Morning Line: the pension schemes that cost the country a fortune

and take a look at the railway pension scheme at the same time - and the senior manager ' up to 40% of salary' bonuses

Doesn't mention Universities. The USS (Universities Superannuation Scheme) whose contractual retirement age is 65, unlike Teachers which is still 60, is being looked at. I'm sure one of the things they'll ask us to do is raise our contribution from 6.35% to 7.35 if not 7.5%.

Why exactly, can't the accrued pension rights be adjusted? They are adjusted for many in the private sector throughout an average career and in my case the state pension goal has already been moved once from 60- 65, and tomorrow I expect it to be moved again - for many in this country who rely on the state pension this represents an adjustments of accrued pension rights, so why should public sector workers be exempt from this too?

The private sector has been adjusting to reality for the best part of a decade with defined benefits being replaced wholesale with defined contributions (the latter increasing to keep pace with liabilities). Welcome to reality, public sector employees. Your arrival is long overdue.

i am a consultant who mainly works in the NHS. Any interference with my pension and I intend to leave the NHS altogether. I know many colleagues who feel the same and I predict a mass exodus from the NHS by senior medical staff, either into early retirement or full time private practice. Think it won't happen? look what happened to NHS dentistry after the imposed contract. NHS dentists have practically vanished from many area. It may be a relatively generous pension but as far as I am concerned it makes up for the relatively poorly paid years as a junior doctor with very long hours early in my career.

phildoc, doctors are overpaid, somehow GPs got a 25% increase in salary one year. All medical courses are oversubscribed so it's not like they need to offer massive salaries to get people to enrole on courses to become doctors so why do you need so much money? Maybe you have earnt too much so you can just leave and never work again. Consultants and doctors seem to be out of touch with reality and many have a superiority (god) complex.

The salaries are comparable to those in an upper middle management or senior management position but only at the top of the scale. When i first qualified I was earning less per hour than most graduates. The senior manangers in my hospital earn more than any doctor. The GP pay you refer to consists mainly of clinical incentives for meeting targets and only applies to GP partners. Salaried GPs did not benefit from this rise. There has been a drip feed into the media around doctors salaries in a cynical attempt to manipulate public opinion prior to an attack on the salaries and terms of service of the medical profession in this country. In general people don't enter medical school just for the money.

Jonathan, when you get sick and need an operation would you submit yourself to a just graduated doctor? You are obviously not aware that doctors learn most of their carear with help of their seniors.

phildoc, the senior managers are overpaid too. From what I remember about the pay rise and I dont know how it was pulled off but they also stopped working call outs as part of the deal. So basically less work for more money. Did someone in the GMC have someone in the Labour party in their pocket? I think people are far too wary to objectively look at what medical doctors do and deserve as they know one day their life might be in your hands. This has skewed everything in the favour of doctors and consultants. In the old days GPs were still highly respected when they prescribed mercury and arsenic for much the same reason as they are today.

Marilyn our pension scheme isn't menetioned because it is (fully) funded with our 6.35% contribution together with the universities larger contribution being invested in the stockmarket, properties, gilts etc. There is no burden on the state. Last time I looked payments into the scheme more than matched outgoings to pension payments and the last actuarial review AFAIR suggested a small surpluss (varying depending on the method of calculation).

phildoc, you may have joined the profession for reasons other than the money

but it sounds like you intend to leave the profession because of money.

In all of this, increased contributions or not, it is essential that Government starts to 'ringfence' state job generated retirement contributions rather than fund them out of the current 'tax take' as has been the case in the past. This will give a boost to the stock markets and the Gilt market as funds are directly invested into securities. BUT that should be it those pensions should then rise and fall with the markets as they do in the private sector and the fund managers be held accountable for the performance and returns. As Robbo says welcome to our world. I have a significant sum in investments and my pension earning nothing at the moment (in fact going backwards at R.P.I.!) because of the cureent, engineered, financial situation, the public sector wanted to be paid like the private sector well they can suffer the realities of it as well!!

Head teachers can still take early retirement at 55 with enhanced pension. Bet Osborne doesn't touch this because Gove needs them onside in his bid to get rid of state education.

Graham Walker, Would the contributions have to be used to buy anything? Surely it will just be like the state pensions ponzi scheme where the government take the money but guarantee to pay the pensions of the people when they retire. I wouldn't like to think that making government employees contribute to their pensions ends up lining the pockets of bankers.

I am luck enough to have a 1/60th final salary pension but it costs me 12% of my salary and my employer contributes 13%. So if you have a non-contributory final salary pension it is really like earning 13% more than people in the private sector. So if they make public sector employees pay 2.5% they have got off lightly.

Johnathan

Wait until you face a life threatening medical condition before your natural years are out (the odds are high - a one in three chance you will get cancer). I bet you will not be so keen on telling the medical consultant treating you that don't think they are worth what they are paid.

Jonathan

Your logic is a bit wonky. It depends on whether the person in the non-contributory scheme has a lower equivalent salary. They may also have lower pension benefits than your fantastic scheme which has 1/60ths.

The sour grapes from Private Sector investors are hilarious. What kind of scum dares to write something like 'doctors are overpaid'? Who should be paid more, hmm? Hedge-fund analysts? They're the reason your private pension pots are so small you have to bleat about public sector workers being provided for properly.

I spent 40 years being told that I should put up with a non-competitive (ie lower) salary in public service because of the generous pension I would get when my time came. And we were told that under the now defunct comparability basis for settling Civil Service pay we should expect 5-6 % less salary than our equivalents in the private sector because they were paying a percentage of their salary and we weren't, towards a pension. So if the rules may now have to be changed - fair enough - but let's do it fairly - and let's not forget that we Civil Servants did in fact pay for our pensions - it just didn't show up as a deduction on our pay chits!

As usual the Media is being hysterical over this this issue and no one seems to want to let the facts get in the way of this hysteria. Realising many people do not want to be troubled by the facts here they are: I am a teacher and together with my employer's contribution I pay over 21% into my pension plan. This is REAL money that comes out of my pay packet and my employer's income, representing salary sacrifice on my behalf. The level of contributions has been actuarily set in relation to future benefits, so there is no cost to the taxpayer. And unlike most other pension schemes the money is not invested but taken away by the government - on which it pays and has only ever paid interest at 3% p.a. And yes, I am angry with anyone who is trying to take away a benefit I have paid paid into and earned.