed a fraction of the value of his pension. To repeat, yet again, that the scheme ever made a profit betrays a spectacular ignorance of the most basic principles of finance, or even any common sense; you are living in la la land. That said good luck to you, I hope you all enjoy long and healthy retirements; just don't tell us your contributions paid for it, they didnt even come close.

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 25th August 20:29

Sway

26,070 posts

193 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Indeed. If that model continued to today, what percentage would current serving officers have to pay in order to fund the current pensions of those retired?

Bet it's greater than 20%.

ED209

5,740 posts

243 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
My pension has been absolutely destroyed by the government.

I will now work an extra ten years to pay in a lot more and loose hundreds of thousands of pounds on the pension i signed up to.

I have been massively shafted but with no industrial rights there is no option but to suck it up.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
ED209 said:
My pension has been absolutely destroyed by the government.

I will now work an extra ten years to pay in a lot more and loose hundreds of thousands of pounds on the pension i signed up to.

I have been massively shafted but with no industrial rights there is no option but to suck it up.
What pension?

Jockman

17,912 posts

159 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
ED209 said:
My pension has been absolutely destroyed by the government.
Gordon Brown left the Govt over 6 years ago.

ED209

5,740 posts

243 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Elroy Blue said:
The Police are starting to recruit again. Anybody who wants a 'gold plated' pension are more than welcome to apply.

Edited by Elroy Blue on Thursday 25th August 19:54
I hope this is a joke, the police pension is far, far from gold plated.

As someone who joined at 19 back in 97 I have been absolutely shafted with pension reform. I under stand the need for reform and wouldn't have minded working an extra couple of years over the 30 i signed up for to get the pension i was promised. Instead i will work an extra 10 years and 2 weeks, Pay in 13.4% of my salary for that time, not claim the pension i was promised for that time all to get a pension that is far, far worse than the one i was promised and was told was protected in law.

ED209

5,740 posts

243 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Jockman said:
ED209 said:
My pension has been absolutely destroyed by the government.
Gordon Brown left the Govt over 6 years ago.
Gordon Brown had nothing to do with my pension being destroyed, Tory ideology did though.

Sharted

2,615 posts

142 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Can't we all cash in the pensions now and spunk the cash on living the high life for a short time?

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
ED209 said:
I hope this is a joke, the police pension is far, far from gold plated.

As someone who joined at 19 back in 97 I have been absolutely shafted with pension reform. I under stand the need for reform and wouldn't have minded working an extra couple of years over the 30 i signed up for to get the pension i was promised. Instead i will work an extra 10 years and 2 weeks, Pay in 13.4% of my salary for that time, not claim the pension i was promised for that time all to get a pension that is far, far worse than the one i was promised and was told was protected in law.
You pay in 13.4% the taxpayer pays in 20-30%+ - seems pretty gold-plated to me. What's your definition?

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
ED209 said:
Gordon Brown had nothing to do with my pension being destroyed, Tory ideology did though.
Please explain...

Jockman

17,912 posts

159 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
ED209 said:
Jockman said:
ED209 said:
My pension has been absolutely destroyed by the government.
Gordon Brown left the Govt over 6 years ago.
Gordon Brown had nothing to do with my pension being destroyed, Tory ideology did though.
Did tax credits on Dividends not apply to you?

Elroy Blue

8,686 posts

191 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
ED209 said:
I hope this is a joke, the police pension is far, far from gold plated.

As someone who joined at 19 back in 97 I have been absolutely shafted with pension reform. I under stand the need for reform and wouldn't have minded working an extra couple of years over the 30 i signed up for to get the pension i was promised. Instead i will work an extra 10 years and 2 weeks, Pay in 13.4% of my salary for that time, not claim the pension i was promised for that time all to get a pension that is far, far worse than the one i was promised and was told was protected in law.
I, like you, have had my pension cut massively. My contributions are 14.2%. When I left the Forces, I could have earnt far more with the skills I had. I chose to earn far less, with a view to a 30yr career. The Tories decided our lack of ANY industrial rights made us an easy target.

My point is that all those that like to condemn the pension now have the choice to apply to the Police. They too can now have all the benefits of that pension. Of course, they'll have to do the job till they're 60 (until it's raised again) and will be able to enjoy rolling around on the floor with pissed up twenty year olds. Easy money. Go for it.

ED209

5,740 posts

243 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
sidicks said:
ED209 said:
I hope this is a joke, the police pension is far, far from gold plated.

As someone who joined at 19 back in 97 I have been absolutely shafted with pension reform. I under stand the need for reform and wouldn't have minded working an extra couple of years over the 30 i signed up for to get the pension i was promised. Instead i will work an extra 10 years and 2 weeks, Pay in 13.4% of my salary for that time, not claim the pension i was promised for that time all to get a pension that is far, far worse than the one i was promised and was told was protected in law.
You pay in 13.4% the taxpayer pays in 20-30%+ - seems pretty gold-plated to me. What's your definition?
Its not gold plated in that for a lot of people the goalposts have been massive moved whilst they were more than halfway through their service. Lots of people have lost an absolute fortune and had plans destroyed.

Yes its a good pension but it is for a reason, the salary isn't that great, you have no industrial rights and those on the frontline face a lot of danger and unsociable shifts, its a form of deferred payment for sone of the shyte you have to put up with.

People on the outside moan about it being gold plated but if it was that great then surely those same people would have joined the police?

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
ED209 said:
Its not gold plated in that for a lot of people the goalposts have been massive moved whilst they were more than halfway through their service. Lots of people have lost an absolute fortune and had plans destroyed.

Yes its a good pension but it is for a reason, the salary isn't that great, you have no industrial rights and those on the frontline face a lot of danger and unsociable shifts, its a form of deferred payment for sone of the shyte you have to put up with.

People on the outside moan about it being gold plated but if it was that great then surely those same people would have joined the police?
On the basis of contributions in compared to benefits out, there can be no denial that it's gold-plated by any normal use of the term.

Whether it's deserved or not is an entirely different question.

Is the 'Tory ideology' you refer to, addressing unsustainable public spending and recognising basic economics and demographics?

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Elroy Blue said:
I, like you, have had my pension cut massively. My contributions are 14.2%. When I left the Forces, I could have earnt far more with the skills I had. I chose to earn far less, with a view to a 30yr career. The Tories decided our lack of ANY industrial rights made us an easy target.

My point is that all those that like to condemn the pension now have the choice to apply to the Police. They too can now have all the benefits of that pension. Of course, they'll have to do the job till they're 60 (until it's raised again) and will be able to enjoy rolling around on the floor with pissed up twenty year olds. Easy money. Go for it.
As opposed to the private sector who have to work until 67, 68...?

As above, the debate is not whether the police deserve such a pension - that's highly subjective - it's simply an acknowledgement of how amazing the terms are. Some people don't seem to recognise that.