do you think they are right?

[Matt Seabrook]

My be public sector workers would like to bring in euthanasia for the private sector worker so this cut their short fall.

My other half work in the suported sector industry. Ie mental health, young peoples services, drugs and domestic violence ect. They have had a budget cut of 40% jobs have been lost. This will mean the service users in these projects have their lives at risk. This is not an exaggeration it's fact. Working like the private sector well in to your 60's is a fact now your life is not at risk from a violent partner because of cuts is it?

[housebeautician]

All i know is my private pension that i have paid into for over 25 years has now been slashed about so much that it now ain't worth a toss.

Better start sticking your money under the mattress  

[D7PNY]

I don't agree with the stikes personally. (or strikes in general but that's a different matter altogether!)

The public sector workers seem to forget that private sector workers are being targetted as well.  Can we strike?

The new pension regime coming in for the private sector is going to cost companies dearly and in turn employees as they are also going to have to contribute. Granted this is on a sliding scale but the end result is people will have to start paying in to it out of their own pocket.

Again, the reasoning behind this is the shortfall in state pension etc.

I completely agree with the comments that everyone should be thankfull they are still in employment and get on with it.

[XTR2Turbo]

I was driving much of yesterday and listening to various radio programs.

What annoyed me most is that so many of the arguments seemed to be the politics of greed and bias.

If CEO's can get paid x we should have our pension, conservatives attacking public sector etc etc.

The reality is that the problem has been growing for the last 30 years but successive governments have tried to sweep it under the carpet.

When I started my first job 25 years ago, the before the company had already closed their final salary pension scheme one year earlier.

When the state Pension was first introduced, only 1 in 3 actually lived long enough to ever claim a pension for more than a year.

I understand that if the governments liability on public sector pensions was capitalised properly (e.g. if it was a fund as required by private companies) we would have a higher public sector to GDP debt ratio than Greece.

Investment returns are almost half what they were in the 70's and 80's.

So in summary the issue is not political - people live much longer, investment returns are worse, size of public sector to private sector grown significantly and we can't afford it.

They should not be striking. It has just made them look selfish, ignorant and idealistic.

Every public sector employee, even with the changes proposed, is getting more back in outright monetary and percentage return terms than they would have been offered on an equivalent basis when they started their job.

It the Unions do win we cannot find more money, we will just have fewer Public servants working and a huge pool of retired public servants.

Get round the table and discuss facts.

[Mooch]

Did anyone see Mark Serwotka (PCS) v Francis Maude on Newsnight last night?  

Spoke volumes about what this is really about for the Unions, especially Serwotka. He's an unreconstructed  marxist straight out of the 'Red Robbo'/Scargill mould. Until anyone with any money gives it all to the workers, he will continue to foam at the mouth.

Maude was sensible and reasonable explaining why the government was doing what it was and what was on offer, offering to meet and discuss the very next day, but he was rebuffed and shouted over at every turn.  Even Paxman looked incredulous as to what an   Serwotka was being.

I've got a mix of public and private pensions, and I know how my public pension (from 26 years in the forces) is much, much more generous than anything available in the private sector these days.  However, the corrections proposed seem reasonable to me having seen the pragmatic cuts in pay taken by private sector colleagues over the last few years just to keep their jobs and those of their workmates.  

I know its not a race to the bottom, but even the opportunity of a guaranteed pension is something to be thankful for.  It's only the public sector that can get that these days.

[SteveD]

cant be doing with all this poor me s**t ,it was your carrier choice ,get on with it ,its life ,live it

[nikpro]

It's a very difficult question to answer!

I'm a public sector worker and when I chose to join the Public sector I wanted to 'serve the public'.

Generally the pay in the public sector was way below the equivelent job in the private sector but I chose this route for several options - one of them being the pension that was being offered.

At 181/2 yrs old it was a very big draw; some people were gready at that stage, never thought about pensions and found the highest earning job they could and then never paid into a pension.

Since that time the pay between private and public workers has narrowed.

I pay 11%; soon to be 14% into my pension - a lot higher than the figures given for other public sector workers.

Personally I don't fancy the thought of fighting with 20yr olds and 45yrs of full shift work - I would be dead before I received a pension.

Would you like a 67yr old fireman carrying you down a ladder?

I agree things have to change ...........but not the pensions!

There is so much money wasted in this Country that just managing the Public sectors properly would easily find this shortful in pensions as would the social security budget.

People in the public sector also pay their taxes and pension contributions so they also feel the increase like the private sector workers.

I feel sorry for the private sector pensions that have 'collapsed' - this is wrong as well and could easily be supported by government through economies elsewhere.

I can't strike but I do support the people that do - don't let Government turn it into a battle between Private/Public workers as it wants to - it has plenty of money if it chooses the right places to save it - trouble is that will cost them popularity and votes with the 'scum' class!

[Dibby]

IMO, get back to work, things have to change and we can't keep plucking money from the magic money tree for ever. If we top up an unsustainable pension system we have to find the money from somewhere. Schools? Hospitals? Keep spending more than the government is earning and we'll end up with Greece and Italy.

Things have to change, started work thinking I'd be retiring at 65, now they've scrapped compulsory retirement age for private sector and I don't believe I'll get a penny in state pension. Even on the original deal the public sector is getting a far better deal than I could ever hope to invest in with my 35 ... sorry, make that 50 years left.

It's my pension pot and taxes being used to fund this cushty scheme of early reitrement and it simply isn't fair that some people should be 'entitled' to leave work early at the expense of the rest of us who will be working well into our 70s

[XTR2Turbo]

it has plenty of money

The government is presently spending £500m more every day than it receives in tax take.

[Rab (bombero) Reid]

Apart from the blinkered 'dry your eyes and get on with it' comments on here, there have been some very balanced points raised by the likes of smokey mow, perksy, AidanPlace, XTR2Turbo and nikpro.

Public sector pension contributions have been mismanaged for years by Party after Party and we are ALL paying the price for it! That said, we are where we are and, as a public sector worker, I genuinely empathise with my friends who work in the private sector who have had their pension plans b******d about with for too long now with no voice to support them. Union membership amongst public sector is much stronger than in the private and therefore strikes are generally well supported by the workers. Private sector workers struggle to get anywhere near the same support and the threat of dismissal is greater as well. Private sector workers get a much harder time at work as well, but as I chose to work in the public sector so they chose to work in the private ..

All I ask is that, although I am dead against striking (being a firefighter, I think it's totally wrong and suffered during the last one), that we all show a little sympathy for the majority of public sector workers who have gennuine concerns for pay and conditions that they feel are being attacked.

Let's not allow the Government to set us against each other (as is their wish) so that they can manipulate the general workforce even more!

Your servant,

Rab

[Rab (bombero) Reid]

IMO, get back to work, things have to change and we can't keep plucking money from the magic money tree for ever. If we top up an unsustainable pension system we have to find the money from somewhere. Schools? Hospitals? Keep spending more than the government is earning and we'll end up with Greece and Italy.

Things have to change, started work thinking I'd be retiring at 65, now they've scrapped compulsory retirement age for private sector and I don't believe I'll get a penny in state pension. Even on the original deal the public sector is getting a far better deal than I could ever hope to invest in with my 35 ... sorry, make that 50 years left.

It's my pension pot and taxes being used to fund this cushty scheme of early reitrement and it simply isn't fair that some people should be 'entitled' to leave work early at the expense of the rest of us who will be working well into our 70s

It is also MY taxes that are going into this 'cushty' pension scheme! And then another 3.2% pension contribution rise next year, expected to remain on active duty until I'm 68 and take a cut in my pension  

I believe there are savings to be made and things have to change, but blanket proposals to change in all sectors is somewhat foolhardy. 60+ year old soldiers, firefighters and police officers .. well, if that's what you're happy with..!    

[XTR2Turbo]

I keep hearing on the news about public sector employees saying they pay taxes etc.  

Look at the link. Don't know what goes into this but it suggests that basically unless you earn more than £25k you are getting out (financially) more than you put in.  I suspect that this is the case for much of the public sector workforce by number.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13633966

Also top 1% of earners contribute something like 25% of all tax take.

In the boom years the City of London - yes mainly all those horrible bankers that the media seem to berate - contributed 10% of this countries tax take on their own.

[Dibby]

Obviously not front line but they can still be useful well beyond 60.

68? My heart bleeds

[V 8]

I pay 11%; soon to be 14% into my pension - a lot higher than the figures given for other public sector work

Mention the benefits aswell Frazer. An accrual rate of 30ths, meaning you can retire after 30 yrs on a full 2/3 salary pension, being paid to you for a good ten years longer than other public sector pensions.

[XTR2Turbo]

here you go

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm

What is more startling is that using HRMC's Table 3.5 (Tax payers only), it is clear that 7% of the population earn over £50,000 a year and contribute over 47% of the income tax for the whole tax paying population. Also, less than 1% of the population earn over £150,000 a year and these people contribute over 22% of total income tax.

So when the Unions are saying that their menbers pay for their benefits, that the poor are paying a diproportionate proportion of their income to solve the economic problems and 'rich' should pay more - it's frankly nonsense.

And don't forget the figures above are just tax payers. It does not include the 20% of families with no tax payer.