Dear University lecturers - get back to work
Discussion
sidicks said:
1. Please sort out your quotes
2. Let’s post the same argument to the lecturers - if they don’t like what is on offer, why don’t they do your job or my job instead?
because I know that I would find a job where I can't change the world or understand the universe pretty dull.2. Let’s post the same argument to the lecturers - if they don’t like what is on offer, why don’t they do your job or my job instead?
sidicks said:
jjlynn27 said:
1. Sorted. Still waiting to hear who said that I had extensive experience with DB pensions.
2. That's not the same argument at all. I'll use any means necessary to get as much as I can. Don't you?
So it’s a one-way thing - as far as you are concerned, if people like lecturer’s benefits so much they should shut up or become a lecturer, but if lecturers do not like the benefits they are being offered then it’s totally unreasonable to suggest they should put up or look elsewhere?2. That's not the same argument at all. I'll use any means necessary to get as much as I can. Don't you?
(And that’s before the evidence that shows that they don’t fully understand the value of what is at stake in the first place).
jjlynn27 said:
I don't want them to leave their job. Given the number of UK universities at the top of league tables, I think that they are doing a pretty good job.
I want UK universities to attract top talent, people who'll come up with graphene.
If Universities are attracting people on the basis of having a DB pension rather than an extremely generous DC scheme, then are they targeting the right people for the right reasons?!I want UK universities to attract top talent, people who'll come up with graphene.
jjlynn27 said:
I think that it's a waste that a good friend left NHS to work for a consultancy company, for significantly more money, fewer hours and less responsibility.
And no DB pension...Who said anything about my extensive DB experience? Why would you make that up?
Do you accept anything that your employers give you or do you try to get as much as you think that you can get/ are worth?
LOL. Right reasons? What are the right reasons? I already told you, I want them to attract the best talent. Very important part of that is remuneration. Given the evidence, they are doing a pretty spectacular job.
If you were honest, you'd accept that your objections are on a purely ideological basis, and you are far from being the only one. If you can actually manage to put that aside for a moment, you'd realize how stupid the whole public/private sector divide is.
Rovinghawk said:
travel is dangerous said:
because I know that I would find a job where I can't change the world or understand the universe pretty dull.
Delusions of grandeur?jjlynn27 said:
Do you accept anything that your employers give you or do you try to get as much as you think that you can get/ are worth?
My employers, past and present, have to recognise economics when determine what they can afford to pay.jjlynn27 said:
If you were honest, you'd accept that your objections are on a purely ideological basis, and you are far from being the only one.
Still wrong. It’s about economics and sustainability and the impact on the rest of the population.travel is dangerous said:
Rovinghawk said:
travel is dangerous said:
because I know that I would find a job where I can't change the world or understand the universe pretty dull.
Delusions of grandeur?sidicks said:
travel is dangerous said:
because I know that I would find a job where I can't change the world or understand the universe pretty dull.
We all have to make choices, trade off some things against others, and ascribe value to those choices.Edited by sidicks on Friday 23 March 10:14
travel is dangerous said:
no, if you're a scientist your job is to understand the universe. If you're an educator, you can change the world.
If you're a scientist your job might well be to understand a specific sphere of science.If you're a street sweeper you can change the world.
I stand behind my comments about delusions of grandeur.
Edited by Rovinghawk on Friday 23 March 10:34
sas62 said:
travel is dangerous said:
Rovinghawk said:
travel is dangerous said:
because I know that I would find a job where I can't change the world or understand the universe pretty dull.
Delusions of grandeur?But to dispute the fact that universities can change the world is really very silly. Do you want a list of ways in which work done in universities has shaped the modern world? Changed your life? In fact, enabled about 4 billion to be even be alive today?
travel is dangerous said:
And everyone who works for a university already made those choices. Employers are now saying they need to alter the value of our remuneration package heavily downwards. It is not unreasonable to disagree with this.
No, as already explained, they need to manage the level of remuneration because it has increased significantly in the past as is going to be unaffordable in the future.Nothing that you have already earned is being taken away. Just that future benefits will be different, albeit still very attractive.
Of course that might lead you to make different choices, just as millions of private sector individuals do all the time.
When the market changes you need to evolve and adapt.
Edited by sidicks on Friday 23 March 10:44
travel is dangerous said:
Clearly the level of influence depends on the university in which you work and the field you work in.
But to dispute the fact that universities can change the world is really very silly. Do you want a list of ways in which work done in universities has shaped the modern world? Changed your life? In fact, enabled about 4 billion to be even be alive today?
Farmers provide the food that allow us to live.But to dispute the fact that universities can change the world is really very silly. Do you want a list of ways in which work done in universities has shaped the modern world? Changed your life? In fact, enabled about 4 billion to be even be alive today?
Doctors and Nurses keep us alive
The financial sector allows and supports businesses to grow which provide taxes to fund the research that you refer to above.
University lecturers can do nothing unless secondary school and primarily school teachers have started the learning process etc
To suggest that lecturers are alone in ‘changing the world’ Is somewhat disingenuous. Of course that’s not to say that many lecturers don’t perform an important role.
Edited by sidicks on Friday 23 March 10:49
Edited by sidicks on Friday 23 March 10:56
sidicks said:
To suggest that lecturers are alone in ‘changing the world’ Is somewhat disingenuous.
We're taking away his remuneration & casting him into the pit of financial penury- at least allow him to keep his self-image. 
Besides- you don't understand anything & he understands the whole universe, apparently.
Edited by Rovinghawk on Friday 23 March 10:49
BuzzBravado said:
This isn't just about Lecturers, its everyone under the USS Scheme, myself included.... A Systems Administrator. In the Education sector wages are behind the private sector but that's ok because the whole package evens us out.
For those saying we are just b
hing about realities and need to suck it up, maybe that is the case...... but would you go from a projected £20k pension to £7k pension just because someone said so? That's the figures i'm personally looking at. If that happens i would have no choice but to go the private sector along with a whole raft of other talent people just to get back to an even keel. If you apply that to other talented members who can get other jobs no problem then where does that leave HE? One of the biggest industries in the UK just now.
I've spoken to a mate in the police about pensions, along similar lines to this.For those saying we are just b
hing about realities and need to suck it up, maybe that is the case...... but would you go from a projected £20k pension to £7k pension just because someone said so? That's the figures i'm personally looking at. If that happens i would have no choice but to go the private sector along with a whole raft of other talent people just to get back to an even keel. If you apply that to other talented members who can get other jobs no problem then where does that leave HE? One of the biggest industries in the UK just now. Setting aside comparatives - public to private - and the understandable human aversion to loss, we reach a point where, I think it fair to say, at some point in the past, pensions were 'over promised'. People thought and assumed certain parameters about GDP growth and the performance of investments that has not transpired. It happened in both public and private bodies and not only in the UK but also the USA too.
I think it fair to say that setting personal arguments (because, as I say, no one wants to lose out on something they thought they had), there must be a recognition that expectations and future projections need to be realigned?
sidicks said:
jjlynn27 said:
Do you accept anything that your employers give you or do you try to get as much as you think that you can get/ are worth?
My employers, past and present, have to recognise economics when determine what they can afford to pay.jjlynn27 said:
If you were honest, you'd accept that your objections are on a purely ideological basis, and you are far from being the only one.
Still wrong. It’s about economics and sustainability and the impact on the rest of the population.So predictable. Till next 'public sector' thread and yet another utterly predictable 'omg public sector pension' thread.
Digga said:
I've spoken to a mate in the police about pensions, along similar lines to this.
Setting aside comparatives - public to private - and the understandable human aversion to loss, we reach a point where, I think it fair to say, at some point in the past, pensions were 'over promised'. People thought and assumed certain parameters about GDP growth and the performance of investments that has not transpired. It happened in both public and private bodies and not only in the UK but also the USA too.
I think it fair to say that setting personal arguments (because, as I say, no one wants to lose out on something they thought they had), there must be a recognition that expectations and future projections need to be realigned?
Should there also be recognition that if you can't get enough staff with the current level of remuneration, that those should be revised too? Setting aside comparatives - public to private - and the understandable human aversion to loss, we reach a point where, I think it fair to say, at some point in the past, pensions were 'over promised'. People thought and assumed certain parameters about GDP growth and the performance of investments that has not transpired. It happened in both public and private bodies and not only in the UK but also the USA too.
I think it fair to say that setting personal arguments (because, as I say, no one wants to lose out on something they thought they had), there must be a recognition that expectations and future projections need to be realigned?
sidicks said:
crankedup said:
It’s a complex web, costs could be reduced to clients using the services of investment companies. Do they need to have big shiny glass towers that cost a fortune. Are clients getting the best value for thier money?
Lowering T&Cs for some sectors of ‘industry’ will have a negative effect upon the U.K. in the longer term, I have given two examples already and we have seen the NHS service staff leaving in droves owing to the Governments heavy handed use of penalties in the form of pay restrictions during the past seven years. We have a wide choice of areas that can be investigated for cost reduction efforts.
Our higher education facilities attract students World wide, without the high calibre of those that educate we have nothing to offer.
The scale of the problem with DB schemes isn’t going to be materially affected by changing the investment management costs by a few basis points here or there - to suggest that is a gross misjudgement as to the scale of the issue.Lowering T&Cs for some sectors of ‘industry’ will have a negative effect upon the U.K. in the longer term, I have given two examples already and we have seen the NHS service staff leaving in droves owing to the Governments heavy handed use of penalties in the form of pay restrictions during the past seven years. We have a wide choice of areas that can be investigated for cost reduction efforts.
Our higher education facilities attract students World wide, without the high calibre of those that educate we have nothing to offer.
There are good reasons that most private sector schemes closed to new accrual 10-20 years ago, and it wasn’t to do with fund management costs.
I’m sure there are many good reasons behind the decision making, maybe we need new ideas that do not reduce living standards of the many whilst living standards of the few are enhanced. You are aware that i’m my World economics come second to people, people should dictate how the economics should work not the other way around.
jjlynn27 said:
Digga said:
I've spoken to a mate in the police about pensions, along similar lines to this.
Setting aside comparatives - public to private - and the understandable human aversion to loss, we reach a point where, I think it fair to say, at some point in the past, pensions were 'over promised'. People thought and assumed certain parameters about GDP growth and the performance of investments that has not transpired. It happened in both public and private bodies and not only in the UK but also the USA too.
I think it fair to say that setting personal arguments (because, as I say, no one wants to lose out on something they thought they had), there must be a recognition that expectations and future projections need to be realigned?
Should there also be recognition that if you can't get enough staff with the current level of remuneration, that those should be revised too? Setting aside comparatives - public to private - and the understandable human aversion to loss, we reach a point where, I think it fair to say, at some point in the past, pensions were 'over promised'. People thought and assumed certain parameters about GDP growth and the performance of investments that has not transpired. It happened in both public and private bodies and not only in the UK but also the USA too.
I think it fair to say that setting personal arguments (because, as I say, no one wants to lose out on something they thought they had), there must be a recognition that expectations and future projections need to be realigned?
There are careers where academia do not provide the best route in and there are also academic qualifications that are clearly not creating value (or taxes, therefore) within the economy.
crankedup said:
Agreed it would be a drop in the ocean, but it would be a start perhaps and many drops add up to a glass full.
It's finding all the other drops that will be the bugger.crankedup said:
maybe we need new ideas that do not reduce living standards of the many whilst living standards of the few are enhanced.
Maybe we need new ideas for a 150mph car that can do 150mpg. Neither this nor your idea has been done, possibly because it's not possible.crankedup said:
You are aware that i’m my World economics come second to people, people should dictate how the economics should work not the other way around.
That would also be lovely but it also doesn't work.jjlynn27 said:
Nothing on DB experience?
You seem to have none. No idea why you think that your anecdotal evidence is so meaningful when you are so quick to dismiss and mock the anecdotal evidence of others on other topics. jjlynn27 said:
So predictable. Till next 'public sector' thread and yet another utterly predictable 'omg public sector pension' thread.
So predictable from you, personal remarks rather than addressing the issues.No doubt on those other threads, where it suits you, you’ll be arguing that we need to listen to the ‘experts’ and can dismiss the anecdotal evidence to the contrary.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff