I went to a strike meeting yesterday - so I'm retired, but I didn't do what I usually do. And I went up to town and saw the tail end of the march - by that time more police than marchers, and an odd fracas with people who were not, from their appearance, on strike from any sort of job. One was hit by a policeman for no apparent reason. (Hand, no weapon.)

I gleaned a few useful bits of information. The teachers' pensions, like the NHS version quoted by Ian Mather, are, after the agreed changes increasing contributions and delaying retirement, making a net contribution to the nation's budget. Not only affordable, but more than affordable. And, like the NHS's, supposedly agreed for a distant future, not to be renegotiated in three years.

The current "negotiation", which is supposed to be something we should not challenge by striking, is a redefined process, like the redefined "consultation". In other words, they say what they are going to do, and regardless of what the other side says, that is what is going to be done.

The unfair private pensions used to be largely, as recently as 1997, on the same sort of principle and value as public pensions. Now few of them are, and the retired private workers will need support from benefits such as pension credits, from the tax payer, from the national budget which is supported by taxes from public workers, retired public workers, and that above need income from public workers pension contributions. This is something that needs correction, not by reducing public workers' pensions, but by bringing the way that private pensions are run back to what they used to be.

In some cases, private executives' pensions are protected in a way that their employees' pensions are not. So, for example, the workers for the company Farepack, when it went bust, lost all their pensions, as the customers lost all their money. The executives' pensions could not be drawn on by the liquidator, and they are still drawing them.

For every year that a teacher works over the age of 60, their age at death reduces by one year (data from the Teacher Support Network - used to be the Teachers Benevolent Fund). Thus those who manage to teach until 68 will die 8 years younger than they would otherwise, and will thus save the nation 16 years of pension payout. The government actuaries will know this. The changes are predicated on making people die earlier. (I suspect that this data will change as observations from staff working under the new conditions feeds in. I suspect the graph will turn out to be a curve, not a straight line, and the government will save even more.)

There was also some data concerning deaths during employment, from heart attacks, and from suicide in people in their 40s and 50s. There seemed to be more than in other occupations. But I can't quite remember the details. Also from the TSN, see above.

These are not the days or situation of Mr Chips, able to teach small classes the same lessons for many years. I left at 61 (that's one year less to live) because there was yet another reorganisation of the curriculum coming in. Mr Gove (anyone see the picture of him on a picket line?) thinks that larger classes are a good idea. Mr Gove should try teaching 50 children, and marking 50 maths, English, history and science books every night for a week, together with lesson planning. So should Bonzo, before he talks of skivers.

Most of the people at the meeting were going home to do marking and preparation - some strike.