Well done Co-op - Now for the Govt.

[superlightr]

If the Co-op and the other big un (which i cant remember now) can shut their final salary pension to Exisiting and future staff and switch to average salary pension... WHY cant the government do the same?

Would this not solve a big chunk of the problem of pensions? and save the poor tax payer who is not in a cushy civil servant job.

>> Edited by superlightr on Thursday 5th January 13:00

[minicity]

Would you be happy if you were employed to do a job and part way through it you were told that you would only get some of the money you were promised?

[superlightr]

Would I be happy to be told my state pension age is rising, my contribuitons are going up to pay for a civil who hasnt paid in enough, and I wont get anything from my state pension when I get there and I must make private provisions as well?

[slapmatt]

No Labour Govt would ever end final-salary schemes in the public sector.

I think this could be a big vote winner for one of the other parties (I know I'd vote for it).

[bga]

slapmatt said:

No Labour Govt would ever end final-salary schemes in the public sector. I think this could be a big vote winner for one of the other parties (I know I'd vote for it).

but, just like benefit reform, there would be a very sizable number of voters who would get of their arses & vote against anyone proposing the changes.

[superlightr]

But as a government - what is BEST for the country? They are meant to be making difficult decisions, some populare some umpopular for the benefit of the country and its people.

The country is in a pension black hole, 'normal' works are having to pay more then is fair for other workers who by virtue of working for the government get more then they pay in/entitled to.

If a private company can switch, so can the government. I feel its akin to corruption of the governement for not switching immediatly.

[AndyAudi]

minicity said:

Would you be happy if you were employed to do a job and part way through it you were told that you would only get some of the money you were promised?

I wouldn't be happy, but it does and is happening in the private sector, I know of several individuals whose retirement income has effectively halved after a change has been anounced, some in their 60's. I've heard of a few that have lost much more when their company can't even afford to make a settlement.

How about just stopping new entrants from getting a final salary scheme pension ?

Many civil servants claim their pension is a "reward for lower wages throughout their employment" Would it be a bad thing if less people were encouraged to join the civil service?

[AJLintern]

I agree that there should be less civil servants, but there always will need to be some in various positions. The Labour government created more than they could afford to support, so messed it up for everyone. The pension scheme was supposed to offset the crap wages, non existant benefits, bonuses and late pay rises that barely keep pace with inflation So I think anyone who's pension is messed about with has cause to feel a bit pissed off!

[AndyAudi]

Quinny said:

One of the reasons I took the job I currently have, is that they offered a final salary pension scheme. I considered it as part of my pay, a benefit I would reap in later years. If they were to withdraw it now, I'd consider that a breach of contract. They can't just go and move the goal posts, without some form of compensation.

Fair enough point which i don't argue with, but would be interested to know,

would you accept a new entrant to your Co doing a similar role to you on a significantly higher salary without the option of a final salary, or a large annual bonus for continued loyalty with no final salary scheme?

how would you react if you employer told you, "we don't have enough money to honour all our commitments, if you all force us to honour your final salary pension we will be forced to put the company into receivership and you can stake your claim with all the other creditors which we anticipate would yield around 38p for every £1.00 you're entitled to?

I am an ex civil servant (brief) & have had lots of dealings with them, in my personal opinion they wouldn't be happy with the first situation, and have the luxury of knowing they won't see the second.

[TheLemming]

Quinny said:

One of the reasons I took the job I currently have, is that they offered a final salary pension scheme. I considered it as part of my pay, a benefit I would reap in later years. If they were to withdraw it now, I'd consider that a breach of contract. They can't just go and move the goal posts, without some form of compensation. After all they wouldn't be to pleased if I decided I don't want to do 37 hours any more, I think I'll drop down to 30 as it suits me better.

Surely all employment contracts, including terms and conditions and renumeration are subject to change given a reasonable notice period?

Unfortunately final salary pension schemes are become unaffordable, as a result, they may have to go the way of the dodo.

[superlightr]

reasoned views, but will the Govt have a debate about it? will they even consider it?

When have the govt not done something that will suit the govt best interests? clearly this would 'benefit ' the country but upset some civil servants. It would relieve some of the unfair burden on 'normal' tax payers in relation to pensions.

Whats best for the Country may not be best for the Govt and may not be best for the civil servants making the changes.

Will this infulence their decisions? Will they even debate it? If they dont then they are corrupt.

[john75]

It will come to a point without doubt where Government Agencies like the NHS and MOD will have to cut their final salary pension arrangements.

[AJLintern]

What people in the private sector often seem to forget is that civil servants are tax payers too! It's the government that is to blame for the financial mismanagement of the situation, not those that it employs.

[speedyman]

Lots of companies took "payment holidays" when their pension schemes were in surplus during the 1990's. If they had maintained their payments then there would be more money available to pay out now and in the future. Pensions are long term savings which need good years to offset losses in bad years. I have invested years in my company pension scheme on the basis that the pension would provide for my retirement, to change it now would effect me big time.
In my opinion this is just another bandwagon compaines are on to reduce benifits for average workers and further line the pockets of CEO's. You can bet their pension arrangements won't be effected.

speedyman

[8Pack]

Absolutely Speedyman, the damage I feel was done years ago and no matter how much people try to deny it, it remains true. The Concervatives were responsible for the massive drop in tax for the Billionaires (in fact it was the first thing Mrs T did) then she precided over the "de-industrialisation" of Britain, all those industries which used to earn the export income disappeared. And, if you have no industry, there is no-one to pay the taxes that fund the Police, the Courts, the Jails, the NHS, the Schools, the Roads.......the Pensions! Etc Etc....(sound familiar?) Yes, that's right...all those things that I hear being complained of in these pages. Even the acursed "speed cameras" are a result of a huge tax hole that forced governments to find another way to fund road policing.

I have worked in 4 major industries in my lifetime, 2 of them are no more....gone!


All in all, it's a sign of a STILL declining economy........




>> Edited by 8Pack on Friday 6th January 05:14

[juliann]

It incenses me the way the Government just doesn't give a about pensions. I lost all my Final Salary benefits when a company I worked for went belly up with an underfunded scheme. It wasn't the companys fault the scheme was underfunded, it was a combination of govt policy on dividend taxation, poor investment advice to the trustees (of whom, incidentally I was one) and unlucky timing (stock mkt woes). Losing the whole value of my pension was bad enough but I later found that I was both unable to either charge it as a taxable loss or even make high payments to my new private scheme (over the std age allowance %ages) to try to recover my situation. So basically, I am now ed for life. The protective legislation that came into force was too late for the thousands of people in our scheme and wasn't made retrospective. An absolute disgrace.

[minicity]

Quinny said:

One of the reasons I took the job I currently have, is that they offered a final salary pension scheme. I considered it as part of my pay, a benefit I would reap in later years. If they were to withdraw it now, I'd consider that a breach of contract. They can't just go and move the goal posts, without some form of compensation. After all they wouldn't be to pleased if I decided I don't want to do 37 hours any more, I think I'll drop down to 30 as it suits me better.

This is how I feel. A person may have chosen a career and worked 20 or 30 years on the basis that they would get a particular pension. An employer cannot just change the rules to suit themselves, after the work has been done.

[themaskedavenger]

This is why I spend a good few working hours on piston heads, something at work will change no doubt and they will feel clever for shafting me and getting some money back but I will have the last laugh in that they paid me for years for surfing.

I suggest everyone spends more time on Pistonheads (although for some I guess there are no more hours in the day!)