Public sector strikes

[Papas1982]

Silly examples? Are you stupid? We're fireman! Making rescues in gas tight suits and house fires of 700 degrees is what we do. No silly examples there!

And as for putting my feet up and money, well your just full of it. Im happy to work until
65. I just dont want to be sacked when i cant complete their impossible fitness test

Im not in anyway saying that the job is easy. But I have heard the argument if nobody wanting a 60 yr old to rescue them which I agree with, but then it's contradicted by saying you're being forced to retire? What would you genuinely like to happen? Work as hard as you can but when not physically able just get paid off?

 

[Papas1982]

For the 5th time. We dont want to retire at an early age
65 is fine. We just want a desk in a corner where we can eat toffie rather than a climb up 3 flights of stairs in full kit whilst holding on to our zimmer frames. The fears i am talking about that you say are unrealistic are founded by the governments own findings
And they even sugar coated them

missed this one, looks like you've answered my question. Only probablem is that surely as a business they can't keep everyone on at a desk just because you've done your time? In any business, if an asset is no longer useful they're dismissed one way or another. Harsh but true

 

[SocketRocket]

So after all this do you accept that your claim that FF will have to work beyond 60 was incorrect?

 

[hovis]

So after all this do you accept that your claim that FF will have to work beyond 60 was incorrect?

No, a fire fighter will have to will have to work past 60 to get his term in. To get mine i would have to work until im 63. Which was fine as i could move sideways into another less physically demanding role. But no more

However if you was lucky enough to land the job early and get your 35 years in by the age of 56. You still can't collect that pension until your 60. the youngest ff a have seen recruited is 22. They really dont like to take on 18 year old boys so the above will rarely happen

 

[hovis]

missed this one, looks like you've answered my question. Only probablem is that surely as a business they can't keep everyone on at a desk just because you've done your time? In any business, if an asset is no longer useful they're dismissed one way or another. Harsh but true

I completely agree with you there and this is where the proposed fitness test deem a fireman "unusable " prematurely. There was also lots of sideway move available in area's such as risk reduction but the tree has been trimmed to death and these posts are saldy diminishing

 

[patricks148]

I have some sympathy with them as the currents Mrs 148 works is in the public sector. She’s not had the two promotion increases in her salary so to all intense and purposes doing the job of an F grade and not being paid for it.

As for MP’s didn’t they give themselves a pay rise a couple of years ago of 6% not taking into account the 11% a report saying they should get another raise ( MPs on that panel by the way). TBH MPs take on these roles by choice to make a difference and not to earn a living.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

No, a fire fighter will have to will have to work past 60 to get his term in. To get mine i would have to work until im 63. Which was fine as i could move sideways into another less physically demanding role. But no more

However if you was lucky enough to land the job early and get your 35 years in by the age of 56. You still can't collect that pension until your 60. the youngest ff a have seen recruited is 22. They really dont like to take on 18 year old boys so the above will rarely happen

In those Final Salary schemes that remain in the private sector you would usually have to contribute for 40 years so someone like yourself who seems to have joined his current employer at age 28 would have to remain in service until 68.

For very many years there has been a disparity between the pension benefits of the public and private sectors in favour of the former.In the past it has been possible to justify this difference by the often lower salaries paid in the public sector but latest figures suggest that the "salary advantage" has swung the other way.

Of course certain occupations enjoyed an earlier retirement age due to the nature of the job but, in the current economic climate and with life expectancy having greatly increased since the original schemes were introduced, as a nation we cannot afford to continue to make these concessions.

The Government really should give the electorate the real costs of providing public sector pensions and then we can all make an informed judgement as we all, public and private, share those costs.

 

[hovis]

In those Final Salary schemes that remain in the private sector you would usually have to contribute for 40 years so someone like yourself who seems to have joined his current employer at age 28 would have to remain in service until 68.

For very many years there has been a disparity between the pension benefits of the public and private sectors in favour of the former.In the past it has been possible to justify this difference by the often lower salaries paid in the public sector but latest figures suggest that the "salary advantage" has swung the other way.

Of course certain occupations enjoyed an earlier retirement age due to the nature of the job but, in the current economic climate and with life expectancy having greatly increased since the original schemes were introduced, as a nation we cannot afford to continue to make these concessions.

The Government really should give the electorate the real costs of providing public sector pensions and then we can all make an informed judgement as we all, public and private, share those costs.

Sorry my mistake i was getting old a new pension scheme mixed up ( tired with 2 day old baby) i have to serve 40 and i joined when 23. Old scheme is 35 year

 

[Deleted member 18588]

Sorry my mistake i was getting old a new pension scheme mixed up ( tired with 2 day old baby) i have to serve 40 and i joined when 23. Old scheme is 35 year

Congratulations on the new arrival! Bit of a coincidence as our son and daughter-in-law presented us with our second grandson on Monday. Their first one is only 19 months old too!

 

[hovis]

Congratulations on the new arrival! Bit of a coincidence as our son and daughter-in-law presented us with our second grandson on Monday. Their first one is only 19 months old too!

You must be a proud man

 

[Andy808]

Personally I have no sympathy at all with any of them.
I now earn the same as I did 16 years ago but I did earn several thousand pounds a year more while working as a boat builder until Gormless Brown put me out of work.
The firm that I worked for was riding out the recession with enough orders to keep the skeleton work force going for several months until the firm was hit with a very large and unexpected tax bill. This was the straw that broke the camels back and the firm went into administration with all of us being made redundant. A few days after I signed on Gormless Brown announced "no company would be put out of business because of a tax bill"
It's not a Labour / Conservative thing but the whole debacle was very poorly handled by New Labour.
Gold reserves sold for rock bottom prices when a few months later the price had almost doubled, no control over the banking system and those in charge of it and worst of all the government creating new jobs to the tune of 55% during their 13 year tenure. Now I'm no accountant but the figures for all of that just don't add up. 45% of new private sector jobs cannot support the 55% of public sector jobs for the same period.
Hopefully all parties will have learned from it and won't let the country get back into that state again but I doubt it.
We all took the cream when it was available and now it's time to pay it back not just by the private sector but by the public sector also.

 

[Foxholer]

As for MP’s didn’t they give themselves a pay rise a couple of years ago of 6% not taking into account the 11% a report saying they should get another raise ( MPs on that panel by the way)

If you are talking about IPSA report, then I'd challenge you to identify the MPs on that panel - 1 ex-MP who lost her seat 8 years+ before being appointed, but that would be misleading at best! No MPs as members or on Board! It would hardly be 'Independent' as per its title otherwise!

 

[delc]

Having worked in the Public Sector for part of my working life, I do have some sympathy for the strikers. Even in my day you often had to meet impossible targets while covering for unfilled vacancies. The pay wasn't particularly good, with the only real benefits being relatively job security and a half decent pension when you retired. Even these are under threat from the Tory Government, who expect us to become a nation of serfs!

 

[GB72]

I have a degree of sympathy in so far as I have sympathy for any person facing tougher times. That said, when the recession hit bug in 2008 I lost my job and had to take a 20% pay cut to find another one. Salaries in the area I work have never really recovered and so I still earn nearly 20% less than I did 6 years ago. Pay freezes are the norm in my sector and the below inflation pay rise this year is the first that most people have seen in a very long time. Times were/are hard all round and very few people have come out of this recession unscathed and, unfortunately, public and private sector alike all have to look at their current position with a certain degree of reality.

 

[c1973]

It's interesting that the predominant view here is one of 'I had to so they have to' when the debate moves onto pay. An understandable position you could argue.

What seems to be lost in all this (only my opinion btw) is that it's (in the main) those at the lower end of the spectrum that are hardest hit. Take local authorities for example, ours are laying off low paid temps, bank staff, agency workers etc, but at the same time are creating new heads of service, area manager and supervisor positions. I don't know, but would hazard a guess that it's being replicated in areas of the private sector as well.

My point being, when are these workers at the lower end of said spectrum (public and private sector) going to wake up to the fact they are all being shafted here? Not one or the other, not one more than the other, but both. The people who caused this financial mess are already back on the gravy train, snouts in the trough and we (all of us) are to busy squabbling between ourselves to do anything about it.

I don't always agree with strikes, but believe it's an important tool that workers shouldn't lose but also shouldn't abuse. But, perhaps a nationwide general strike should have been supported by all (public and private sector) workers in protest about, say;

MPs expenses fraud and the guilty one's not being sacked and charged with fraud (all of them, not some),
bankers not being criminally charged for fixing LIBOR rates amongst other things,
energy companies not having to reimburse customers for fixing rates (instead of paltry fines that go to government),
paedophile rings (allegedly) operating in the upper echelons of the ruling class being swept under the carpet,
contracts being awarded because MPs are either on the board or consultants

That's enough to get me pissed about the way this country is run just for starters. Yet here we are, arguing the toss between public and private sector pensions etc. Divide and conquer.

It makes me sad that the public are so easily fooled.

 

[Old Skier]

If you are talking about IPSA report, then I'd challenge you to identify the MPs on that panel - 1 ex-MP who lost her seat 8 years+ before being appointed, but that would be misleading at best! No MPs as members or on Board! It would hardly be 'Independent' as per its title otherwise!

However, all appointments are made by the Speaker of the HOC.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Why should the difficulties, trials and tribulations of those working in the private sector make any different whatsoever to whether of not those in the public sector try and improve their lot or protect what they have. We choose to work where we work. Just because in the private sector employees may seem powerless against their employer - that does not in itself make an argument for everyone being powerless. Maybe workers in the private sector should get ourselves organised.

 

[Old Skier]

Most of us work where we can get a job. If you live in an area where you can pick and choose I consider you very lucky.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Most of us work where we can get a job. If you live in an area where you can pick and choose I consider you very lucky.

Indeed - and that's why I had to leave Scotland to find mine

 

[SocketRocket]

People that support Public sector employees keeping their current pension schemes(Even though there is a £550 Billion Deficit in their funding) and them having inflation proofed wages should think about how this will be funded. It's no good saying MPs should not have a wage increase or bankers bonuses need a special tax, massive amounts of money would need raising. This could be achieved by raising tax, cutting more from the armed services, cutting the NHS budget, cutting back on welfare, these are the things that would need to be done to keep Public sector people in the manner they have become accustomed.

Another consideration is that the current journey we have set out on whereby we have decided on a policy to create a very large increase in the population which will have to be funded, these additional people will need to use public services so the bill will get even bigger.