30,th of june strike action

[Johny Walker]

That "fact" sort of tosh:001_tt2:

 

the post is a jest ,ok you choose to take it somwer else ,now be a good boy & start your own thread about strikes

Edited June 14, 2011 by Johny Walker

[eggsarascal]

the post is a jest ,ok you choose to take it somwer else ,now be a good boy & start your own thread about stikes

 

What are stikes?

[geoff]

What are stikes?

 

I think they have got something to do with cheep holidays...

[Johny Walker]

What are stikes?

 

you tell me loughing boy:thumbup:

[Graham]

What? so you think as a working class man who as worked all your working life for an instution such as the government or the local council, utility company and been promised decent terms and conditions plus a pension at the end of your service that its fair to have all these things ripped away from you just because weve had a recession...wake up mate.

 

Well I didn't think they were having it all 'ripped away'. They're having to take cuts just as the rest of are. It ain't fair, life ain't fair just as my next- to worthless pension ain't fair:001_smile:

 

I think I've woken up now:001_smile:

[agg221]

I don't normally reply to these threads, but I thought I would in an attempt to correct a few misconceptions.

 

1. It's coming up to midnight. My wife is still marking exam papers. She will hopefully finish by 12.30. Tomorrow morning she will leave for work at 7.30. This is normal. This is not a very good hourly rate on a £30k salary.

2. Teachers are a year in to a two year pay freeze. This follows a three year deal of sub-inflationary pay rises. In real terms, income has gone backwards for the past four years and is set to do so for at least another year. Given the above, she can't just work a few more hours or take on an extra job to make up the difference.

3. She signed up to a deal - Ts & Cs, which included a pension, which has already been retrospectively devalued by changing the index it will be linked to when she retires. Pensions work by having a 'pot' which is big enough to cover their liabilities. The teachers' pension pot has been carefully invested over the years. They didn't take pension holidays when a lot of private sector workers did in the 1990s and it is therefore big enough to cover its liabilities (or at least it was when last valued, revaluation now being conveniently a year overdue) - it therefore doesn't need 'subsidising' by anyone else's taxes. True, the government puts in a contribution - it's about the same contribution as most private sector employers make, and soon may well be legally obliged to make, on behalf of their employees.

4. This does not apply to other public sector workers, most significantly the Whitehall based civil service, which has no pension pot and whose pensions are therefore directly paid in full by taxes.

 

This isn't meant to inflame the debate, but to hopefully inform it.

 

Alec

[robbo 110]

wow, this debate/discussion has been lively for a tuesday,, cant wait for friday's debate when some alcohol fuelled comments are on tap!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Johny Walker]

I don't normally reply to these threads, but I thought I would in an attempt to correct a few misconceptions.

 

1. It's coming up to midnight. My wife is still marking exam papers. She will hopefully finish by 12.30. Tomorrow morning she will leave for work at 7.30. This is normal. This is not a very good hourly rate on a £30k salary.

2. Teachers are a year in to a two year pay freeze. This follows a three year deal of sub-inflationary pay rises. In real terms, income has gone backwards for the past four years and is set to do so for at least another year. Given the above, she can't just work a few more hours or take on an extra job to make up the difference.

3. She signed up to a deal - Ts & Cs, which included a pension, which has already been retrospectively devalued by changing the index it will be linked to when she retires. Pensions work by having a 'pot' which is big enough to cover their liabilities. The teachers' pension pot has been carefully invested over the years. They didn't take pension holidays when a lot of private sector workers did in the 1990s and it is therefore big enough to cover its liabilities (or at least it was when last valued, revaluation now being conveniently a year overdue) - it therefore doesn't need 'subsidising' by anyone else's taxes. True, the government puts in a contribution - it's about the same contribution as most private sector employers make, and soon may well be legally obliged to make, on behalf of their employees.

4. This does not apply to other public sector workers, most significantly the Whitehall based civil service, which has no pension pot and whose pensions are therefore directly paid in full by taxes.

 

This isn't meant to inflame the debate, but to hopefully inform it.

 

Alec

 

thank you very much for you imput

[Lorry thompson]

And centreparcs is crap:001_tt2::lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry Johnny couldn't help me sel:biggrin:

[Johny Walker]

And centreparcs is crap:001_tt2::lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry Johnny couldn't help me sel:biggrin:

 

only coz they wont let you in again