What concessions did the Government obtain from the trade unions when it accepted that existing public sector workers can continue to retire at 60?
The Government should be ashamed that they caved in to union demands for nothing. Increasing the retirment age for new staff is not a significant concession. How can the Government now demand that the retirement age for private sector employees possibly be raised to 67?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Is this the same government that is stealing £5B per year from private pension funds?
If you were on the same package with your employer and they tried to take it off you to please the shareholders, would you give it up without a fight?
Wonko, I don't blame the unions for defending the interests of their workers. That's what they are supposed to do. My disagreement is with the Government.
They are supposed to look after the interests of the 27m people in work who pay taxes. The Government has won no concessions from the unions for reducing the unfunded £380bn public sector pension fund liability.
The unions have simply agreed that new terms and conditions can be introduced for new employees. The Government already has the right to change the terms and conditions of employment for new staff anyway. Agreeing that the public sector can keep their pensions in their current form is ridiculous.
My "package" with the Government is that I currently retire at 65. If they unilaterally decide that the pension age should be increased to 67, how do I 'strike' to show my disapproval?
In thirty or forty years, there will be considerable disagreement between private sector pensionsers living in poverty to pay the pensions of ex-public sector "keyworkers" who even have inflation linked pensions.
I wasn't disagreeing with you as such, just pointing out that the public sector workers are only doing what you and I would do in the same circumstance.
Wonko, apologies for directing the last comment at you directly then!!
Post a Comment