[tomtom]

I've no beef - just interested...

[GCW]

Well, I've had to take a day off (annual leave) to look after the kids because the school is on strike.

[slackline]

I wouldn't class Universities as "public sector" yet there seems to be quite a few joining in on the strike.

[SA Chris]

Maybe they are just practicing for when they have one of their own.

[GCW]

I can't really understand the point of this strike, maybe I'm being thick.

Everyone is in the same boat.  My pension is fucked too, even though the NHS pension scheme is so good it actually makes money for the government.  Since everyone is in the same boat, how does causing inconvenience help the cause of the strikers?  The government can't really back down on this, otherwise it opens the door for masses of other people trying to push them.

 

[andy popp]

I wouldn't class Universities as "public sector" yet there seems to be quite a few joining in on the strike.

Universities can, I suppose, be quite 'hybrid' organizations - but they are more public sector than they are anything else. Certainly the vast majority of their funding comes from the public purse.

They're striking because the union (UCU) won a mandate for action in a ballot (correct me if I'm wrong TT). Simple.

[slackline]

The thing is its pretty ineffective, if I were to strike I'd have the same amount of work to do tomorrow with a day less to do it in and I'd be out of pocket.  I can understand why its effective for teachers/medical care/front line public services/production line workers (effectively where it started) to strike but for office workers a "work to rule" approach would likely have greater efficacy as most of my colleagues put in more hours than they're contracted for.

[GCW]

Distilling my question:  What does this strike acheive other than losing any support the Strikers may have had before, and annoying people that actually want to work by cocking up their childcare with 24 hours notice?

[psychomansam]

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/112516

Pension are affordable, they were audited and shown to be. The government is just destroying them as a tax (on the elderly). Public sector pension average is below £6000.

While we're on politics, remember not to need rescuing from anywhere after 2016. You might not be profitable enough to bother with.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/112530

[Stubbs]

cocking up their childcare with 24 hours notice?

How come you only had 24hrs notice? Did your childminder decide to go on strike yesterday?

I think the position 'well my pension is shit, so therefore everyone else's should be too'  isn't a great starting point; why not 'those politicians get an awesome pension, why can't I too' instead?

[GCW]

Schools only need to give 24 hours notice.

I think you're misinterpreting what I am saying. I'm not moaning about my pension as everyone, especially private sector workers, are going to be fucked.

[slackline]

Universities can, I suppose, be quite 'hybrid' organizations - but they are more public sector than they are anything else. Certainly the vast majority of their funding comes from the public purse.

They're striking because the union (UCU) won a mandate for action in a ballot (correct me if I'm wrong TT). Simple.

Mine feels increasingly more like a business with "consultancy targets" for each sub-division, continually needing to secure independent funding for research projects, add to that the need to now "attract business" in terms of students who pay their own fees its increasingly moving away from any notion of 'public sector service'.  And there's certainly not the perceived long-term job security/pensions that people are banging on about with regards to public sector ("job for life" etc. etc.) for a large proportion of research workers who are on short-term contracts, worst of both worlds really.

And what was the ballot to strike for?  (As you may have guessed I'm not a member of any union, likely "pensions" I guess)

Distilling my question:  What does this strike acheive other than losing any support the Strikers may have had before, and annoying people that actually want to work by cocking up their childcare with 24 hours notice?

My take would be "nothing more than that which you've highlighted".

My wife works at the local college, she's not going into work today, but because the workload expectation is greater than the time afforded for her to get it done in the office she's spending the day working at home, which completely defeats the object and is why I think a "work to rule" approach rather than outright striking would be more effective in conveying dissatisfaction with proposed changes.

[Jaspersharpe]

None of the options apply to me so I've gone pink anasazi.

I disagree with the government and the strike.

[GCW]

I disagree with the government and the strike.

 

[Snoops]

I disagree with the government and the strike.

 

I kind of agree.
I'm no expert, but it seems pretty clear that people are and will continue to live longer, there is gonna be a huge lot of old folk running round in decades to come (us included )
There is a secondry here as well ; one of the reasons of the above is due to constantly improving and constantly getting  more expensive health care, which is going to have an even more burden with increased old folk.

Anyway -  there isn't going to be enough money for it/us all, so we all going to have to take a little hit one way or the other. Seems to me that while there may a better way  for the rulers to go about it, throwing your dummy out 'cause the good times are over doesn't help either.

[griffer]

When the government decides we can have a day off for the royal wedding it doesn't damage the economy. But when public workers decide to strike for a day it costs the UK economy half a billion.

[Big Dave]

What I don't like when I'm driving to work is a bunch of people waving banners and jumping out in front of me in the road....kind of wish I'd put my foot down!

[IanP]

When the government decides we can have a day off for the royal wedding it doesn't damage the economy. But when public workers decide to strike for a day it costs the UK economy half a billion.

I think the royal wedding was quoted as one of the reasons (excuses) for the poor GDP figures for Q2 last year.

From the pension perspective, as someone who's final salary scheme was closed completely 3 years ago with all future contributions going into a money purchase scheme I have limited sympathy for the strike.  We are all living longer and it seems pretty obvious that we will all have to retire later. 

BTW aren't any affordability arguments from 2008 a bit out of date given the state of the UK / World economy now compared to predictons in 2008.

Ian (working from home due to school closures)

[slackline]

What I don't like when I'm driving to work is a bunch of people waving banners and jumping out in front of me in the road....kind of wish I'd put my foot down!

Passed people stood on a cycle path and as approaching had to use my bell to warn them, unfortunately they thought it was support for them.  Think I'll resort to shouting next time as that will be unambiguous.

[tomtom]

a few points...

1. The main thing that disgusts me about the whole strike debate, is that people seem to think that because some workers may have a better pension than they get, they should suffer for it. Why can't people be glad that teachers get decent pensions? Whats wrong with that?

2. The 'public' is not subsidising a teachers pension - the (negotiated) settlement 2-3 years back meant a later retirement date and increased contributions - this made it sustainable...  By raising employee contributions and the retirement age further the government will make £2.9 billion a year. This is going straight into budget defecit reduction stuff. Private sector workers - if you feel strongly about this - why not contribute an extra 3% of your wages to the defecit reduction scheme?? (teachers pension contributions will rise from 6-9% under the govts scheme).


3. A pension is no more a privelige than a wage packet. It is part of the deal - the package - that you sign up for when you take a job. This is akin to being given a fairly signficant pay cut.

Tits. Pressed send before finishing.. bear with me..

4. Andy, UCU is on strike today for god knows what reason - our scheme has been settled (AFAIK) - I think its bollocks that lecturers are supposed to be striking today...

5. I completely agree that a pension fund has to be self sustaining. Thats fine - my T&C's have changed recently - career average, increased contributions etc.. I can see that and I agree with it. I dont necessarily like having to pay more, but I dont feel I should get something for nothing.. but what is happening with the public service pensions where there is no pot (i.e. its the Govt) is just a tax on them. And thats wrong. this may have started with the last Govt - I dont know - I dont care - I dont think it matters..

6. If you dont want to have to pay for public sector workers salaries and/or pensions then fine. But you'll have to pay for your healthcare, schooling, nursery, defence, ambulance, fire service etc.. yourself....

Grrr. Rant over. 

[slackline]

Eh, teachers are striking because they've got a good deal, that doesn't make sense? 

[fried]

Eh, teachers are striking because they've got a good deal, that doesn't make sense? 

Are you sure?

[Wipey Why]

What I don't like when I'm driving to work is a bunch of people waving banners and jumping out in front of me in the road....kind of wish I'd put my foot down!

The roads were pretty empty for me this morning. Was nice.

Being ill informed I don't really see how strikes will help.  We are all pretty fucked at the moment. There is even talk of being in recession at the moment

[IanP]

a few points...

1. The main thing that disgusts me about the whole strike debate, is that people seem to think that because some workers may have a better pension than they get, they should suffer for it. Why can't people be glad that teachers get decent pensions? Whats wrong with that?

2. The 'public' is not subsidising a teachers pension - the (negotiated) settlement 2-3 years back meant a later retirement date and increased contributions - this made it sustainable...  By raising employee contributions and the retirement age further the government will make £2.9 billion a year. This is going straight into budget defecit reduction stuff. Private sector workers - if you feel strongly about this - why not contribute an extra 3% of your wages to the defecit reduction scheme?? (teachers pension contributions will rise from 6-9% under the govts scheme).

3. A pension is no more a privelige than a wage packet. It is part of the deal - the package - that you sign up for when you take a job.

1.  People in the private sector have seen there final salary pension schemes closed to reduce cost and risk exposure for their companies - why are you suprised that they don't all fall over themselves to support public sector workers striking over renention of benefits they don't have the option to keep.

2.  How do your measure sustainability?  How much is the employer contribution to the teachers pension scheme? My employee contributes 10% into my money purchase scheme, and thats relatively attractive by private sectors standards.  I would increase my pension contributions by 3% in a shot if I could have a scheme like the teachers,

3.  All sorts of areas of employment package change over time.  Assuming they are not trying to change previously earned benefits I don't understand this as a significant argument.

[slackline]

Eh, teachers are striking because they've got a good deal, that doesn't make sense? 

Are you sure?

Well thats what tomtom's first point seems to suggest...

1. The main thing that disgusts me about the whole strike debate, is that people seem to think that because some workers may have a better pension than they get, they should suffer for it. Why can't people be glad that teachers get decent pensions? Whats wrong with that?

...and teachers are striking aren't they?

I thought they were striking because they've got to pay a bit more and work a bit longer, but then......so does everyone else.  Its a simple self-evident fact that people are living longer than they used and money doesn't grow on trees.

I suspect I may be confused by the points tomtom is getting at.