You are here: Home » News »

Unison release pension “infographic”

November 29, 2011 11:39 am

Tags:

Share this Article

Ahead of tomorrow’s strike action, Unison have released the following “infographic”, showing in stark detail the impact of proposed pension changes on millions of workers:

Related posts:

  1. Unison NEC release statement on pensions
  2. Unions respond to government’s pension offer
  3. Unison members back strike action
  4. Unison backs Ed Miliband
  5. Strikes – we know we can count on Labour for support
  • Anonymous

    If Unison want equality then lets fire those women and hire some men. Male unemployment is higher in every single constituency in the land. Why should women be protected in the public sector when men are losing their jobs in the private sector?

    • http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com A Very Public Sociologist

      Someone’s overdosing on idiot pills.

      • John Ruddy

        Its verging on Spam.

        • Anonymous

          Well it brought a smile to my day.

          • alex williams

            Since Francis Maude isn’t speaking to the unions he has to find something else to spend his time on. Spamming labourlit must be his choice.

          • Anonymous

            I doubt  he had  much worth saying to be honest, and he may well have made it worse if he did have something to say, the bloke annoys me when he opens his mouth on TV.

  • Anonymous

    17,000 public sector workers have a pension pot worth more than 1 million pounds. Why are they striking to protect rich public sector workers? 

  • Anonymous

    Average pension for female local government worker 2800, which is more than the average pension for the equivalent worker in the private sector – we in the private sector don’t get offered pension schemes and can’t afford our own after paying high taxes to pay for the public sector workers.

    • John Ruddy

      Then demand them from your employer. Join a  union to fight on your behalf.

      • James

        Surely by definition, it is impossible for everyone to have a pension scheme they are happy with, there is only so much money available.

  • Anonymous

    Public sector workers were promised higher pensions by Labour on the basis that the banks would continue to pay lots of tax from casino banking. It was a lie. We are all paying the costs of having a Labour government, and that includes the public sector workers.

    • John Ruddy

      A strange view of history there. In fact I dont recall any Labour Government promising us higher pensions.

      In fact, just a few years ago, the Last labour Government negotiated reforms to all these schemes to make them viable. It included higher contributions for those earning more. Unions agreed them. It wasnt anything to do with “casino banking”.

      What happens to the £2billion a year surplus that the NHS pension fund makes every year? Why do LGPS funds with assets in excess of £130billion need saving?

      • Anonymous

        I really despair when I hear this constant “them and us” argument;
        divisive public vs private sector workers etc.

        That’s what’s been pumped out via the right wing tabloids over time;
        and probably what they’d like us to engaging in,
        as it distracts from the truth of the matter and what needs to be done;
        eg tackling high pay across all sectors.

        These divisive politics are a hallmark of some right wing thinking.

        They should be considering fairness and equity amongst
        those that can most afford cuts to jobs, working conditions and pensions.

        Also- sustain high quality pension arrangements, and extend to all;
        not create a race to the bottom.

        J

      • Anonymous

        I think there was an article in the Guardian which mentioned the NHS surplus, I think they said it was due to the NHS employing a lot more people than in the past e.g. more current contributors than dependants, which of course may well go into reverse in the future if (as presumably it must eventually) the number of NHS employees stops growing and the membership ages and become dependants.

  • Anonymous

    It’s just not fair… that private sector workers should pay for the public sector to get better pay and better pensions than we can afford.

    Which is why most people in the UK do not support these strikes.

    • John Ruddy

      Strange definition of “most people in the UK”. A recent poll showed 61% support for the strikes, including a large proportion of Tory voters.

    • Dougthain

      First of all who said we cannot afford the pensions?

      The Government, polictitions, who spend millions of our money, traipsing all over the world first class every year, who make sure they are very well paid and have first class pensions expences. and even worse we pay them to provide the propaganda that they spout, to try and con us into believing we cannot afford to pay our employees, people we employ, to provide the best education health care, to take away our rubbish, to feed our kids to repair our roads. ect ect.  first of all i suggest you find out exactly what the actual deal the goverment says they they have offered to the people. as far as i am there is no offer on the table? how much are these people going to be paying for their own pensions, and how much will we the tax payer be paying? how much will the teacher Dinner lady nurse, doctor binman road sweeper teachers assistant what will their monthly pension be.when they retire.  the government and media are treating us like idiots and we are letting them.  and you are falling for it.  i want figures what do they mean by gold plated 10,000 20,000 a year, before i make a judgment on anything  i need all of the relevent acurate information not propaganda and miss information and dammed lies.  because we in the private sector are supposedly getting worse pensions than the public sector then should we not be aspiring to get ours up to their level not getting their down to ours.         

  • Anonymous

    Private sector workers don’t have to work longer to receive their pensions – we can’t afford pensions because so much of our income is taken in tax to pay for a bloated public sector.

    We all have to work longer to receive the state pension. Why should public sector workers be any different?

  • Anonymous

    Public sector pay went UP during the recession while the private sector pay went DOWN.

    Public sector employment went UP during the recession while the private sector jobs were lost.

    It is time to share the pain of having a Labour government.

    • John Ruddy

      I’ll have to remember that my pay went up, next time I get a pay freeze.

      Oh, and “public sector employment” only went up during the recession because all those bank workers at RBS and Lloyds were classed as public sector workers.

  • Anonymous

    Unite want to steal from our children. If pension contributions do not go up then taxes will have to go up in 2031. You don’t care because you will have retired, but your children might have something to say about it.

    • John Ruddy

      But public sector pensions will be a smaller percentage of GDP then than they are now – so why would there need to be tax rises to pay for them? Unless, of course, the current government has so devastated the economy that there is no money left to pay them.

      • Hugh

        Yes, smaller than they are now, but larger than, say, 2008 for the next 25 years – assuming the move to CPI takes place, which the unions oppose.

  • Anonymous

    Brilliant idea- and very striking!

    I think this is the right message to get across.

    Perhaps they could attach to billboards and double decker buses?

    I think this could become a wider public campaign
    about the unfairness of pay levels across all sectors?

    Good luck all.

    Jo

    • jaime taurosangastre candelas

      Jo, two points of opinion:

      lowering the pension age is going to have two unwanted effects, even if it does (and I’m a bit sceptical) result in full youth employment.  Firstly, it will cost a lot more for public sector pensions, as by definition you are increasing the amount of years until death over which a pension is paid.  Secondly, if private sector workers retire earlier to allow young people to come into the workforce, the private sector pension – if it exists – will be smaller per annum than it would have been, as the pot is divided into more years.  

      Not everyone is incapable of working beyond 68.  My old man is just 77 years young, and while he’s slowing down, he still runs the mission and sometimes performs surgery.  My mother also still works in the mission and she’s 73, mostly on the accounts and supplies, and twice a year training volunteer nurses and continuing to mentor them.  I agree that as an average, that’s never going to be the case, and that most people are actively wanting to retire much earlier, nor should we force people to work beyond the agreed retirement age, but a blanket statement about it being “untenable for frontline staff to work until 68″ is clearly not universally true.

      • Anonymous

        Thanks Jaime, I think different sides to the first argument; I was also repeating a suggestion made by a listener to the R4 programme, which I thought was rather original, and a different way of thinking about it which shouldn’t be entirely discounted.

        Re your points about age of retirement; I’d agree doesn’t apply in all cases, of course.But equally to set a mandatory limit and one size fits all approach cannot work. It depends on individuals- for example, state of health, fitness and capability; also demands of the job- both mental and physical.

        I’m actually in favour of flexibility for individuals, but not too much pressure.
        If some are able to and want to carry on working indefinitely, that’s fine; but they also have to be capable to carry out full role within safe limits.

        My belief is that outside of work, older people should be able to carry on
        to pursue their interests, continue education if they so wish, or contribute to the community- great stuff. In fact, much to pass on to society and the younger generation I feel.

        I’ve met and know some amazing people in their 70′s and 80′s who are completely active and intellectually involved with projects and education/community work; although not physically demanding.
        One or two are writing books and advising on local policy!

        (And see make up of HOL.)

        But probably not suited as firefighters or secondary school teachers with a full curriculum…

        Having to sign off now, but thanks again. 

        Jo

        • Hugh

          “I thought was rather original, and a different way of thinking about it which shouldn’t be entirely discounted.”

          It’s not actually original; a fair few continental European countries used to encourage early retirement in the public sector for this reason. It didn’t work in cutting unemployment, and much of the effort in more recent years in places like France has been to try to reverse the tendency, principally because of the massive cost it imposes on public finances in adding five or ten years to pension payments.

    • charles.ward

      So you want to take out of the workforce the most experienced and productive workers and replace them with inexperienced workers.  What will that do to productivity?  You’ll also need to pay out masses more in pensions (already one of the largest areas of government spending, about 85 billion IIRC).

       ”Many people are in highly stressful and demanding jobs,
      and would welcome the opportunity to retire earlier.”

      And I guess the money to pay for this will fall out of the same magic money tree that pays for public sector pensions.

  • Anonymous

    “Women are being ignored by the coalition,” says WI;”

    T’graph.

  • Anonymous

    “We are paid too much, bankers confess in St.Paul’s survey…..
    “As politicians shift ground on high earners, City workers admit public sector gets raw deal.”

    Independent, 6/11

  • Adkins Colin

    Good grahpic. The only thing missing is a MPs pension which accrues at twice the rate of the average public sector scheme and costs the taxpayer more than twice as much. We are promised that their scheme will be reformed. I bet. Last time their one was “reformed” with increased contributions (public sector schemes were reformed at the time by increased contributions and poorer benefits) they voted themselves a pay rise to compensate which low and behold increased their pension benefits.

Latest

  • Comment Planning the revolution – Labour and the Spending Review

    Planning the revolution – Labour and the Spending Review

    By David Robinson

    In four weeks time the Chancellor will announce the results of the 2015 spending Review. There won’t be many winners but some will have lost more than others. Political commentators and discussion forums will pass judgement and public sector managers will, yet again, pick through the debris, making do and mending from what ever they can salvage. Before we get overtaken by the detail we should reflect on the bigger picture. What ever the chancellor says on June 26th it [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment A call for action at the G8

    A call for action at the G8

    By Ivan Lewis

    In less than a month’s time, the UK hosts the G8 Summit. With hunger, tax, trade and transparency all on the agenda, the UK has a unique opportunity to show global leadership on these issues. The scale of hunger is devastating. There is enough food in the world for everyone, yet 1 billion people still go hungry. 2.3 million children every year die from malnutrition – to put that in perspective, that is around 16,000 children every day. Or one [...]

    Read more →
  • News TUC suggests Football World Cup vote should be re-run – Media roundup: May 24th, 2013

    TUC suggests Football World Cup vote should be re-run – Media roundup: May 24th, 2013

    Subscribers to our morning email get the best of LabourList – including the Media and blog round up – every weekday morning. If you were a subscriber you would have already received this in your inbox. You can sign up here. TUC suggests Football World Cup vote should be re-run “The TUC along with its international equivalent – the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) – is calling on UEFA to address the appalling treatment of workers and players in Qatar and [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured A Northern Tory that Labour should be afraid of

    A Northern Tory that Labour should be afraid of

    By Mark Ferguson

    The Labour Party spends a great deal of time beating itself up over its performance in Southern England. We know it simply isn’t good enough, but we can’t seem to put our finger on why exactly that’s the case. Is it demographics? No. Culture? Perhaps. Lack of basic party organisation in some areas? It’s certainly a factor. But whilst we’re flagellating ourselves over our inability to perform south of the Watford gap (outside of London), we should remember that the [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Why we love Woolwich

    Why we love Woolwich

    By Jon Wilson

    Woolwich is an amazing place. It’s where the Labour party was founded as a mass membership organization. The Woolwich Provident was one of Britain’s first building societies. The Royal Arsenal Coop one of our first cooperative societies. Woolwich had the second Polytechnic in the country, created with the aim of providing education for working adults. Woolwich is my nearest big town centre, where I shop and go to meet friends. In the last few days, for many people, its name [...]

    Read more →