Final salary pension schemes should end
Discussion
el stovey said:
Legend83 said:
el stovey said:
sidicks said:
Quinny said:
I get a pension....one that I contributed to, agreed to and earned..... For those that don't like it TOUGH s
t
FFS - why are there so many retards on this thread?!tWe are talking about future accrual not existing benefits!!
It's not difficult to understand that an attack on public sector pensions does not mean knocking on retired public sector worker's doors and demanding they pay some their entitlement back!
It means ensuring that any future accrued benefits of existing pension members AND the allowance of new entrants are managed in a way that makes it more affordable to the State.
Not rocket-science.
So stop with the "it's not fair to take away benefits that people have contractually earnt" waffle.
Surely the lion share of these pension costs are being payed to retirees & nobody is arguing against closing schemes to new entrants.
So this discussion is all about continuing to award the same or close to the same pension to current members. Why is it waffle? Do you think it's fair that these people shouldn't get to retire on a FS pension? If not why not?
My point is that current members will get to retire on a FS pension - just not for every working year of their lives, but rather as a proportion.
My company operates a non-contributory FS scheme for which I am most grateful. But if the company decided this was no longer sustainable and switched me to a DC scheme BUT promised that my previous FS contributions would be set aside and treated as an FS scheme in retirement, then I would have to accept that.
Much like I think public sector workers need to accept this as their 'employer' can no longer afford this level of benefit going forward.
Dupont666 said:
I find it funny that some of the people on this thread are saying its MY money why should I give it up I worked for it and thats the contract that I signed.
Are the same ones whining on the Bankers Bonus thread saying they should not get their money owed to them due to contracts and they should have a super tax on their bonuses.
Funny people...
Hows about a new pension tax just for final salary pensions so that we can recoup 50% back into the pot, as straight tax to be used for the nation or used to reduce the debt? This would be easy to do after all the super tax was simple to push through and thus reducing the pensions scheme and the liability we have?
^^^^Are the same ones whining on the Bankers Bonus thread saying they should not get their money owed to them due to contracts and they should have a super tax on their bonuses.
Funny people...
Hows about a new pension tax just for final salary pensions so that we can recoup 50% back into the pot, as straight tax to be used for the nation or used to reduce the debt? This would be easy to do after all the super tax was simple to push through and thus reducing the pensions scheme and the liability we have?
This. Exactly this.
Either the public sector embrace reform of their pensions and accept much lower payouts, or we're going to have no choice but to super tax final salary public sector pensions. I'd suggest that up to £10,000 be taxed at normal marginal rates, £10,001 to £20,000 be taxed at 50%, and anything over £20,000 be taxed at 100% as nobody needs more money than that from the state.
A super tax would obviously have the advantage of capturing payments from those already retired rather than only those yet to retire.
Quinny said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
Quinny said:
sidicks said:
Quinny said:
That's right, I never contributed a penny from my own salary
What is you contribution rate?If your unions hadn't beeen so greedy this last 13 years of profligate spending could have been curtailed and you could have kept your pensions, but you'd still be earning 20% less than equivalent private sector jobs, not 10% more.
When I joined my employment, back in 1984 I earned the vast sum of £85.00...PW
So that's what I should have been earning in 2008 when I left...??
Are the majority of these public sector FS schemes really calculated as Length of service/80? That's really not much. Surely the vast majority of public sector pensions aren't that generous at all, hardly gold plated anyway.
I'm sure senior figures will get more but the majority of these pensions don't seem to give a very big pension.
I'm sure senior figures will get more but the majority of these pensions don't seem to give a very big pension.
el stovey said:
Are the majority of these public sector FS schemes really calculated as Length of service/80? That's really not much. Surely the vast majority of public sector pensions aren't that generous at all, hardly gold plated anyway.
The BBC implied that the majority were 1/60ths schemes rather than 1/80ths, include index-linking and are based on salary at retirement, so are fairly generous.Obviously it varies by age but the actual cost of these schemes is in the region of 30-40% p.a.
Average public sector employee contributions are 10% (police / fireman), 0% (military), 6.4% (teachers), 7% (NHS), 3% Civil service, 6.5% (local government).
Let these people keep their final salary pensions but make them pay an additional 20-25% of salary towards the cost !!!!
el stovey said:
I'm sure senior figures will get more but the majority of these pensions don't seem to give a very big pension.
Clearly contributions are a % of salary, so if salaries are low then the £ amount of the pension will also be low. Compared to the amount of employee contributions the pensions are hugely valuable.sidicks
Frankeh said:
Very unfair imo.
I don't work for the government and I don't have a FS pension or anything like that, but I can see how some people probably took HIGHER paying jobs in the public sector so that they could be secure for their retirement.
Corrected you thereI don't work for the government and I don't have a FS pension or anything like that, but I can see how some people probably took HIGHER paying jobs in the public sector so that they could be secure for their retirement.
After 13 years of Labour the notion of an underpaid public sector is a myth.
just a question and I know it's a drop in the ocean, but is there any proposal to MP's pensions in all this?
Let's face it if there isn't then there should be a riot.
Regardless of what is proposed for pub sector, even private sector has been marmalised by the actions of Brown et al, yet at the same time MPs fixed themselves up very nicely.
As an aside because it struck me that it's not been made clear, but aiui if a FS scheme is closed to existing members then the accruals already earned will be paid at time of future retirement at x/60ths (say) of the salary at the time the scheme was closed, not salary at the time of retirement. This puts someone in the same position as a deferred member e.g. someone who left for another job.
Also, whilst it is hoped that if any FS schemes are closed that accrued benfits will be preserved, however that doesn't have to be the case. In the small print there will be the option to close the scheme and convert it to something else. And there will be more or less nothing that members can do about it.
Let's face it if there isn't then there should be a riot.
Regardless of what is proposed for pub sector, even private sector has been marmalised by the actions of Brown et al, yet at the same time MPs fixed themselves up very nicely.
As an aside because it struck me that it's not been made clear, but aiui if a FS scheme is closed to existing members then the accruals already earned will be paid at time of future retirement at x/60ths (say) of the salary at the time the scheme was closed, not salary at the time of retirement. This puts someone in the same position as a deferred member e.g. someone who left for another job.
Also, whilst it is hoped that if any FS schemes are closed that accrued benfits will be preserved, however that doesn't have to be the case. In the small print there will be the option to close the scheme and convert it to something else. And there will be more or less nothing that members can do about it.
F i F said:
As an aside because it struck me that it's not been made clear, but aiui if a FS scheme is closed to existing members then the accruals already earned will be paid at time of future retirement at x/60ths (say) of the salary at the time the scheme was closed, not salary at the time of retirement. This puts someone in the same position as a deferred member e.g. someone who left for another job.
I believe that by legislation, deferred members have benefits indexed to CPI potentially with certain maxima/minima (previously RPI), rather than simply being being fixed relative to the salary at exit from the scheme. Historically salary inflation was circa 2% higher than rpi, resulting in lower benefits than if they had stayed in the scheme but not accrued any new benefits.F i F said:
Also, whilst it is hoped that if any FS schemes are closed that accrued benfits will be preserved, however that doesn't have to be the case. In the small print there will be the option to close the scheme and convert it to something else. And there will be more or less nothing that members can do about it.
I'll take your word for this, however I can't see the govenment going down this route and I could understand the justified complaints from the public sector if they tried to amend benefits accrued to date.Sidicks
Edited by sidicks on Friday 8th October 11:33
F i F said:
just a question and I know it's a drop in the ocean, but is there any proposal to MP's pensions in all this?
Let's face it if there isn't then there should be a riot.
Regardless of what is proposed for pub sector, even private sector has been marmalised by the actions of Brown et al, yet at the same time MPs fixed themselves up very nicely.
As an aside because it struck me that it's not been made clear, but aiui if a FS scheme is closed to existing members then the accruals already earned will be paid at time of future retirement at x/60ths (say) of the salary at the time the scheme was closed, not salary at the time of retirement. This puts someone in the same position as a deferred member e.g. someone who left for another job.
Also, whilst it is hoped that if any FS schemes are closed that accrued benfits will be preserved, however that doesn't have to be the case. In the small print there will be the option to close the scheme and convert it to something else. And there will be more or less nothing that members can do about it.
I believe that the MP's pension pot is the only one that is up to date and fully funded with no pension black hole like the rest of the public sector...Let's face it if there isn't then there should be a riot.
Regardless of what is proposed for pub sector, even private sector has been marmalised by the actions of Brown et al, yet at the same time MPs fixed themselves up very nicely.
As an aside because it struck me that it's not been made clear, but aiui if a FS scheme is closed to existing members then the accruals already earned will be paid at time of future retirement at x/60ths (say) of the salary at the time the scheme was closed, not salary at the time of retirement. This puts someone in the same position as a deferred member e.g. someone who left for another job.
Also, whilst it is hoped that if any FS schemes are closed that accrued benfits will be preserved, however that doesn't have to be the case. In the small print there will be the option to close the scheme and convert it to something else. And there will be more or less nothing that members can do about it.
Funny that eh?
sidicks said:
F i F said:
As an aside because it struck me that it's not been made clear, but aiui if a FS scheme is closed to existing members then the accruals already earned will be paid at time of future retirement at x/60ths (say) of the salary at the time the scheme was closed, not salary at the time of retirement. This puts someone in the same position as a deferred member e.g. someone who left for another job.
I believe that by legislation, deferred members have benefits indexed to CPI potentially with certain maxima/minima (previously RPI), rather than simply being being fixed relative to the salary at exit from the scheme. Historically salary inflation was circa 2% higher than rpi, resulting in lower benefits than if they had stayed in the scheme but not accrued any new benefits.I mentioned this as it seemed from various posts that people might think that if they had 25/60th if FS scheme and something in a DC scheme that they might be thinking that the 25/60ths is of their final pensionable salary and not the pensiionable salary at the time the FS scheme was closed to future accruals.
sidicks said:
F i F said:
Also, whilst it is hoped that if any FS schemes are closed that accrued benfits will be preserved, however that doesn't have to be the case. In the small print there will be the option to close the scheme and convert it to something else. And there will be more or less nothing that members can do about it.
I'll take your word for this, however I can't see the govenment going down this route and I could understand the justified complaints from the public sector if they tried to amend benefits accrued to date.Sidicks
What's the betting that at the end of this the people with the best pensions in all UK in terms of what each £ of contribution pays back will be those in Westminster.
The pension issue is the one thing I hold most ill will against Labour
el stovey said:
Are the majority of these public sector FS schemes really calculated as Length of service/80? That's really not much. Surely the vast majority of public sector pensions aren't that generous at all, hardly gold plated anyway.
I'm sure senior figures will get more but the majority of these pensions don't seem to give a very big pension.
The teacher's scheme and the NHS scheme are both 1/80s IIRCI'm sure senior figures will get more but the majority of these pensions don't seem to give a very big pension.
Edited by Lucas CAV on Friday 8th October 13:18
Quinny said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
Quinny said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
Quinny said:
sidicks said:
Quinny said:
That's right, I never contributed a penny from my own salary
What is you contribution rate?If your unions hadn't beeen so greedy this last 13 years of profligate spending could have been curtailed and you could have kept your pensions, but you'd still be earning 20% less than equivalent private sector jobs, not 10% more.
When I joined my employment, back in 1984 I earned the vast sum of £85.00...PW
So that's what I should have been earning in 2008 when I left...??
Every time I and everyone else where I worked got a promotion, payrise or whatever, their contract was amended..to reflect the change..
There were over 6000 employees, and a massive HR department......All on an FS pension scheme
As an example, even when I gave up my company car, my contract was changed, when I worked at a different site for 6 months my contract was amended
Lucas CAV said:
el stovey said:
Are the majority of these public sector FS schemes really calculated as Length of service/80? That's really not much. Surely the vast majority of public sector pensions aren't that generous at all, hardly gold plated anyway.
I'm sure senior figures will get more but the majority of these pensions don't seem to give a very big pension.
The teacher's scheme and the NHS scheme are both 1/80s IIRCI'm sure senior figures will get more but the majority of these pensions don't seem to give a very big pension.
Edited by Lucas CAV on Friday 8th October 13:18
medical students are getting hit with more debt due to increased fees, they're now coming out 30-60k in debt, if the universities get to charge what they like they may be adding another 25k to that
i would be very happy for the nhs pension to be changed, once the others have been modified to match it first
7thCircleAcolyte said:
Quinny said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
Quinny said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
Quinny said:
sidicks said:
Quinny said:
That's right, I never contributed a penny from my own salary
What is you contribution rate?If your unions hadn't beeen so greedy this last 13 years of profligate spending could have been curtailed and you could have kept your pensions, but you'd still be earning 20% less than equivalent private sector jobs, not 10% more.
When I joined my employment, back in 1984 I earned the vast sum of £85.00...PW
So that's what I should have been earning in 2008 when I left...??
Every time I and everyone else where I worked got a promotion, payrise or whatever, their contract was amended..to reflect the change..
There were over 6000 employees, and a massive HR department......All on an FS pension scheme
As an example, even when I gave up my company car, my contract was changed, when I worked at a different site for 6 months my contract was amended
lenny007 said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
Quinny said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
Quinny said:
7thCircleAcolyte said:
Quinny said:
sidicks said:
Quinny said:
That's right, I never contributed a penny from my own salary
What is you contribution rate?If your unions hadn't beeen so greedy this last 13 years of profligate spending could have been curtailed and you could have kept your pensions, but you'd still be earning 20% less than equivalent private sector jobs, not 10% more.
When I joined my employment, back in 1984 I earned the vast sum of £85.00...PW
So that's what I should have been earning in 2008 when I left...??
Every time I and everyone else where I worked got a promotion, payrise or whatever, their contract was amended..to reflect the change..
There were over 6000 employees, and a massive HR department......All on an FS pension scheme
As an example, even when I gave up my company car, my contract was changed, when I worked at a different site for 6 months my contract was amended
Its all I work hard and should get a pay rise, blah, blah, blah... when I ask them where they think the money is going to come from for their pay rise I get a simple answer which sums them up entirely...
'Not my problem, someone elses problem, but I want my pay rise I deserve it!!'
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff