Dear University lecturers - get back to work
Discussion
travel is dangerous said:
Do you think that all that lecturers do is teach? I actually only do 10 hrs of lectures a year.
what I spend most of my time doing is discovering/creating new knowledge, and training people to do the same. I'm not really interested in whether its of 'value' to society - all new knowledge about the universe is inherently valuable, if some of it turns out to commercially valuable or useful or improves quality of life, then great, but... shrug.
So precisely how many angels can be accommodated on the end of a pin?what I spend most of my time doing is discovering/creating new knowledge, and training people to do the same. I'm not really interested in whether its of 'value' to society - all new knowledge about the universe is inherently valuable, if some of it turns out to commercially valuable or useful or improves quality of life, then great, but... shrug.
As it should be, because universities collectively have precipitated this crisis by failing to value their staff properly and also failing to convince them of the need to lose massive chunks of their pension provision.Tthe proposed changes have been poorly handed. It was only 2-3 years ago that we were told the changes that were made to the scheme were to ensure its long term future. Yet here we are, back again, being told it needs to be changed to make it sustainable for the long term... UUK and the VCs have bungled this, badly.
travel is dangerous said:
As it should be, because universities collectively have precipitated this crisis by failing to value their staff properly and also failing to convince them of the need to lose massive chunks of their pension provision.
How can you lose something you haven't yet earned?travel is dangerous said:
The proposed changes have been poorly handed. It was only 2-3 years ago that we were told the changes that were made to the scheme were to ensure its long term future. Yet here we are, back again, being told it needs to be changed to make it sustainable for the long term... UUK and the VCs have bungled this, badly.
It was poorly handles - proper changes should have been made 10-20 years ago like the private sector.You're still struggling to explain how these pensions are 'not as expensive as claimed' but will result in a much lower pension for you if you invest the same contributions at 5% p.a...
Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 13th March 20:33
Joey Ramone said:
johnfm said:
Unless you do decent research, your role will be redundant in a couple of decades.
A) My research is top rated according to the REFB) Don't worry about my future. In a couple of decades I'll be retired. Whereas I suspect you'll be dead.
(2) I'll be retiring a bit earlier than you. If your research mentioned in (A) has the same quality as your unfounded suspicion in (B) you may need the 19.3% earlier than you plan.
Anyway, shouldn't keep you - you've got top rated research to do apparently.
johnfm said:
(1) Not remotely interested in your future. I made reference to the role of university lecturers which, with the advent and improvement of MOOCs and the systems that support them will change the way further education is taught.
(2) I'll be retiring a bit earlier than you. If your research mentioned in (A) has the same quality as your unfounded suspicion in (B) you may need the 19.3% earlier than you plan.
Anyway, shouldn't keep you - you've got top rated research to do apparently.
Nah, it's sunny. Might just skive off and go cycling. Still get paid though, obviously. (2) I'll be retiring a bit earlier than you. If your research mentioned in (A) has the same quality as your unfounded suspicion in (B) you may need the 19.3% earlier than you plan.
Anyway, shouldn't keep you - you've got top rated research to do apparently.
And it wasn't research. It was a presumption, based upon this deeply unedifying interaction with what appears to be a grumpy old
on the internet.Edited by Joey Ramone on Tuesday 20th March 09:29
Edited by Joey Ramone on Tuesday 20th March 10:40
V8LM said:
How do you know? Unless your return was 100% 4* in all cases, or you were told by someone on the panel?
My department only selected those for submission who would reach the dizzy heights of 3* or 4* submissions across the board. Seeing as my university came 7th out of 154 institutions, that I was one of a very small number put straight through the sift by the head of school, and that the REF counts 3/4* ratings as the only ones meriting HEFCE funding, and thus top rated, it's a pretty safe to draw the conclusion that my research is very strong. Add to that another strong REF submission this time round, as well as British Academy funding and a book contract with CUP, and it's looking pretty rosy.Edited by Joey Ramone on Tuesday 20th March 10:41
Has anyone mentioned the university pension scheme USS is not a public pension ? It is a private pension paid for out of contributions from universities and their workers.
This fact alone might cause Sidicks and Co some tumescence problems. Sorry tax payers are not paying for my pension.
(My employer, a university, does take some money from the state but no where near 100% of income. We are more contractors supplying a service into the state than public sector. I have annual income targets which are multiples of my salary.)
Also that the pension scheme is not in fact likely to be in deficit ? The employers projections were truly the worst case possible - ie 100% of all UK universities close.
Whilst this prospect might reignite Sidicks's vascular efforts, it is vastly unlikely.
The union's has countered with some equally unlikely scenarios in which the pension scheme is £8bn in the black.
N one without an accurate crystal ball really knows what will happen, but it is not likely there will be a massive deficit. This is all about the employers wishing to reduce their contributions.
In the end this is a negotiation about our remuneration package. Someone above proudly stated they were a lawyer and had no difficulties in negotiating salary with their employer. Congrats. Most people rely on a union to do this since they have feck all power as individuals. Nothing wrong with that.
All developed and developing countries put money into their university systems. Most more than the UK. Why ?
Is it because they are all run by left-wing Venezula loving nutters as Sidicks might believe ? Not really.
Most countries realise there is massive value in money spent on education, and although it is difficult to measure directly, there really is a great return on investment from funding universities.
For credibility reasons I will disclose that I work in a UK university, and work directly with industry in research. I have invented things and have patents, and currently two companies are trialling new bits of design tool code which I have written.
I'm doing my bit for UK Plc.
What is weird to me is why so many people (OK this is NP&E on PH) have such extreme views on things like this issue.
Why does Sidicks, and perhaps others too, have such wildly off course views about stuff ?
Is this a product of the Daily Mail agenda, or have people always been so crazy ?
This fact alone might cause Sidicks and Co some tumescence problems. Sorry tax payers are not paying for my pension.
(My employer, a university, does take some money from the state but no where near 100% of income. We are more contractors supplying a service into the state than public sector. I have annual income targets which are multiples of my salary.)
Also that the pension scheme is not in fact likely to be in deficit ? The employers projections were truly the worst case possible - ie 100% of all UK universities close.
Whilst this prospect might reignite Sidicks's vascular efforts, it is vastly unlikely.
The union's has countered with some equally unlikely scenarios in which the pension scheme is £8bn in the black.
N one without an accurate crystal ball really knows what will happen, but it is not likely there will be a massive deficit. This is all about the employers wishing to reduce their contributions.
In the end this is a negotiation about our remuneration package. Someone above proudly stated they were a lawyer and had no difficulties in negotiating salary with their employer. Congrats. Most people rely on a union to do this since they have feck all power as individuals. Nothing wrong with that.
All developed and developing countries put money into their university systems. Most more than the UK. Why ?
Is it because they are all run by left-wing Venezula loving nutters as Sidicks might believe ? Not really.
Most countries realise there is massive value in money spent on education, and although it is difficult to measure directly, there really is a great return on investment from funding universities.
For credibility reasons I will disclose that I work in a UK university, and work directly with industry in research. I have invented things and have patents, and currently two companies are trialling new bits of design tool code which I have written.
I'm doing my bit for UK Plc.
What is weird to me is why so many people (OK this is NP&E on PH) have such extreme views on things like this issue.
Why does Sidicks, and perhaps others too, have such wildly off course views about stuff ?
Is this a product of the Daily Mail agenda, or have people always been so crazy ?
911newbie said:
Why does Sidicks, and perhaps others too, have such wildly off course views about stuff ?
Is this a product of the Daily Mail agenda, or have people always been so crazy ?
Maybe the other question should be "Why do lecturers have such a differing view, I confess to not being well read on this but even if you read few online sources its easy to gain a better understanding of the issue than many of those on this thread" Of course when the facts dont suit someones agenda they are easy to ignore Is this a product of the Daily Mail agenda, or have people always been so crazy ?
When you read the sources like The Times Education you get painted a very different picture , but then you would just like if you only read the Daily Mail
911newbie said:
Has anyone mentioned the university pension scheme USS is not a public pension ? It is a private pension paid for out of contributions from universities and their workers.
This fact alone might cause Sidicks and Co some tumescence problems. Sorry tax payers are not paying for my pension.
(My employer, a university, does take some money from the state but no where near 100% of income. We are more contractors supplying a service into the state than public sector. I have annual income targets which are multiples of my salary.)
Also that the pension scheme is not in fact likely to be in deficit ? The employers projections were truly the worst case possible - ie 100% of all UK universities close.
Whilst this prospect might reignite Sidicks's vascular efforts, it is vastly unlikely.
The union's has countered with some equally unlikely scenarios in which the pension scheme is £8bn in the black.
N one without an accurate crystal ball really knows what will happen, but it is not likely there will be a massive deficit. This is all about the employers wishing to reduce their contributions.
In the end this is a negotiation about our remuneration package. Someone above proudly stated they were a lawyer and had no difficulties in negotiating salary with their employer. Congrats. Most people rely on a union to do this since they have feck all power as individuals. Nothing wrong with that.
All developed and developing countries put money into their university systems. Most more than the UK. Why ?
Is it because they are all run by left-wing Venezula loving nutters as Sidicks might believe ? Not really.
Most countries realise there is massive value in money spent on education, and although it is difficult to measure directly, there really is a great return on investment from funding universities.
For credibility reasons I will disclose that I work in a UK university, and work directly with industry in research. I have invented things and have patents, and currently two companies are trialling new bits of design tool code which I have written.
I'm doing my bit for UK Plc.
What is weird to me is why so many people (OK this is NP&E on PH) have such extreme views on things like this issue.
Why does Sidicks, and perhaps others too, have such wildly off course views about stuff ?
Is this a product of the Daily Mail agenda, or have people always been so crazy ?
You are entirely correct that this is a funded scheme, as most posters, including Sidicks, who apparently have "wildly off course" views recognize.This fact alone might cause Sidicks and Co some tumescence problems. Sorry tax payers are not paying for my pension.
(My employer, a university, does take some money from the state but no where near 100% of income. We are more contractors supplying a service into the state than public sector. I have annual income targets which are multiples of my salary.)
Also that the pension scheme is not in fact likely to be in deficit ? The employers projections were truly the worst case possible - ie 100% of all UK universities close.
Whilst this prospect might reignite Sidicks's vascular efforts, it is vastly unlikely.
The union's has countered with some equally unlikely scenarios in which the pension scheme is £8bn in the black.
N one without an accurate crystal ball really knows what will happen, but it is not likely there will be a massive deficit. This is all about the employers wishing to reduce their contributions.
In the end this is a negotiation about our remuneration package. Someone above proudly stated they were a lawyer and had no difficulties in negotiating salary with their employer. Congrats. Most people rely on a union to do this since they have feck all power as individuals. Nothing wrong with that.
All developed and developing countries put money into their university systems. Most more than the UK. Why ?
Is it because they are all run by left-wing Venezula loving nutters as Sidicks might believe ? Not really.
Most countries realise there is massive value in money spent on education, and although it is difficult to measure directly, there really is a great return on investment from funding universities.
For credibility reasons I will disclose that I work in a UK university, and work directly with industry in research. I have invented things and have patents, and currently two companies are trialling new bits of design tool code which I have written.
I'm doing my bit for UK Plc.
What is weird to me is why so many people (OK this is NP&E on PH) have such extreme views on things like this issue.
Why does Sidicks, and perhaps others too, have such wildly off course views about stuff ?
Is this a product of the Daily Mail agenda, or have people always been so crazy ?
The Universities don't, as far as I am aware, have much discretion in how the pension scheme deficit is valued. Accounting standards require this to be an expert valuation under determined rules.
You can question the standards themselves if you like, but this is not down to the universities, or the daily mail.
911newbie said:
Has anyone mentioned the university pension scheme USS is not a public pension ? It is a private pension paid for out of contributions from universities and their workers.
This fact alone might cause Sidicks and Co some tumescence problems. Sorry tax payers are not paying for my pension.
(My employer, a university, does take some money from the state but no where near 100% of income. We are more contractors supplying a service into the state than public sector. I have annual income targets which are multiples of my salary.)
I agree with your viewpoint, what I am astounded at is those who seem to think either that final salary or defined benefit pension is a bad thing public or private, what seems to be misunderstood is that the pension you receive can be viewed as deferred wages.This fact alone might cause Sidicks and Co some tumescence problems. Sorry tax payers are not paying for my pension.
(My employer, a university, does take some money from the state but no where near 100% of income. We are more contractors supplying a service into the state than public sector. I have annual income targets which are multiples of my salary.)
People should be shouting for a good pension that supports individuals in retirement and that elusive thing called an economy. People work hard most of their life, part of their wage and the contribution from the company which lets face it is part of the cost of employing someone. Most companies are slaves to the stock exchange and 'shareholder value' they wish to pay a shareholder who has contributed zip to the companies wealth yet companies bemoan pension schemes that pay the true wealth generators....their staff. University staff need pensions its the 'Top management' who are lining their own pockets that wish to change something that was part of the employees contracts.
So Guys you, in my opinion should be supporting the lectures keeping their pensions and asking your boss.......where is my pension that equals a final or defined benefit scheme.
Edited by Toaster on Wednesday 21st March 10:39
Toaster said:
I agree with your viewpoint, what I am astounded at is those who seem to think either that final salary or defined benefit pension is a bad thing public or private, what seems to be misunderstood is that the pension you receive can be viewed as deferred wages.
People should be shouting for a good pension that supports individuals in retirement and that elusive thing called an economy.
Workers will want the best pay package possible, which includes the pension element. People should be shouting for a good pension that supports individuals in retirement and that elusive thing called an economy.
It is good for the worker and a cost for the employer. Ranting about shareholders does not create infinite money to pay for it.
With a DC scheme the cost and benefit is clear at a given percentage of salary. With a DB scheme the value has to be estimated and changes over time.
Toaster said:
So Guys you, in my opinion should be supporting the lectures keeping their pensions and asking your boss.......where is my pension that equals a final or defined benefit scheme.
Not that I'd make such a career limiting move, but my boss would probably reply with any of the following:Edited by Toaster on Wednesday 21st March 10:39
- When I see a unicorn fly
- We already give you the legal minimum
- You can pay in more yourself
- Go to the public sector
ked - going by contribution rates.lauda said:
Have a read of that sentence back to yourself. You do realise that without the shareholders, there is no company?
Erm I think my point is that an ethical and well run company would pay both, its staff first and then pay the divi's rather than pay the divi's at the cost of the staff.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff