Greece; Is this the beginning of the end for the Euro?

[Dryce]

I am conflicted on the strikes. My partner has been teaching for 20 years and it seems reasonable that her pension is honoured. I can see the argument for changing the terms for subsequent years and entrants.

But if you have always known where you stand, you knew the pension is going to be liveable and you are too close to retirement to make any other provision than I see her point when she says it makes a her years of hard work seem unvalued.

The pension does need to be worth working for.

My wife works in public sector and the dilemma is similar.

In the past decade the ratio between what she is paid in terms of headline and the staff at my company has inverted. Factor in her pension and her package is unbelievably good. I spreadsheeted it a few years ago and it was obvious then that I can't compete with what she'll get.

It's all very well talking about a pension being honoured. The bottom line is that it has to be paid for. And that the costs have been going up as salaries and life expectancy have increased. The deal that HMG is trying to push is still *fantastic* compared with the real world the rest of us live in.

There are only two ways out of this.

The system is rebalanced by design or it is rebalanced by rampant inflation.

There are a large number of public sector workers who have all our futures in their hands.

 

[snoop51]

My wife works in public sector and the dilemma is similar.

In the past decade the ratio between what she is paid in terms of headline and the staff at my company has inverted. Factor in her pension and her package is unbelievably good. I spreadsheeted it a few years ago and it was obvious then that I can't compete with what she'll get.

It's all very well talking about a pension being honoured. The bottom line is that it has to be paid for. And that the costs have been going up as salaries and life expectancy have increased. The deal that HMG is trying to push is still *fantastic* compared with the real world the rest of us live in.

There are only two ways out of this.

The system is rebalanced by design or it is rebalanced by rampant inflation.

There are a large number of public sector workers who have all our futures in their hands.

Perhaps another way of looking at it is life expectancy which has increased over the years so the annual pension has to be paid over a greater length of time. If you have a private pension you build up a sum of money (your pension pot) surely if you take say the life expectancy of a public sector worker in the 70's or 80's say 75 years with a retirement age of 60 years then you end up with 15 years retirement. If you now increase the life expectancy to 85 years subtract 15 years retirement gives a retirement age of 70 years or a retirement age still of 60 but then you only get 15 years pension rights or a lower pension per annum. The pension pot is a finite amount of money, if you have paid no more in you cannot expect to get more out of it, unless interest rates are exceptional, which currently they are not.

I understand why public sector workers feel hard done by but surely even they can see that if there is only a small amount going into the pot they can't take out a huge amount.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

I think a major argument from the public sector staff is that the government bails out the banks to the tune of billions and then makes everyone else pay for it, while the bankers carry on getting these ludicrous bonuses.

I've never worked in the public sector, but I'm amazed that it's taken this long for real industrial action to be taken.

I'm sure this won't be a popular stance on a forum made up mostly of middle aged Mercedes drivers, but I support their right to strike. It's about time someone backed up their words with actions.
I

 

[finisterre]

The various governments over the last few decades have lobbed money at teachers rather than deal with the reasons that retention is a problem. The Mrs knows the pension is superb. When Darren from Y9 is mouthing a load of obscenity in her face and damaging every other child's education she wants to jack it in but the pension keeps her in there.

If the job was more pleasant we could get away with paying her a lot less. Money has never been the motivator. It has only ever become a factor since the job went to ****. I have asked around and it seems to be the general case.

It is not legal to strike over being asked to tick stupid boxes or being expected to dumb down examinations. Or for making kids take exams too early, or making them do inappropriate courses because it is good for the schools league ranking.

There are loads bits to the job where education is being put second and many of the crappy bits of the job are tolerated because of the quality of the pension.

Yes I support the teachers. Not to have glorious pensions but to have some support in the workplace instead. It might offend some parents to be told they are damaging their children but we need to face up to the voters and kick their ****s where necessary.

Good Lord! - I am turning into my mrs.

 

[rhud]

Back to the euro. I love Greece,but the Greeks are essentially ungovernable. 400 years of occupation as part of the Ottoman empire bred a mindset which seeks to circumvent authority/rules/laws. Tax evasion is regarded as the natural order of things. It amounts to 3,000 euros per annum per taxpayer. I've just returned from holiday there and for 80 per cent of meals out no receipt was offered for cash transactions.

 

[Dryce]

I'm sure this won't be a popular stance on a forum made up mostly of middle aged Mercedes drivers, but I support their right to strike. It's about time someone backed up their words with actions.
I

How do you pay for something that is unaffordable?

I know a lot of people who tend to think HMG is a bottomless pit of money without thinking where that money comes from.

The problem isn't new. But by the mid nineties the problems were very apparent. There is an irony that Gordon Brown came in as chancellor - started *taxing* private pensions - *cleaned up* the accounting on company pensions - and did nothing about the *increasing* liabilities on public sector pensions - and on his watch those lieabilities were incrsased bt profligacy in the public sector on employment and salaries.

So the issue was going to come to the fore within a decade or two. It has but under desparate financial circumstances.

HMG has three solutions. Change the deal and try and be fair on everyone affeted. Keep the existing deal but further reduce the number of public employees so some lsoe out completely. Or let matters take their course - which will mean that they will simply print money in the future while sucking the private sector dry so the real value of those pensions will drop anyway.

So the strikes are meaningless. If they lose they don't gain. If they win they will eventually lose.

 

[Scott_F]

The various governments over the last few decades have lobbed money at teachers rather than deal with the reasons that retention is a problem. The Mrs knows the pension is superb. When Darren from Y9 is mouthing a load of obscenity in her face and damaging every other child's education she wants to jack it in but the pension keeps her in there.

If the job was more pleasant we could get away with paying her a lot less. Money has never been the motivator. It has only ever become a factor since the job went to ****. I have asked around and it seems to be the general case.

It is not legal to strike over being asked to tick stupid boxes or being expected to dumb down examinations. Or for making kids take exams too early, or making them do inappropriate courses because it is good for the schools league ranking.

There are loads bits to the job where education is being put second and many of the crappy bits of the job are tolerated because of the quality of the pension.

Yes I support the teachers. Not to have glorious pensions but to have some support in the workplace instead. It might offend some parents to be told they are damaging their children but we need to face up to the voters and kick their ****s where necessary.

Good Lord! - I am turning into my mrs.

Teaching is by no means an easy job and has been made more difficult by successive Governments using education as a political football.

However, pensions aside, teachers also enjoy lots of other attractive benefits (holidays, generous sickness and maternity benefits) that are not open to private sector employees (or even most of their colleagues elsewhere in the public sector).

 

[finisterre]

Yep.
It is a pity sexual assault by children, verbal abuse and physical assault by children and parents are also perks.

Young teachers nowadays can hardly spell. It is because nobody in their right mind wants to be placed in charge of educating a group of young thugs that have no interest in education and over whom you have absolutely no power. We are no longer attracting good people into the profession. The levels of stress are dreadful. As for the holidays. The summer holiday is the only one that counts. The Mrs is ill for every other one, she collapses, is utterly drained. No use to man or beast. Aand you mentioned sickness and maternity benefits, we have never used either not a day off in 24 years. They don't exactly float your boat if you are dedicated to your job.

Take the pension away and there will be nothing whatsoever attractive about the job. The experienced will leave in droves. It is a Govian disaster. This country is ****ed without an educated workforce. We are fiddling while the kids are wasted.

 

[Scott_F]

Yep.
It is a pity sexual assault by children, verbal abuse and physical assault by children and parents are also perks.

Young teachers nowadays can hardly spell. It is because nobody in their right mind wants to be placed in charge of educating a group of young thugs that have no interest in education and over whom you have absolutely no power. We are no longer attracting good people into the profession. The levels of stress are dreadful. As for the holidays. The summer holiday is the only one that counts. The Mrs is ill for every other one, she collapses, is utterly drained. No use to man or beast. Aand you mentioned sickness and maternity benefits, we have never used either not a day off in 24 years. They don't exactly float your boat if you are dedicated to your job.

Take the pension away and there will be nothing whatsoever attractive about the job. The experienced will leave in droves. It is a Govian disaster. This country is ****ed without an educated workforce. We are fiddling while the kids are wasted.

Nobody should consider teaching to be a job for the faint-hearted and it's a credit to your wife that she has never been off work due to sickness.

However, the long holidays (no matter how they are used) and the other benefits that I mentioned are still attractive and many will make use of them.

 

[finisterre]

The holidays are attractive.

Scott you are spot on about the political football stuff too.

The really annoying thing is that it could be so much better. And cheaper.

Clearly I have issues.

 

[mattc]

the Euro in its current form is toast. It is the edifice of political vanity of a good number of politicains who will desperately try to keep it afloat as it underpins the European Project (a federal europe). its galling to watch people calling for GREATER harmonisation of taxation as a means to solve the problem!

Greece will cut loose - the question is just when. other nations will follow.

 

[st13phil]

My wife works in public sector and the dilemma is similar.

In the past decade the ratio between what she is paid in terms of headline and the staff at my company has inverted. Factor in her pension and her package is unbelievably good. I spreadsheeted it a few years ago and it was obvious then that I can't compete with what she'll get.

Historically, generous pensions and job security were used in the public sector as a balance for relatively poor pay, but as Dryce notes the days of the public sector being remunerated less than the private sector for equivalent jobs are long gone and, in fact, the pay situation has reversed. The trouble is, that's an unaffordable situation which cannot continue to exist.

I have a great deal of sympathy with those who find themselves close to retirement and with insufficient time to adjust their financial plans, but that's exactly the situation that many in the private sector found themselves in when their pension investments collapsed a few years ago. Many had no choice but to delay their retirement and continue working. The public sector will still be much better protected than that, even after the proposed changes.

 

[grober]

What I am a bit wary of is the "politics of envy " approach to this current attack on public sector pensions. Instead of dragging the public sector down perhaps we should be thinking more in terms of improving the private sector pension provision with legislation . Certainly room for reform in both camps. And as for affordability the public sector pension burden on GDP has peaked and is set to come down according to the oft quoted Hutton report probably due to immediate post war population dynamics.


Despite public sector pension reform the burden is getting lighter | Money | The Guardian

 

[snoop51]

What I am a bit wary of is the "politics of envy " approach to this current attack on public sector pensions. Instead of dragging the public sector down perhaps we should be thinking more in terms of improving the private sector pension provision with legislation . Certainly room for reform in both camps. And as for affordability the public sector pension burden on GDP has peaked and is set to come down according to the oft quoted Hutton report probably due to immediate post war population dynamics.


Despite public sector pension reform the burden is getting lighter | Money | The Guardian

That well known advertiser of public sector non jobs. Methinks it's as biased as the Daily Mail just the opposite side of the playing field.

 

[Mr E]

How do you pay for something that is unaffordable?

I know a lot of people who tend to think HMG is a bottomless pit of money without thinking where that money comes from.

The problem isn't new. But by the mid nineties the problems were very apparent. There is an irony that Gordon Brown came in as chancellor - started *taxing* private pensions - *cleaned up* the accounting on company pensions - and did nothing about the *increasing* liabilities on public sector pensions - and on his watch those lieabilities were incrsased bt profligacy in the public sector on employment and salaries.

So the issue was going to come to the fore within a decade or two. It has but under desparate financial circumstances.

HMG has three solutions. Change the deal and try and be fair on everyone affeted. Keep the existing deal but further reduce the number of public employees so some lsoe out completely. Or let matters take their course - which will mean that they will simply print money in the future while sucking the private sector dry so the real value of those pensions will drop anyway.

So the strikes are meaningless. If they lose they don't gain. If they win they will eventually lose.

But that's where you're wrong - as has been well demonstrated by the number of politicians slaughtered by decent journalists who have done their research and read the report.

This report demonstrates that the cost in terms of a percentage of GDP is falling, having peaked a few years back. Being unable to sustain the status quo on a cost basis is not backed up by the report at all. What is does say is that the status quo is "untenable" on the basis that it is unfair when compared to the private sector.

What gets me annoyed about this is the way that it's been competely misrepresented by the government - who I don't see leading the way in this. They retain a generous final salary scheme. What happened to "we're in this together". Ditch the hypocrisy, lead by example, and then you might find those affected a little more sympathetic.

 

[snoop51]

What is does say is that the status quo is "untenable" on the basis that it is unfair when compared to the private sector.

What gets me annoyed about this is the way that it's been completely misrepresented by the government - who I don't see leading the way in this. They retain a generous final salary scheme. What happened to "we're in this together". Ditch the hypocrisy, lead by example, and then you might find those affected a little more sympathetic.

I agree with you about the politicians, they should be willing to lose their final salary pensions first.

Then again it is completely unfair that taxes are used to sustain a pension fund that ALL the population are not allowed access. We are all, public or private sector, payers of tax, yet only those in the private sector have been right royally rogered over the proverbial barrel with regards to pensions. All while the public sector has grown bloated in size and now caught up and surpassed the equivalent private sector workers wage, which was always given as a reason for the "perks" of the public sector package.

I as a private sector individual, self employed have no sympathy for those public sector employees currently on strike. My pension has all but gone thanks to good old Gordon whilst he over inflated the public sector with non jobs and increased the salaries whilst not looking at the overall package. He should have been reducing the pension arrangements whilst increasing salary but then what else could we expect off the man who can sell the gold reserve whilst the price was in the toilet.

 

[Alfie]

I think a major argument from the public sector staff is that the government bails out the banks to the tune of billions and then makes everyone else pay for it, while the bankers carry on getting these ludicrous bonuses.

I've never worked in the public sector, but I'm amazed that it's taken this long for real industrial action to be taken.

I'm sure this won't be a popular stance on a forum made up mostly of middle aged Mercedes drivers, but I support their right to strike. It's about time someone backed up their words with actions.
I

But it wasnt the banks that got us into this mess. It was the mindless borrowing and spending of a government that had no way to pay it all back! The banks contributed a small amount to the deficit thats all.

As for strikes well they went out with the ark. Didnt these people learn anything from the miners strikes? Striking doesnt work anymore where there is now legislation to protect the employees, unions are no longer needed. Ive seen with my own eyes just how lazy and mind numbingly militant these union leaders are. They do very little work, take huge salaries (eg Bob Crowe £180,000 PA and a council house) and perks. All striking does is to alienate the population against those who do walk out. As for this strike, who is suffering? The school kids who are losing a days education all because the public sector workers cant accept that things have to change just as they have for the private sector.

These union leaders and their militant cronies are a cancer in our society. fortunately survival rates for cancer have risen a lot in the last few years.

 

[finisterre]

I agree with you about the politicians, they should be willing to lose their final salary pensions first.

it would be nice but I don't expect being in it together goes quite that far

Then again it is completely unfair that taxes are used to sustain a pension fund that ALL the population are not allowed access. We are all, public or private sector, payers of tax, yet only those in the private sector have been right royally rogered over the proverbial barrel with regards to pensions.

National Insurance is the pension scheme accessible to all, being able to overpay would be a start.

All while the public sector has grown bloated in size and now caught up and surpassed the equivalent private sector workers wage, which was always given as a reason for the "perks" of the public sector package.

First. the government workers took what was offered. if the T&C were uncompetitive they may have chosen to stay private. We need good people in education, health and justice. Nobody wants rubbish public servants. It has to be attractive.

Bloated - yes- it is a response to the welfare bill climbing stratospherically and people in the private sector working ever more productively. There are too many unemployed and too few jobs, governments will always try to satisfy the demand for better services and cut the welfare bill. Can you blame them? Possibly, but if it looks affordable as it did pre 07 then it isn't a surprise they employ more people. It wasn't done to hurt the private sector, it was done to support the people in need and cut the unemployed.

I as a private sector individual, self employed have no sympathy for those public sector employees currently on strike.

Why? What has my Mrs done to you to deserve your opprobrium, she has worked hard all her life to do the best she can for the children in her care. I wonder what makes you so bitter.

My pension has all but gone thanks to good old Gordon

I am sorry about you pension. Brown was fiscally incontinent. He must have been one of the worst PMs ever.

He should have been reducing the pension arrangements whilst increasing salary

Keeping the salary down and pushing the pension age up would have worked too. Whatever, I agree that where we are now is not even slightly funny.

 

[Scott_F]

But it wasnt the banks that got us into this mess. It was the mindless borrowing and spending of a government that had no way to pay it all back! The banks contributed a small amount to the deficit thats all.

The reckless behaviour of the banks caused a global economic crises from which Western economies are still suffering. And in the UK several of them required massive bail outs from the taxpayer.

Striking doesnt work anymore where there is now legislation to protect the employees, unions are no longer needed.

Exactly which legislation had rendered union membership redundant ??

 

[st4]

I am conflicted on the strikes. My partner has been teaching for 20 years and it seems reasonable that her pension is honoured. I can see the argument for changing the terms for subsequent years and entrants.

But if you have always known where you stand, you knew the pension is going to be liveable and you are too close to retirement to make any other provision than I see her point when she says it makes a her years of hard work seem unvalued.

The pension does need to be worth working for.

Whilst public sector pensions are very high, they always have been, are they not a contractual right?

I am very wary of an employer pulling and messing with contractual rights. In the private sector (I work for a massive UK PLC) we have a major perk, a career average pension scheme (guess the employer) and whilst its not as good as a final salary scheme, which is closed for new entrants, I believe the current members of that will still get it. It would be galling from them if that was just changed. It was one of the main things which attracted me to that company, and probably why I will endevour to stay there as whilst I could earn more, I'd rather have the means to jack work in earlier.

I am no leftie, far from it, but I would say I don't grudge the unions striking on this one. I have in the past over non contractual things like pay rises when the packages are much better than they are in the private sector, but a pension is something you can build a life around, its a beacon of hope at the end of the tunnel. 3.5% pay rise is not, a big pension and waving goodbye to work is.

Scott F, the banks were bailed out by the UK tax payer, but we have a stake in them, when share prices rise, which they will, we shall see a return on our investments.

Alfie - I take your point re Unions and Bob Crowe, but in a private sector environment a union has a value, it prevents the employer exploiting staff and giving staff a 3rd party to go to with any issues and advice with any issues that hopefully never crop up.