Re: Strikes Revisited : Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:30 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Unbelievable you should read back on some of your stuff - still never used your car's breaks in hurry

You are hardly posting from a position of superiority!!

I have no idea what you're on about now but if it makes you happy, my car gets regular breaks, it gets a good rest every night too.

Re: Strikes Revisited : Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:16 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

I never said that was what they earned - all I did was illustrate how the £720 was a reasonable figure and how it could be calculated - another Mod who struggles with basic comprehension.

Oh the irony.

Re: Strikes Revisited : Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:33 pm  

I'm in unison and I intend to strike on the 30th. The main reason a lot of people in in the PS are striking is because final pensions will soon be based on average salary rather than final salary. Its a total myth that every PS worker receives a "golden handshake" when the retire.

Re: Strikes Revisited : Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:44 pm  

It might even be a little easier to swallow if those grunting, snivelling bastads in Westminster had sorted their own grasping, tax-payer funded, defined-benefit pension scheme out first

Re: Strikes Revisited : Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:41 pm  

Charlie Sheen wrote:

I'm in unison and I intend to strike on the 30th. The main reason a lot of people in in the PS are striking is because final pensions will soon be based on average salary rather than final salary. Its a total myth that every PS worker receives a "golden handshake" when the retire.

Very much the same thing is about to happen to the armed forces. Pensions will be based on career average rather than final salary. Unsurprisingly, no-one is planning to strike, partly because they are Crown servants and can't.

A brilliant article in The Independent today. It basically said that some in the public sector have completely unrealistic expectations. The make up around 1/5 of the workforce and are generally paid better than people with similar qualifications in the private sector. They get better terms and conditions and a pension that those in the private sector would have to pay around 37% of their salary to match. If we are all in this together, then so is the public sector.

As for Tube drivers (who earn £45,545 a year) all we are asking them to do is what lots of other people do....work Boxing Day. Aslef members don't like the idea of doing what everyone else who works weekends and bank holidays does, which is take it in turns.

Re: Strikes Revisited : Wed Nov 16, 2011 8:10 pm  

The Video Ref wrote:

Very much the same thing is about to happen to the armed forces. Pensions will be based on career average rather than final salary. Unsurprisingly, no-one is planning to strike, partly because they are Crown servants and can't.

A brilliant article in The Independent today. It basically said that some in the public sector have completely unrealistic expectations. The make up around 1/5 of the workforce and are generally paid better than people with similar qualifications in the private sector. They get better terms and conditions and a pension that those in the private sector would have to pay around 37% of their salary to match. If we are all in this together, then so is the public sector.

As for Tube drivers (who earn £45,545 a year) all we are asking them to do is what lots of other people do....work Boxing Day. Aslef members don't like the idea of doing what everyone else who works weekends and bank holidays does, which is take it in turns.

Did this brilliant article provide significant examples of such unrealistic expectations? Or any evidence of this mythical better pay that public sector workers receive? As for the pensions, my mum retired last year after 20 years in the public sector. Her pension is less than £6000 per year. My dad also retired last year after over 40 years in the NHS, with a pension of £12,000 per year. Which private sector workers would have to pay in 37% of their wages to gain this kind of gold-plated pension?
My current private sector pension scheme is similar to the one I was on in the NHS, but my total remuneration package is far better than what I was on in the NHS because the wages and benefits are far higher for a far less demanding job.
But wait, I can't be in the real world? Can I?

Re: Strikes Revisited : Wed Nov 16, 2011 8:17 pm  

In fact, just had a quick look on a few websites, we already know the private schools pay more than the public sector, we already know that doctors & nurses get paid more for their work in the private sector than for the NHS and a quick vacancies check sees admin posts in private hospitals with far higher wages than in the NHS.

I've heard a lot said by right-wing media and free-Market apologists about how the pay, pensions & conditions are far better/gold-plated etc in the public sector. I'm yet to see any evidence for this.

Re: Strikes Revisited : Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:10 pm  

I love how the press and the government are trying to pitch the public sector average joes against the private sector average joes while the richest public and private sector workers laugh it up with massive pay rises, massive bonuses and massive pensions.

Re: Strikes Revisited : Wed Nov 16, 2011 10:16 pm  

Out of interest, I was wondering what people on this board consider to be a 'good' salary and a 'good' pension?

Should society begrudge people a decent wage if they have worked hard to get it?

Is this just another opportunity for some to be part of the 'us' in the never ending battle against 'them'?

[DaveO]

Re: Strikes Revisited : Thu Nov 17, 2011 1:09 am  

The Video Ref wrote:

Out of interest, I was wondering what people on this board consider to be a 'good' salary and a 'good' pension?

I think you should start the ball rolling by answering a slightly different question. What do you consider to be a "Gold Plated Pension". You know like the one my wife was bound to get according to you.