BS: Striking teachers should lose pay

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 08:17 AM

Or as Kipling expressed more or less the same thought:

...For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 08 Jul 11 - 02:59 AM

Quote from a Ewan McColl song,

They may be gallant heroes when they're saving peoples lives,
But they're just a bunch of layabouts when they're asking for a rise.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 04:13 PM

Well, they gotta hate somebody. Might as well be firefighters, police, teachers, road maintenence workers - and all the rest of them damn good-for-nuthin' public employees.

Until they need their services, that is.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 03:18 PM

yes, sadly a predictable byproduct of Thatcher's glorious campaign to dismantle society
was a festering new generation of thousands upon thousands of ignorant under-educated people
who simply cannot understand the complex true socioeconomic factors that cause their miserable living conditions..


but as for intelligent educated professional people
falling for tory propaganda..

who know's why they are so gullible ??????

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 03:16 PM

I was a right whinger in hockey as a youth. Hope you are having a lovely day.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 07 Jul 11 - 03:08 PM

You are but half a dozen whingers among thousands who do not aree with you!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 06:33 PM

Yep. And can anyone explain to me why public sector workers, with properly negotiated, demonstrably sustainable pension schemes should be punished for that theft?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 06:17 PM

"Pension holidays" means that money which should have been paid by companies towards pensions have been diverted into the pockets of shareholders.

What I can't understand is, how that can possibly be any more legal than doing the same process of diversion from money in the bank accounts of employees? Either way it is theft.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 05:14 PM

One of my favourite words is

kak·is·toc·ra·cy n. pl. kak·is·toc·ra·cies
Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens.

[Greek kakistos, worst, superlative of kakos, bad; see caco- + -cracy.]

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 04:54 PM

"Not impressed, I've had no pay rise for 4 years."

Ever think maybe you should belong to a union?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 04:41 PM

Bozo doesn't kick those like him. He kicks the smallest and weakest and least able to defend themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 04:33 PM

"I've had no pay rise for 4 years."
Then point the finger at those responsible for the mess we're in instead of kicking those in the same boat as yourself.
That's why the bastards remain unaffected by the consequences of their own greed and incompetence.
They really love people like you doing their dirty work for them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 03:07 PM

I didn't want you to be "impressed," I wanted to apprise the aptly-named correspondent above you that the teachers have behaved responsibly apropos of their pension scheme whereas the present bunch of clowns running the country have not. And I have no idea why you've been deprived of a pay rise for so long. My mind is positively racing.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 02:44 PM

Not impressed, I've had no pay rise for 4 years.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 01:11 PM

Just as I suspected, Steve, your true colours now on public display. What happened to "We're all in it together, aren't we"? You're all high-and-mighty-principles and "we're all in it together" when you seek to benefit, but when it comes down to it, and you're OK, it's "Fuck you Jack, I'm alright".
What a load of old bollocks. This country has just baled out the miserable failure which is capitalism. The only people "not all in this together" appear to be bankers and their fellow-travellers who are carrying on just as they were before. The teaching and other public sector unions acted extremely responsibly, and in the best interests of the country, in 2007 when they accepted that full pensions would have to be deferred for five years beyond the then retirement age. Not one voice has been raised to say that that was not a good, long-term, sustainable deal. Not one. Yet this benighted lot have torn up that deal. A teacher presently in his or her mid-30s will have to work till 68. Anybody who has ever been in a modern classroom knows that that is a recipe for disaster. Already, without negotiation, the measure on which pension increases are calculated has been downgraded from the RPI to the CPI. Cheating bastards. On top of that, teachers will have to contribute 9.6% of salary into the scheme, up from 6.4%, no negotiation on that little gem either. And, on top of that, teachers have had a two-year pay freeze imposed, at a time when inflation is running at 5%. Work that lot out. In one year an effective pay cut of 8%-plus and the same the following year, worse if inflation keeps rising. No overtime, no perks, no bonuses in teaching! The teachers' scheme as it now stands is sustainable. The government has refused to audit the scheme, something that is now two years overdue, and they won't do it because they know the outcome will be embarrassing. If you think that someone who is blameless in the present mess in that position is "all right Jack" then you've got another think coming. Choose your target with a bit more thought. Leave our bloody pensions alone. They are affordable, sustainable and not that good.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 12:12 PM

BWM, it wasn't you so much, I do see your argument was carefully structured. But I have heard people using the "It's not fair" one, and seen it on the press front pages.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 10:20 AM

"So what you want now is for the public sector to join the race to the bottom, all because capitalism screwed it up once again. Well we've already baled out capitalism once, thank you. Leave our bloody pensions alone!"

Just as I suspected, Steve, your true colours now on public display. What happened to "We're all in it together, aren't we"? You're all high-and-mighty-principles and "we're all in it together" when you seek to benefit, but when it comes down to it, and you're OK, it's "Fuck you Jack, I'm alright".

You should hand in your Union card.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:54 AM

I'm not sure 'should' comes into it. Theres no moral imperatives here. No entrenched positions.

The government has had a change of heart over the years. I was paying a third of my wages and half my wifes in deductions throughout the 60's and seventies. Than came the Thatch, with her promises that we would have more of our own money to do as we wished with. free collective bargaining - that was her number one hit from 1978.

We gave the government a mandate after the war, in the cradle to grave deal. They took as much as they wanted and fiddled the books to the satisfaction of whoever needed to be satisfied. Wilson's critics called it 'galloping pragmatism' - I guess finally they couldn't gallop fast enough.

No moral imperatives, but my god! what a mess! theres only Jeremy Paxman who thinks we've been ruled by the wisest (naturally Oxbridge educated) brains in the country.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:48 AM

Now, please explain why you believe that public sector workers should continue to have a pension regime of a type which has been taken away, in my case long ago, from the majority of private sector workers - namely the (rather inaptly named, but we all know what it means) 'Final Salary' scheme. The vast majority of private sector workers who had a 'Final Salary' scheme (more aptly termed 'Defined Benefits' scheme) found it withdrawn and replaced with a 'Defined Contributions' scheme, because the latter is more affordable (and the downside, of course, is its unpredictability in terms of the benefits provided on retirement).

If "we truly are all in it together", why do you support a structure in which one group is entitled to something that the rest are not?

Final salary schemes in the private sector were withdrawn because of gross mismanagement. When times were good and profits were huge, companies took pension holidays in order to inflate profits even more. And guess where those extra goodies went. Not to future pensioners, that's for sure, but to shareholders in dividends and to top executives in bonuses. So when times get hard and investment returns go down, big holes appear in the pension funds. Duh. So what you want now is for the public sector to join the race to the bottom, all because capitalism screwed it up once again. Well we've already baled out capitalism once, thank you. Leave our bloody pensions alone!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:38 AM

...please explain why ... public sector workers should continue to have a pension regime of a type which has been taken away from the majority of private sector workers...

Woodsman, you're looking in the wrong end of the telescope.

If you and other private sector workers have been fu$ked over by management, suggest you organize and take it up with mamagement, rather than insisting that public workers be as badly screwed as you have been.

Management could probably survive with 3 million dollar a year salaries instead of four million and an extra couple of million in bonuses.

*

Bent out of shape from society's pliers
Cares not to come up any higher
But rather get you down in the hole
That he's in.

            -- Bob Dylan

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 08:40 AM

Al, I'm not saying that anyone should welch on anything - read my posts FFS! I'm saying that current members of schemes should get what they contracted for when they joined - that's fair and reasonable. However, going forward the structure needs to change to a more sustainable format for new members.

Penny, it's not about fairness especially - it's about reality and peoples' grasp on it. The reality that I had to face when it was realised that my F/S pension scheme was unsustainable without a considerable increase in contributions from both employees and employer is the self-same reality that public sector workers need to face.

But I guess we'll not agree and, as I'm not about to get embroiled in the kind of trench-warfare that goes on on this forum, I've said what I believe and that's it - I'm off.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 08:22 AM

To be honest, they've been ripping off the public secctor pension funds for years - the wilson and heath governments did it. We had some foreign teachers over from Germany and they couldn't understand why the unions were letting them get away with it back then. i think some things just get seen as an easy option to raise more government money.

I can't really understand how things have got like this and why governments are allowed to welsh on contracts entered into, in a way that private insurance companies or private individuals wouldn't be allowed to. But i do know its been going on a long time. its nothing new.

I suspect nothing much can be done about it. i wish i could decide that I didn't have to pay the bills that I had contracted to pay, because I was a bit short.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:49 AM

Argh. Grammar error. The one isn't. The ones aren't.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:48 AM

That argument is reasonable. The ones which simply state it isn't fair for one group of people to have something others don't isn't. Unless the ones who have are the ones at the top with enormous bonuses while their footsoldiers are on very little or nothing.

Wasn't the report on public pensions saying that they were sustainable?

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:39 AM

No, the point is that Defined Benefits schemes are largely unsustainable - they cost too much. What's so difficult to understand about that simple fact?

If you want to continue with the same scheme regime, be prepared to pay more.

Simples.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:19 AM

So where business decides to provide a lesser good, those who have, hitherto, expected to be provided with a better good should have that better not applied to them.

When I studied history, there was a narrative of things being improved, usually by imposing regulations on business to better their practices. Had we then accepted business practice as the arbiter of what is done, we would still have child workers in unsafe mines. (No unions, no closures.) Why can't we look at private pensions and improve them? Where jobs are plentiful, pensions would be part of the enticement for employees, and people could vote with their feet as to where they worked. I gather this works at the top.

The cleaners should have as good a package as the boss, should they not? In proportion.

Private is bad, yes. The unfairness is not with the comparison with the public. It is in the comparison between the bottom and the top, and that applies within both public and private sectors. What about MP's packages?

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 06:17 AM

"When it comes to paying for people's pensions, whatever sector they work in, we truly are all in it together."

Absolutely, Steve, couldn't agree more.

Now, please explain why you believe that public sector workers should continue to have a pension regime of a type which has been taken away, in my case long ago, from the majority of private sector workers - namely the (rather inaptly named, but we all know what it means) 'Final Salary' scheme. The vast majority of private sector workers who had a 'Final Salary' scheme (more aptly termed 'Defined Benefits' scheme) found it withdrawn and replaced with a 'Defined Contributions' scheme, because the latter is more affordable (and the downside, of course, is its unpredictability in terms of the benefits provided on retirement).

If "we truly are all in it together", why do you support a structure in which one group is entitled to something that the rest are not?

I'm not suggesting that long-term members of the existing public sector scheme(s) should lose benefits - I said earlier that they should get what they've contracted and paid in for - but, going forward, there needs to be a harmonisation between public and private sector provision. After all, "we truly are all in it together", aren't we?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 05:52 AM

What is clear from this thread is that Bozo, as well as being a reactionary and selfish lunatic, is entirely happy to mislead and even lie in the pursuit of his neocon agenda. Now there's a surprise.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 05:38 AM

If anyone is still deluded enough to think that we don't, by buying goods and services, all contribute to private sector pension pots, it's also worth remembering that contributions into pensions are exempt from tax. That means money that would otherwise have been taxed not being taxed (that's what "exempt" means). That's a hell of a good deal. If I invest in an ISA or some other "tax-free" savings scheme, the money I invest has been taxed before I invest it, unlike pensions contributions which are removed from consideration before tax is calculated on the residual income. That means that, if the government wants to maintain its income, it has to charge higher rates of tax on everyone to make up the shortfall. When it comes to paying for people's pensions, whatever sector they work in, we truly are all in it together. Incidentally, if anyone can provide an instance of a striking teacher being paid whilst on strike, please let's have it. Never in the history of mankind...

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 02:44 AM

"I see absolutely no reason why any striking teacher should be paid."
Fine - if those who milked the country dry and brought about the present situation lose their massive bonuses - backdated, and the politicians who backed them were prohibited from holding office, and all politicians who dishonestly claimed expenses faced legal proceedings..... ain't gonna happen though.
It seems that there are those among us who are happy that those who played no part in the mess we are in should pay for it to be cleared up and be prepared to bend over and be shafted - again - isn't it always the way?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 02:24 PM

By the time I arrived at Primary School aged four my mother had taught me to both read and write.

Good enuf, Teezer, but did you still wet the bed and sleep with the light on?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 02:08 PM

Bonzo, have you cooked your own dinner yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 01:17 PM

That's good because I draw my private pension very soon.......the tax free lump sum is on the way!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Cats
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 01:04 PM

'Public sector workers do not contribute, through taxation or by any other means, to private sector workers' pensions.' WRONG. Taxpayers pay £2.50 towards Private sector pensions as opposed to £1 towards Public sector pensions. I have said this 3 times now. Is anybody actually listening?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 12:25 PM

My point was that the argument before was structured, as is a lot of the reporting in the press, to imply that the pensions of public servants are ONLY paid for from taxation, and that said public servants do not themselves pay tax. It may not state that openly, but that is the impression that people are being given, when "taxpayers" are written about as opposed to "public sector workers".

As for private sector workers not receiving money from taxes paid for by public servants, I understand that people with inadequate pensions receive extra benefits from the public purse to which all have contributed. And where are those inadequate pensions found?

I have used the word servants this time rather than "sector workers", because that is what used to be used, reminding everyone that the jobs done by these people were a service to the community. To all the community, regardless of who employs them.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 11:12 AM

Teribus, it's too bad more kids didn't have your mom.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 10:47 AM

"If you can read this thank a teacher."

Not unless the teacher is in inverted commas - By the time I arrived at Primary School aged four my mother had taught me to both read and write.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 12:14 PM

Some otherwise intelligent folks are getting too caught up in the trap of 'divide and rule' tribalist political manipulation..

"Private v Public" Sector ???

Just remind yourselves what the 'Public' sector is actually established for,
and for just 'who' these mostly hard pressed under esteemed Public workers
are employed to provide life long benefit and value ...

Aside from the higher echelons of the most independently wealthy;
all of us at some points in our lives
will gain substantial value for our tax money
as the Public Sector variously meets our individual personal needs..

Of course the Public Sector is far from perfect:
seriously flawed and destabilised by constant contrary
contradictory Govt interference;
and unjustly maligned by extreme crackpot tory theoreticians
and unenlightened "Daily Mail" reading 'I'm alright Jack, f@ck you' yahoos...

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:59 AM

The thing that is quite clear about his point, bonzo, is that it is completely deluded.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:50 AM

His point is quite clear and elaborates on mine - put up or shut up!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:48 AM

4) Public sector workers do not contribute, through taxation or by any other means, to private sector workers' pensions.

What utter bollocks. Everyone who ever spends money contributes to private sector pensions (not to speak of shareholder dividends, big bonuses and overseas jollies, business-class travel of course) when they pay for goods and services. Right, we don't call it "tax," but the obstinate fact is that it is still money paid out by you, me and everybody else. Just like tax. Maybe you just didn't notice it because it isn't itemised on your pay-slip. Sheesh.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:32 AM

So, what's YOUR point, Backwoodsman?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Mayet
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 10:49 AM

After private-sector recklessness, greed and incompetence plunged us into financial crisis and recession, Tory politicians and right-wing newspapers have attempted, with some success, to deflect popular anger on to public-sector workers such as teachers and civil servants although those other public sector workers involved, such as fire fighters, armed forces and doctors are seldom identified in these attacks on 'gold plated' pensions
I guess teachers are just an easy target for the Bonzos and other loonies of this world.

Recruitment publicity stresses that "The Army's pension scheme is one of the best there is and you won't have any of your salary deducted to pay into it, making you better off in the long run. The pension you get will be based on your final salary and how long you've served for. You could be entitled to payments and a tax-free lump sum after 18 years' Regular service."
The armed forces pension scheme costs the government more than £3bn annually.

At 11% of salary, firefighters, along with the police, already pay some of highest contribution rates of any scheme in the public sector. The Government's proposed changes to the Firefighters Pensions Scheme (FPS) aim to save £73 million by 2014 is based on assuming only 1% would opt out of the FPS, by far the largest pension scheme for fire crews although a YouGov survey of nearly 8,000 firefighters found that as many as 27% would consider opting out of the pension scheme.
If such was the case it is estimated that the changes would cost the Government £283.5 million in lost contributions by 2014 (£94.5 million a year) and additionally undermine the viability of the pension scheme as the scheme is unfounded and relies heavily on the contributions coming in to pay the pensions going out, meaning the impact of the loss of contributions would be immediate.

[Hutton recognised that setting too high a level could prompt some lower-paid workers to quit pension schemes altogether resulting in even greater costs in the long term.]

Hutton is also quoted as saying
"….it it is wrong to say that public service pensions are gold-plated. …..these pensions provide a modest - not an excessive - level of retirement income……
I also reject the argument that the downward drift of pensions in the private sector is justification that pensions in the public sector must follow the same course. I have rejected a race for the bottom."

An independent financial on line guide points out
"Many critics say the problem with public sector pensions is that they are unfunded by investment returns and are paid direct by taxpayers. However, switching from unfunded to funded status could cost £20 billion a year as employer contributions would be invested in the stock market, requiring the government to find fresh money for existing pensioners."

Pension obligations, of course, are the biggest barrier to more privatising and outsourcing of public-sector services.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 10:18 AM

"1. Public sector workers pay tax.
2. Public sector workers pay contributions to their pensions"

OK:-

1) Private sector workers pay tax.
2) Private sector workers pay contributions to their pensions.
3) Private sector workers also pay contributions, through taxation, to public sector workers' pensions.
4) Public sector workers do not contribute, through taxation or by any other means, to private sector workers' pensions.

What's your point, Penny?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Penny S.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 09:11 AM

If you call all the contributions deducted from the public sector workers payslips in addition to income tax taxation. Which I suppose you could, since it all stays in the treasury money box with the rest.

Two points to help unravel those sentences.

1. Public sector workers pay tax.
2. Public sector workers pay contributions to their pensions.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 08:04 AM

But public sector pensions are paid out of taxation are they not?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 03:45 PM

how many teacher do you have to strike before you get paid?

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 02:31 PM

"So fucking what Bozo?"

Does that get under his British National Partship's skin??? He can speak English properly as well!!

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 12:54 PM

When the only tool ya have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Subject: RE: BS: Striking teachers should lose pay
From: kendall
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 07:50 PM

pdq could your sister read and understand the constitution at three?

John, I learned a lot from my Mother too, in her role as a teacher.

Some people's attention span doesn't reach beyond a bumper sticker.