Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Stirling, Jun 29, 2011.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Enter rent-a-mob ?, hope plod corals them early,

    £9.7 billion black hole in public sector pensions, something had to be done.
  2. The unions have my full support, if and when I see MP's leading by example I might reconsider my position.

    MPs are delaying on a pledge to reform their gold-plated pensions despite having raised the retirement age for 2.6m women by up two years.

    Broken promises: David Cameron and Nick Clegg have taken the axe to British pensions, but delayed doing the same to their own

    MP's enjoy supercharged pensions that are heavily subsidised by taxpayers.
    They can build a £24,000 year pension in just 15 years, based on their £65,738 salary.

    While in opposition Tories and Liberals promised to ditch MPs' final salary pension schemes for new MPs and replace them with a scheme linked to the stock market.
    This would have brought them into line with most of their constituents.
    The first step on the road to reform would be for MPs to hand over control of their pensions to an independent body away from the Leader of the House of Commons. This has not happened.
    And they have still not decided whether to accept proposals made last summer that they should switch from a final salary pension to a less generous career average ones, build up benefits more slowly, and increase their pension age from 65 to 68.
    But while they have delayed dealing with their own pensions, the Government has decided to bring forward plans to raise the state retirement age to 66 by April 2020, some six years earlier than originally planned.
    In doing so it broke a pledge made in the Coalition agreement that it would not start introducing the increases for women before 2020.

  3. Nice one Fink....... My Company changed from a Final Salary Scheme, to a Defined Contribution Scheme, for new starters only, with the full support from the Union. Maybe the Cons/Libs Coalition might like to think that one over!!!!
  4. I actually agree with you on this one Finks.
  5. :sign3:I agree with you Finx
  6. Nice one Finks......seem to have forgotten the name of the Chancellor who did a tax raid on the pension funds though
  7. See I told you Fink the White would return after the slaying of Fink the Grey.

    You are now a Bruvva Finks, and I totally agree with you.
    Seems the old adage "Don't do as I do, do as I say" is still very much the order of the day in Westminster.
  8. After MLP receiving bell end..........sorry leg end of the month, I think our Finksy is maybe looking for some brownie points in order to 15-2 the mong master baiter !
  9. While accepting that MPs pension arrangements are far better than any of their constituents can expect it doesn't alter the fact that Public Sector pensions need to be brought more into line with those in the private sector whose tax payments fund them.Even the Labour Party,that champion of the working classes,are saying the same.I accept that no-one wants to hear they are going to have to work longer,pay more,and get a smaller pension at the end of it but millions in the private sector have already had to thanks in no small way to Gordon Brown's raid on their Final Salary Schemes.Where were the Union battallions when all that was going on?
  10. How the hell do you know their all labour voters.
    You can't start throwing politics into union affairs, thats a numpty point of view.
    Your rights at work and the conditions you work under are naff all to do with who you vote for, and the only way the two come together is if its the gov (as in this case) thats the root cause of your discontent.
    I was a trade unionist for years and was even shop steward in two jobs, but have been a life long Tory. I never contributed to Central funds as a member, as is your right.
  11. The union supports ALL who are members, it does not champion a cause for non members the same as the RAC or AA drive past you if you ain't in their club.

  12. Are you feeling disappointed Stirling that the baying mob did not materialise, who would have thought that teachers and other public sector workers could protest in such a civilised manner?

    If the government need to bring in pension changes it should be for new entrants with a new contract of employment and should not destroy the hopes and aspirations of those who are in position now.
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2011
  13. Yet they're still asking for public support
  14. That would be fine if the problem i.e. the funding gap,was not going to be a problem for another twenty years rather than the predicted eight years.As I understand it those whose have accrued pensions thus far under the current system will carry that forward and it will be added to what will follow under the new system.We all have hopes and aspirations which sometimes work out and sometimes don't.That is how life is but circumstances change often when out of our control.What you need to do is adapt to the new situation and make the best of it rather than throw Teddy out of the pram.
  15. Hope you are not forgetting all those pension free contribution holiday payments ( raids) that the Company/Bosses helped themselves for years , whilst the Final Salary Schemes were in surplus .......In the late 90s when the equity market was booming the companies also awarded themselves "contribution holidays" . This meant that labour costs were held artificially low and those companies thereby gained a market advantage and greater profits which in turn boosted share prices. Not paying any contributions into the pension schemes soon became the norm, a habit it proved difficult to break.
  16. You do not have to be a member to benefit from any improvement in work and conditions that the union negotiates. It's good to sit back and get paid when the members are taking industrial action and still reap any benefits that may come from such action, don't you think?
  17. Striking to me, (and to everyone I've spoken to about this) is counterproductive IMO. Quite simply, it's a surefire way to get the public to hate you.

    I understand why strike action may be taken in extreme circumstances and as an absolute last resort for those who are being monumentally seen off. But half the time it seems to me to be pure and simple teddy throwing hissy fits.

    We're skint, take a bite of the shit sandwich like everyone else and crack on.
  18. Well everyone wants to be loved
  19. The trouble with that Monty is that many are being asked to take bigger mouthfuls.
    The take big breaths and get rid of it quicker don't work.
    It seems Cameron tells us were all in it together, trouble with that is we all know its bull shit.
    100% of **** all is still **** all.
    Like these ***** on reality shows showing us how Lord so and so can live on Benefit for a couple of weeks.
    So could I, I call it a diet, but bills and needs still come even if delayed.
    Funny how all the bastards with plenty tell the ones with jack how easy it is to get by.
    My daughter works 55 hours a week as a dental nurse and her standard of living is dropping so fast free fall comes to mind.
    Striking for money is a bit counter productive but conditions well.........?

Share This Page