Dear University lecturers - get back to work
Discussion
Rovinghawk said:
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.Your car analogy, it’s not far off reality in fact I am sure it’s been done already.
Agreed, lots of drops need to be found but sometimes just one drop can lead to a waterfall.
Yes I know all very romantic and idealistic, but 65 years ago the enigma machine became reality, they said the German codes could not be broken! Look where the enigma machine has led us! ( feeling positive today)
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.
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.
You keep missing the point, the economic environment is the reality we face, it’s not something that we dictate in the short term at least.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.
Our ability to look after people is fundamentally driven by the economics of the situation. Your inability to understand the link between the two and to think that we can ignore the underlying economics just by clever thinking is the problem.
Further, you seem unaware that if some people are getting more, that means that other people are getting less - those on generous final salary pensions are getting more at the expense of those with very little pension provision.
crankedup said:
Nothing is impossible, it may take time but nothing is impossible.
Agreed, lots of drops need to be found but sometimes just one drop can lead to a waterfall.
When you've done it you can tell us it's possible. Whilst it can't be done I'll claim it's impossible.Agreed, lots of drops need to be found but sometimes just one drop can lead to a waterfall.
It would be really nice if everyone had everything they needed but that's not the world in which we currently live. There's not enough for everyone to have everything therefore something has to give. The earlier comments about 'over-promised' pensions seem sensible & I'll go with them rather than your well-intentioned dreams.
sidicks said:
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.
None of the experts that I think are worth listening to would quote a demonstrably false story from order-order. I'd think that they are less of an expert than they think they are, or that they are simply dishonest.
HTH.
jjlynn27 said:
There are no personal remarks, you were questioning my 'extensive experience', and if that wasn't for scoring petty points, I'm asking why. And yet no answer, just, as usual, another predictable sidicks diversion in a desperate attempt to close yet another thread.
So you admit that your anecdotal evidence was pretty meaningless in the context of the discussion. Ok, fair enough.It seems more likely that the person that is trying to get thread closed down is the one determined to repeat something off topic from 2+ years ago. Never mind.
jjlynn27 said:
None of the experts that I think are worth listening to would quote a demonstrably false story from order-order. I'd think that they are less of an expert than they think they are, or that they are simply dishonest.
HTH.
So funny, so predictable. Back to your order-order obsession based on one thread from 2+ years ago where I once used a figure that turned out to be incorrect on a subject that I have never claimed to be an expert about.HTH.
Digga said:
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.
Basic education standards, are in part, IMO, results of treatment of teachers. Look at the countries with better education scores, and you'll see that teachers are treated very, very differently.
jjlynn27 said:
As was mentioned few times before, this is not just about lecturers. Universities are something that the UK is exceedingly good at. One of the main reasons for that is staff. Very important part of deciding where to work, at least for me, is remuneration.
Basic education standards, are in part, IMO, results of treatment of teachers. Look at the countries with better education scores, and you'll see that teachers are treated very, very differently.
Basic education standards, are in part, IMO, results of treatment of teachers. Look at the countries with better education scores, and you'll see that teachers are treated very, very differently.
In the places where teachers are treated better, it is very often the case education is a lot more costly.
jjlynn27 said:
Not sure what I'm supposed to get out of those graphs, but glad that LSE is where it belongs 
. Should we make education more expensive and treat teachers better?
Why does remuneration have to include DB pension, with uncertain costs. Why can’t it include explicit pension costs?. Should we make education more expensive and treat teachers better? If we weren’t trying to send half of the population to university we might be able to reduce the number of lecturers and increase the quality, which might then justify higher remuneration.
Ali G said:
Just keep the top universities and lecturers and go MOOC - that way more students are taught better and more money for lecturers.
Obviously not going to happen though - too many vested interests.
You have completed overlooked the other side of university business which is research. MOOC's only applicable to the teaching side. You get rid of Universities just because of an online teaching solution then where do you get research done. Where i work UoE they are constantly breaking new ground with research that everyone benefits from. Obviously not going to happen though - too many vested interests.
Digga said:
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?
What doesn't help is the way the Media portrays it. Yes there are senior lecturers on huge money, but for each one of them there are 100's of us average joes looking at life changing finances. If it happens, it happens and i'll deal with it.
BuzzBravado said:
I totally agree, but that doesn't change where we are now. I'm currently being told that potentially i cannot afford to retire if i continue to work for the University (who retires on £7k?). So using personal responsibility my only option is to go where they money is better in order to be able to retire. The price for that is a mass exodus of talent from HEI's. As long as the UK understands that HE is still a big moneymaker for the country, however there are other countries eager to take its spot. Another home-based industry gone..
What doesn't help is the way the Media portrays it. Yes there are senior lecturers on huge money, but for each one of them there are 100's of us average joes looking at life changing finances. If it happens, it happens and i'll deal with it.
Over how many years is that pension assessed?What doesn't help is the way the Media portrays it. Yes there are senior lecturers on huge money, but for each one of them there are 100's of us average joes looking at life changing finances. If it happens, it happens and i'll deal with it.
As a comparison, a £7k pa pension would require a pot of around £300k to guarantee, based on current interest rates and longevity.
How many private sector employees do you think will have a pension fund at or above this level at retirement?
A quick calculation suggests a £200 per month contribution over 40 years would broadly fund that pension. Now if the employer is paying 15% of salary, that £200 would be payable on a salary of £16k.
(Hope I’ve got my numbers correct here, I’m travelling so am having to do some broad brush calculations in my head).
(Plus of course you have the state pension on top).
Edited by sidicks on Friday 23 March 15:48
Rovinghawk said:
BuzzBravado said:
The price for that is a mass exodus of talent from HEI's.
If such a mass exodus takes place, what do you think will happen to payscales at the destination industry bearing in mind the flood of applicants?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff