30,th of june strike action

[tomtrees]

Billy 68

 

I would go further than that and say any civil servant including MP's and PM would have an earnings cap of twice the national average. This would then give an incentive for the average salary to be increased.

 

That would be nice but you would have to increase the size of the economy, prosperity of the country as well in order to keep inflation under control or we go back to 17 % interest rates.

[Billy68]

Listening on the news this morning about it being unreasonable to expect nurses, paramedics etc to work to 68 because of the type of manual work involved - somehow they don't seem to think this applies to similar types of job in the private sector though. Anyone else not fancy having to climb at 68? Same goes for lots of factory / production line type jobs. I also wish they'd stop with the "we'd get more money in the private sector" - if that's the case why haven't they moved?

[likeitorlumpit]

you can't limit salaries

It's the difference that drives driven people to try harder to be better- don't stop them doing this or we'll end up no one trying

[easy-lift guy]

Funny how threads take on a life of their own. Might I suggest cutting taxes across the board and start phasing out many cradle to grave programs, say 5% reduction per year.

I also suggest a balance budget amendment for your government to have to live by. Everyone would have plenty of notice to start adjusting most of their collective lives and in turn. I also think your VAT tax should start to be reduced 1/2 % annually. This will stimulate additional economic activity, and more people to work. Of course it may take more than 20 years to pull this off, maybe as many a Two generations but it would be worth a try. O and lastly most of the government departments that take care of everything else except the military,water/sewer fire, and police convert to the Private sector responsibility.

elg

[difflock]

I would be the first to admit that if the public sector does not set out to recruit the useless or dysfunctional..........but it sure does not get rid of them...............rather it sends them for "training" ...................which since one cannot "fail" is less than useless..............or mostly works around them.

I am "blessed" with this unfortunate phenomena..................I even had the cheek to attempt to get rid of a worse than useless newley appointed tradesman during his probationary period................all without avail............mind some of my more senior offiers may well think the same of me:001_tt2:

PS

At 52 I hope to retire with a reduced pension in another 2 years:lol:

[skyhuck]

Nice in theory but not what the government is proposing hence why the teachers are up in arms. Originally the scheme divided the pension pot by 80ths under the government proposal the pot is divided into 100ths.

 

Going forward from now, not retrospective, if you have paid in X number of years thats fixed and you will get whatever you have acrewed up to the change.

 

So on retirement they will get a % at the old rate and the remainder at the new rate.

[skyhuck]

Another point, teachers get at least 10 weeks more holiday per year than the rest of us, so for them to have worked the same 40 years as the rest of us, they need to work an additionally 8.46 years.

 

So really if we are retiring at 65 they should be working to 73.

[renewablejohn]

Going forward from now, not retrospective, if you have paid in X number of years thats fixed and you will get whatever you have acrewed up to the change.

 

So on retirement they will get a % at the old rate and the remainder at the new rate.

 

 

Skyhuck

 

Unfortunately it is retrospective for example a teacher having worked 37 years would have expected to get 37/80 of final salary currently £37795 for the "average" teacher.working out to an annual pension of £17840 plus a lump sum of £52540.

Under the new scheme average working life salary would be used currently £36031 and the new fraction of 37/100 less 35.6% penalty for retiring at age 60 giving an annual pension of £8585 and no lump sum.

[Pat Ferrett]

I feel robbed every time I think of the 13 years of my life I spent at school

[skyhuck]

Skyhuck

 

Unfortunately it is retrospective for example a teacher having worked 37 years would have expected to get 37/80 of final salary currently £37795 for the "average" teacher.working out to an annual pension of £17840 plus a lump sum of £52540.

Under the new scheme average working life salary would be used currently £36031 and the new fraction of 37/100 less 35.6% penalty for retiring at age 60 giving an annual pension of £8585 and no lump sum.

 

I have a mate who is a teacher (has been all his life and so is his father) he says the years he has paid are safe, but going forward he will get less for the years he has left to work, so will end up with less.

 

New teacher will get only the new rate.