Dear University lecturers - get back to work
Discussion
sidicks said:
As usual, feel free to invent things that aren’t true to try and score points. Failing, as ever.
Only one of us uses order-order as a source on financial matters. And only one of us flounces. I asked you a question, you've chosen, as is your right, not to answer it. Not the first, not the last time.
jjlynn27 said:
Only one of us uses order-order as a source on financial matters. And only one of us flounces.
No I don’t. I once quoted a figure from that website. The fact that you are obsessed with this and want to pretend something entirely different is your problem.The fact you are now resorting to inventing ‘notions’ purely to dispel them is obviously a sign of desparation on your part. But keep lying if it helps you get through the day!
I use over 20+ years of experience in this area to support my position - remind me about your expertise...
jjlynn27 said:
I asked you a question, you've chosen, as is your right, not to answer it. Not the first, not the last time.
Your question made no sense. Simple.sidicks said:
jjlynn27 said:
Only one of us uses order-order as a source on financial matters. And only one of us flounces.
No I didn’t. I once quoted a figure from that website. The fact that you are obsessed with this and want to pretend something entirely different is your problem.The fact you are now resorting to inventing ‘notions’ purely to dispel them is obviously a sign of desparation on your part. But keep lying if it helps you get through the day!
I use over 20+ years of experience in this area to support my position - remind me about your expertise...
jjlynn27 said:
I asked you a question, you've chosen, as is your right, not to answer it. Not the first, not the last time.
Your question made no sense. Simple.The question makes sense, but as usual, you do your flouncy dance.
To try to get this back to the thread before you manage to close yet another thread;
The division between public / private sector is idiotic, at best. Pensions represent the part of remuneration and different companies/entities chose different routes to attract people that they want to attract. I never worked in the public sector, but I don't feel the need to whine, thread after thread, about some benefits that someone else is getting.
For anyone that thinks that public sector jobs are easy and/or too well paid; go get one. It's hardly closed shop.
Or, you can look out for an echo-chamber of NP&E, and do the 'public sector bad, mkay' routine.
sidicks said:
911newbie said:
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).
Just to follow up on this, according to the 2016 ‘Universities UK’ document on funding: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).
In 2014-15, over 25% of funding was from government.
2/3rds of research funding is direct from UK government.
11% of funding is from the EU (which is really just recycled UK government spending)
In terms of teaching income (44%), 18% of this amount came directly from the UK government and over 50% was from student fees, where the majority are loaned by the government and a signficant proportion are not repaid.
The document itself highlights the high costs of DB pensions and the significant existing deficit (£8.3billion in 2014/15), which the lecturers on here appear determined to ignore.
Not quite the independent private entity some would like to portray!
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 22 March 10:32
jjlynn27 said:
I'm not counting how many times people use order-order for financial insight. The fact that one would resort to that is more than telling.
The question makes sense, but as usual, you do your flouncy dance.
No, it really doesn’t.The question makes sense, but as usual, you do your flouncy dance.
Jjlynn27 said:
To try to get this back to the thread before you manage to close yet another thread;
...says the person that appears to be posting lies on the thread purely to incite an argument.
jjlynn27 said:
The division between public / private sector is idiotic, at best. Pensions represent the part of remuneration and different companies/entities chose different routes to attract people that they want to attract. I never worked in the public sector, but I don't feel the need to whine, thread after thread, about some benefits that someone else is getting.
For anyone that thinks that public sector jobs are easy and/or too well paid; go get one. It's hardly closed shop.
That works both ways.For anyone that thinks that public sector jobs are easy and/or too well paid; go get one. It's hardly closed shop.
jjlynn27 said:
Or, you can look out for an echo-chamber of NP&E, and do the 'public sector bad, mkay' routine.
No one has said that, so we’ll just have to put that down to another one of your lies or invented ‘notions’.No final salary pension is guaranteed - remember Mirror Group?
The scheme (and I have some that were originally government backed that have these provisions) can generally reduce pension before it is paid but once in payment the pensioners rights are stronger. Won't be in the short booklet but will be in the full scheme rules. It is rare the powers are used but they are there to protect the scheme.
If the scheme fails a DB pension is worth no more than a DC pension - nothing.
I have had one DB scheme close to existing members while I was a contributing member - the company made it very clear that they could not afford to support the scheme.
Why should university lecturers be treated any differently to the rest of us.
The scheme (and I have some that were originally government backed that have these provisions) can generally reduce pension before it is paid but once in payment the pensioners rights are stronger. Won't be in the short booklet but will be in the full scheme rules. It is rare the powers are used but they are there to protect the scheme.
If the scheme fails a DB pension is worth no more than a DC pension - nothing.
I have had one DB scheme close to existing members while I was a contributing member - the company made it very clear that they could not afford to support the scheme.
Why should university lecturers be treated any differently to the rest of us.
sidicks said:
Toaster said:
Rovinghawk said:
One very simple question- where would the money for this come from?
A simples answer: it comes from the renumeration package paid to workers and thats both private and public all of whom pay tax on earned income. Why don’t you provide a DB pension for your employees?
IJWS15 said:
No final salary pension is guaranteed - remember Mirror Group?
That’s a pretty isolated and atypical example.IJWS15 said:
The scheme (and I have some that were originally government backed that have these provisions) can generally reduce pension before it is paid but once in payment the pensioners rights are stronger. Won't be in the short booklet but will be in the full scheme rules. It is rare the powers are used but they are there to protect the scheme.
If the scheme fails a DB pension is worth no more than a DC pension - nothing.
Blatantly untrue - PPF protection exists for most UK schemes which will typically provide 90% or more of the promises liabilities.If the scheme fails a DB pension is worth no more than a DC pension - nothing.
IJWS15 said:
I have had one DB scheme close to existing members while I was a contributing member - the company made it very clear that they could not afford to support the scheme.
Why should university lecturers be treated any differently to the rest of us.
There might be good reasons, but so far they are hidden behind lots of false claims by the lecturers themselves!Why should university lecturers be treated any differently to the rest of us.
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 22 March 12:46
IJWS15 said:
Why should university lecturers be treated any differently to the rest of us.
Because everyone should be treated as university lecturers thats why. The division of we don't have so you shouldn't is not a correct one. The argument should be turned around in that if you serve a company or many companies over your working life you should have a decent pension at the end of it.I think most of us would like the Dutch system
The Dutch statistic authority reported in 2017 that the average pensioner in the Netherlands had a disposable income of some EUR 23,000 in 2015, or EUR 40,000 for couples. Only around 4 percent of pensioners were reported as having a 'very low income'. https://www.expatica.com/nl/finance/The-Dutch-pens...
Now tell me it can't be done ( I am sure the financial wizards on here will say so)
Toaster said:
Thats a random question and out of context in relation to Rovinghawk.
Very much in context in relation to your previous claims.Toaster said:
If you are of working age I suspect you would like the benefits the company provides.
Once again, it woukd be very easy for you to give an indication as to the employer’s contribution you make, but I suspect that the reason you won’t is that your previous arguments will become somewhat hollow!Toaster said:
But I'm not sure i would employ you with such a negative and inverse attitude. All I can say matey is I wish you well.
I doubt you can afford me, so it’s a moot point, ‘matey’.Toaster said:
Because everyone should be treated as university lecturers thats why.
In that case, why don’t you treat your employees as ‘university lecturers’?Toaster said:
The division of we don't have so you shouldn't is not a correct one. The argument should be turned around in that if you serve a company or many companies over your working life you should have a decent pension at the end of it.
Define ‘decent’. How much should that cost?Toaster said:
I think most of us would like the Dutch system
The Dutch statistic authority reported in 2017 that the average pensioner in the Netherlands had a disposable income of some EUR 23,000 in 2015, or EUR 40,000 for couples. Only around 4 percent of pensioners were reported as having a 'very low income'. https://www.expatica.com/nl/finance/The-Dutch-pens...
Now tell me it can't be done ( I am sure the financial wizards on here will say so)
Where is the money going to come from?The Dutch statistic authority reported in 2017 that the average pensioner in the Netherlands had a disposable income of some EUR 23,000 in 2015, or EUR 40,000 for couples. Only around 4 percent of pensioners were reported as having a 'very low income'. https://www.expatica.com/nl/finance/The-Dutch-pens...
Now tell me it can't be done ( I am sure the financial wizards on here will say so)
I believe that employee contributions are something like 17.9%. They also have to pay for their own healthcare, I think?
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 22 March 12:52
sidicks said:
jjlynn27 said:
I'm not counting how many times people use order-order for financial insight. The fact that one would resort to that is more than telling.
The question makes sense, but as usual, you do your flouncy dance.
No, it really doesn’t.The question makes sense, but as usual, you do your flouncy dance.
Jjlynn27 said:
To try to get this back to the thread before you manage to close yet another thread;
...says the person that appears to be posting lies on the thread purely to incite an argument.
jjlynn27 said:
The division between public / private sector is idiotic, at best. Pensions represent the part of remuneration and different companies/entities chose different routes to attract people that they want to attract. I never worked in the public sector, but I don't feel the need to whine, thread after thread, about some benefits that someone else is getting.
For anyone that thinks that public sector jobs are easy and/or too well paid; go get one. It's hardly closed shop.
That works both ways.For anyone that thinks that public sector jobs are easy and/or too well paid; go get one. It's hardly closed shop.
jjlynn27 said:
Or, you can look out for an echo-chamber of NP&E, and do the 'public sector bad, mkay' routine.
No one has said that, so we’ll just have to put that down to another one of your lies or invented ‘notions’.who said:
that's why active DB schemes don't really exist in the private sector any more!
Talking about liars. jjlynn27 said:
Who said this
The key point is highlighted above in bold - interestingly it was word that you choose to remove in your earlier post. I wonder why that was...who said:
that's why active DB schemes don't really exist in the private sector any more!
Talking about liars. The vast majority of DB schemes are closed to new accrual (and normally those that are still open have future accrual just for existing members, not for new entrants). That number is growing.
Extremely few, if any, new schemes are being opened and those schemes that are open are reducing the benefits for future accrual.
HTH
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 22 March 13:12
Toaster said:
sidicks said:
Toaster said:
Rovinghawk said:
One very simple question- where would the money for this come from?
A simples answer: it comes from the renumeration package paid to workers and thats both private and public all of whom pay tax on earned income. Why don’t you provide a DB pension for your employees?
IJWS15 said:
No final salary pension is guaranteed - remember Mirror Group?
The scheme (and I have some that were originally government backed that have these provisions) can generally reduce pension before it is paid but once in payment the pensioners rights are stronger. Won't be in the short booklet but will be in the full scheme rules. It is rare the powers are used but they are there to protect the scheme.
If the scheme fails a DB pension is worth no more than a DC pension - nothing.
I have had one DB scheme close to existing members while I was a contributing member - the company made it very clear that they could not afford to support the scheme.
Why should university lecturers be treated any differently to the rest of us.
The uk government stands behind all db pensions. I.e. Us. The scheme (and I have some that were originally government backed that have these provisions) can generally reduce pension before it is paid but once in payment the pensioners rights are stronger. Won't be in the short booklet but will be in the full scheme rules. It is rare the powers are used but they are there to protect the scheme.
If the scheme fails a DB pension is worth no more than a DC pension - nothing.
I have had one DB scheme close to existing members while I was a contributing member - the company made it very clear that they could not afford to support the scheme.
Why should university lecturers be treated any differently to the rest of us.
markcoznottz said:
IJWS15 said:
No final salary pension is guaranteed - remember Mirror Group?
The scheme (and I have some that were originally government backed that have these provisions) can generally reduce pension before it is paid but once in payment the pensioners rights are stronger. Won't be in the short booklet but will be in the full scheme rules. It is rare the powers are used but they are there to protect the scheme.
If the scheme fails a DB pension is worth no more than a DC pension - nothing.
I have had one DB scheme close to existing members while I was a contributing member - the company made it very clear that they could not afford to support the scheme.
Why should university lecturers be treated any differently to the rest of us.
The uk government stands behind all db pensions. I.e. Us. The scheme (and I have some that were originally government backed that have these provisions) can generally reduce pension before it is paid but once in payment the pensioners rights are stronger. Won't be in the short booklet but will be in the full scheme rules. It is rare the powers are used but they are there to protect the scheme.
If the scheme fails a DB pension is worth no more than a DC pension - nothing.
I have had one DB scheme close to existing members while I was a contributing member - the company made it very clear that they could not afford to support the scheme.
Why should university lecturers be treated any differently to the rest of us.
sas62 said:
That's like children saying it comes from my pocket money.
Remuneration does not just exist - it has to come from somewhere.
In the case of public sector it could be a) increase in taxes b) increase in borrowing, c) reduce expenditure on other areas etc
In the case of private then it could come from a) an increase in prices. b) a decrease in profit (or increase in losses)
c) increase in productivity etc etc
The answer in most of these cases for those receiving any increased benefit is "As long as it comes from someone else, I do't care where it comes from"
As you've said, economic reality isn't a prime concern; keeping the nose deep in the trough regardless of detriment to everyone else is what really matters.Remuneration does not just exist - it has to come from somewhere.
In the case of public sector it could be a) increase in taxes b) increase in borrowing, c) reduce expenditure on other areas etc
In the case of private then it could come from a) an increase in prices. b) a decrease in profit (or increase in losses)
c) increase in productivity etc etc
The answer in most of these cases for those receiving any increased benefit is "As long as it comes from someone else, I do't care where it comes from"
Toaster said:
Because everyone should be treated as university lecturers thats why. The division of we don't have so you shouldn't is not a correct one. The argument should be turned around in that if you serve a company or many companies over your working life you should have a decent pension at the end of it.
I think most of us would like the Dutch system
The Dutch statistic authority reported in 2017 that the average pensioner in the Netherlands had a disposable income of some EUR 23,000 in 2015, or EUR 40,000 for couples. Only around 4 percent of pensioners were reported as having a 'very low income'. https://www.expatica.com/nl/finance/The-Dutch-pens...
Now tell me it can't be done ( I am sure the financial wizards on here will say so)
Given that our total remuneration package is unlikely to change then what you are effectively talking about is allocating more to pension and less to salary. I think most of us would like the Dutch system
The Dutch statistic authority reported in 2017 that the average pensioner in the Netherlands had a disposable income of some EUR 23,000 in 2015, or EUR 40,000 for couples. Only around 4 percent of pensioners were reported as having a 'very low income'. https://www.expatica.com/nl/finance/The-Dutch-pens...
Now tell me it can't be done ( I am sure the financial wizards on here will say so)
As already pointed out most will have paid off their mortgage,and be in receipt of a state pension of £160 a week, so it questionable how much more they will need then as compared to now.
sidicks said:
jjlynn27 said:
Who said this
The key point is highlighted in bold. The vast majority of DB schemes are closed to new accrual and that number is growing. No new schemes are being opened and those schemes that are open are reducing the benefits for future accrual.who said:
that's why active DB schemes don't really exist in the private sector any more!
Talking about liars. HTH
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 22 March 13:04
I'm not sure why you felt the need to lie about the above.
ETA; lol, keep editing your post, that'll make you less of a liar.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff