• The post you are reporting:
   
  Let me give you all a factual example of what the Local Government pension (unreformed) offers.
  
  Final salary of £32,000 after 40 years service provides a pension of £16,000 p.a. at age 60 plus a tax-free lump sum of £48,000. In addition they get the basic state pension currently at their state pension age which for men is age 65. A change in the rules mean a larger lump sum can be obtained now with a reduction in the level of pension, that is up to the individual.
  
  They pay £1,920 (6% of salary) per annum for that. This is before tax so a further 20% can be knocked off the bottom line cost. In addition the pension is contracted out so members of the scheme pay less national insurance. The impact on net pay would be £1,146 per annum, in other words the actual cost of that pension to the employee would be £95 per month.
  
  Now take someone working 40 years in the private sector.
  
  They would have to pay something like £11,200 pa (approx 35% of salary) into a pension - £933 per month which works out at £746 net of tax, to have any chance of getting anything like the kind of pension the Local Government employee above has at age 60. But also - they would not have any guarantees at all as to what they get and only a very limited indexation whereas the LG pension is fully indexed. So they pay more for much much less plus they may well not have the group life scheme and almost certainly will not have the very generous sickness arrangements (6 months full pay then 6 months half pay) that local government have.
  
  As I have said the strikers are defending a privilege that can no longer be afforded and it is time that this scandal is dealt with. The government proposals do not go far enough to correct this imbalance and remain far too generous.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason