Flying Picket

S.O.N.I.C
10 May, 2012 - 09:18

Well, a limping picket, I've hurt my knee. Today I will be defending the rights of the working man and public sector pensions and getting some fresh air. I hope somebody brings a chair.

‹ I'm thinking of placing a bet Exile ›

..I'm all for public sector pensions

scorpion
10 May, 2012 - 09:40
scorpion's picture

as long as the public sector pay for them.

..I'm sure you realise

S.O.N.I.C
10 May, 2012 - 09:45

that the extra cost to these pensions isn't going into the pension fund, but going towards paying off debts created by bankers.

On the buses

rblockells (not verified)
10 May, 2012 - 12:09

the bus drivers are after a bit of the loot that will pour into the coffers of the various bus companies during the olympics.

and why not?

good companies share their profits with their workforce.nothing wrong with that.

Share their profits

Boston R (not verified)
10 May, 2012 - 12:37

but eat their losses?

Bus Companies

exile
11 May, 2012 - 18:46
exile's picture

in England does suffer losses. Like the trains they are bankrolled by the government. Private, but living of public funds. Cut these and maybe we'd see a change, but that aint going to happen.

__________________

I’m known as Exile and I know where you live.

I've enthusiastically picketed in my time

Boston R (not verified)
10 May, 2012 - 12:41

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfuHgzu1Cjg

California this winter dear?

scorpion
10 May, 2012 - 12:53
scorpion's picture

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2142028/Pensions-80-000-retired-public-sector-workers-higher-average-salary-paid-private-employee.html

Something similar in Massachusetts

Boston R (not verified)
10 May, 2012 - 13:25

generationally the public sector provided steady work at lower remuniration, though rewarded with a supplemental pension upon retirement. It's only 7/8 years ago that the average taxpayer became aware that the increments had added up and the public sector were now enjoying higher wages and better benefits than the private sector, this coupled with an employment contract which made losing a job for anything but the most serious offence, impossible. When someone actually was found with their hand in the till, they rarely lost benefits or pensions, even when the offence involved financial 'discrepancies'.

I'm not sure what was alluded to earlier about the banks, but an example from this side of the pond, President Obama's administration awarded hundreds of millions of dollars to the Teachers Union citing the dire lack of educators in the 'inner city'. Not one penny was spent hiring new teachers, that sum was used to bolster existing pension plans.

Times, like the tide are changing. It's causing much rancour, understandably as most people are unwilling to 'take a hit', but like it or not, the United States has reached the social tipping point. The large block of people who normally carry on with their life not bothered by elections, politics, governments, have awoken.

where as in the developed world

S.O.N.I.C
10 May, 2012 - 21:14

leaving aside the fact that rather than cut public sector pay it might be better for the private sector to fight for better pay and conditions - the extra money raised from increased contributions and the extra years working isn't paying off a pension fund debt - There is no funding gap - the public sector schemes were assessed for long term risk and adjusted accordingly three years ago and are now very secure. Both the local government pension scheme and NHS pension scheme are currently cash rich with income far exceeding outgoings - some £2 billion in the case of the NHS pension scheme. It is simply an ideological attack on the public sector, on its unions and is theft.

Well over here

Boston R (not verified)
10 May, 2012 - 23:42

all they're asking is public workers are treated the same as everybody else. And, knowing you're a teacher and me being rather connected to the world of educators myself...as I said before, the times they are a changing, fast.

I wish

S.O.N.I.C
11 May, 2012 - 09:49

I was on the same terms as a teacher, rather than short-term individual contracts as a lecturer. I've been on strike 4 times over this dispute, and that's with a few months of being out of work. The NUT have been out once I think, and they are the ones whose actions would actually be more disruptive/useful. As for being treated the same as the private sector, that'll never happen, there are plenty of areas where they are better paid - mostly in professions where the public sector has paid for their training and education, and the private sector is focused on maximising profit and they will always seek to keep wages down to the lowest they can get away with. The statistics here don't actually support the view that the private sector is doing so badly anyway, The average director of a FTSE 100 company has a final salary pension worth £3.6m or £174,963 a year, while the average occupational pension is £9,500 a year, the average public service pension is £7,800 a year.

The private sector will never adequately fill the role of  either the public sector or the voluntary/charity organisations and individuals that hold the arse-end of society together, because there are some things that are important, there just isn't any profit in it.

Well we're agreed then

Boston R (not verified)
11 May, 2012 - 11:49

if there isn't any profit in it, there shouldn't be any profit from it.

Seriously, the average employee in the private sector is not a director of a FTSE company and as I mentioned before, my neighbours here in Massachusetts are asking that workers are treated the same, I'd hazard that's pretty much the same scenario in the UK.

No, we don't agree.

S.O.N.I.C
11 May, 2012 - 12:47

You can make a profit from health care, at the expense of those conditions that can't. You can make a profit teaching certain things, at the expense of those people who can't afford it. As for the FTSE managers, I notice you ignored the comparaison between the average occupational pension of £9.500 and the average public sector of £7, 800. It is nothing to do with being treated the same. the pension is part of the pay - just like a company car, private health care,

The cuts to the public sector are a cynical, ideological attack on the public sector (and their unions) and employees in general. The excuse of cutting a deficit is a smokescreen, the pensions were adjusted 3 years ago already, and the budget deficit hasn't been touched by any of the ConDem cuts, not those in the benefit system or in public sector jobs and services.(well it wouldn't with less people paying tax, consumer confidence down and welfare payments up) This latest wheeze about making it easier to fire people wont boost the economy either. As for being equal, this bollocks about local pay rates for the public sector, most of the big private sector employers have a national pay structure, it is a nonsense. If anything a reverse of the local pay proposal would be fairer becasue I'm pretty sure working in the public sector in a struggling area is a lot harder than in a nice middle-class borough.

I say it is a cynical attack, because like Thatcher's attack on industry and its unions did, it will leave the country unable to respond to the vagaries of an inherently unstable capitalist economy.

As for your neighbours and their ilk, I'm wondering why, if they truly believe the public sector to be so well favoured they don't all work in it, nobody is stopping them, it is a reasonably equal oppurtunities employer, no class, race, wealth bias - like in a lot of jobs (apart from the cabinet, where it would help if they were schooled at Eton)

Sure, but then they would have a compulsory deduction

Boston R (not verified)
11 May, 2012 - 23:21

made to the union, who then supports a political party, whether you like it or not.

And, I didn't ignore...some call it speed reading, I prefer to call it missing out every second line.

A lot of us in the private sector ..

Donaldo
11 May, 2012 - 13:30
Donaldo's picture

... got hit hard on this sort of thng a few years ago.  It's the way things are at the moment.  Final salary schemes are unsustainable and people are living longer.  Things have to change.

Maybe it's a 'divide & rule' thing but there's not a great deal of sympathy for the 'plight' of public sector workers in the private arena.

As I said Don

S.O.N.I.C
11 May, 2012 - 14:12

The pensions were adjusted to account for, amongst other things,  the projection that people were living longer, three years ago and some are well into surplus. I suspect that selling off the NHS and cutting public services and education as well as the complete failure of this governmnet to get any activity in the economy will result in life expectancy growth slowing down, and the 13 year gap between the rich and poor widening. In HE, we've been taking a hit for a long time, under Labour as well as this lot and not just in terms of wages, but in conditions, which is one of the reasons I chose to stay part-time, which was a bit of mistake as things have turned out, but there you go.

Life expectancy should shorten

Boston R (not verified)
12 May, 2012 - 13:22

...and pretty soon. Take a good look in the mirror, obesity, binge drinking and drug abuse are not the cocktail for a royal telegram.

How come

S.O.N.I.C
12 May, 2012 - 00:44

you know so much about me? are you the FBI?

Entrenched in the front line of the war against 'pinkos'.

Boston R (not verified)
12 May, 2012 - 13:28

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.