public sector pensions

21 Dec 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts
Dave, the Local Government scheme does not include teachers and also that scheme runs at a net deficit every year and has to be subsidised by taxpayers.

You are right in that teachers are not in the LG scheme. Yet when I read these threads or the papers they all seem to be lumped together. Some can't see two schemes, they just see Public Servants
The net deficit. I have read a little on this but can't get my head around it as one side says it is a deficit while others say it is there but the likelihood of all employees claiming their pensions tommorrow is ridiculous. So the deficit would never come into play.
Dave_Notts
From what I understand about the LG scheme is that it has an annual defecit, ie the outgoing payments are greater than the ingoing contributions and the difference has to be funded by the taxpayer.

21 Dec 2011

Quote by Max777
Dave, the Local Government scheme does not include teachers and also that scheme runs at a net deficit every year and has to be subsidised by taxpayers.

You are right in that teachers are not in the LG scheme. Yet when I read these threads or the papers they all seem to be lumped together. Some can't see two schemes, they just see Public Servants
The net deficit. I have read a little on this but can't get my head around it as one side says it is a deficit while others say it is there but the likelihood of all employees claiming their pensions tommorrow is ridiculous. So the deficit would never come into play.
Dave_Notts
From what I understand about the LG scheme is that it has an annual defecit, ie the outgoing payments are greater than the ingoing contributions and the difference has to be funded by the taxpayer.
I do not wish to fund it, I would rather not pay as much tax and then fund my own pension

21 Dec 2011

Quote by Bluefish2009
Dave, the Local Government scheme does not include teachers and also that scheme runs at a net deficit every year and has to be subsidised by taxpayers.

You are right in that teachers are not in the LG scheme. Yet when I read these threads or the papers they all seem to be lumped together. Some can't see two schemes, they just see Public Servants
The net deficit. I have read a little on this but can't get my head around it as one side says it is a deficit while others say it is there but the likelihood of all employees claiming their pensions tommorrow is ridiculous. So the deficit would never come into play.
Dave_Notts
From what I understand about the LG scheme is that it has an annual defecit, ie the outgoing payments are greater than the ingoing contributions and the difference has to be funded by the taxpayer.
I do not wish to fund it, I would rather not pay as much tax and then fund my own pension
im with you on this blue but i have no problem paying more tax provided it was used for things like better schools,hospitals,industry ect ect
id rathr not pay someones better off future as i think they are resposible for that as i am mine and you are yours (if that makes sence)

21 Dec 2011

Quote by Lizaleanrob
im with you on this blue but i have no problem paying more tax provided it was used for things like better schools,hospitals,industry ect ect
id rathr not pay someones better off future as i think they are resposible for that as i am mine and you are yours (if that makes sence)

:thumbup:
Makes perfect sense to me Rob

23 Dec 2011

Quote by Max777
Dave, the Local Government scheme does not include teachers and also that scheme runs at a net deficit every year and has to be subsidised by taxpayers.

You are right in that teachers are not in the LG scheme. Yet when I read these threads or the papers they all seem to be lumped together. Some can't see two schemes, they just see Public Servants
The net deficit. I have read a little on this but can't get my head around it as one side says it is a deficit while others say it is there but the likelihood of all employees claiming their pensions tommorrow is ridiculous. So the deficit would never come into play.
Dave_Notts
From what I understand about the LG scheme is that it has an annual defecit, ie the outgoing payments are greater than the ingoing contributions and the difference has to be funded by the taxpayer.
Thats the strange thing Max. You say it is a deficit but the unions and the LG pension groups say the members pay in more than they pay out.
Dave_Notts

23 Dec 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts
Thats the strange thing Max. You say it is a deficit but the unions and the LG pension groups say the members pay in more than they pay out.
Dave_Notts

Is that down to the volatility in the investment market over the past few years? I know my pension fund is struggling to show any growth, but my hope is that the units I'm buying at a crap price now will one day be worth more. Unlikely, but it's all the hope I have right now.
In the words of a wise old sage: "The value of your investment can fall as well as plummet"! ;)

23 Dec 2011

From the LGPS website.
The LGPS is a valuable part of the pay and reward package for employees working in local government or working for other employers participating in the Scheme, and for some councillors. It provides benefits for you and your family both now and in retirement.
The LGPS is widely viewed as one of the most valuable financial rewards of the job.
You can look forward to your retirement with the LGPS which gives you:
Secure benefits –
the scheme provides you with a secure future income, independent of share prices and stock market fluctuations.
At a low cost to you –
with tax-efficient savings and lower National Insurance contributions for most people under state pension age.
And your employer pays in too –
the scheme is provided by your employer who meets the balance of the cost of providing your benefits in the LGPS.

23 Dec 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts
Dave, the Local Government scheme does not include teachers and also that scheme runs at a net deficit every year and has to be subsidised by taxpayers.

You are right in that teachers are not in the LG scheme. Yet when I read these threads or the papers they all seem to be lumped together. Some can't see two schemes, they just see Public Servants
The net deficit. I have read a little on this but can't get my head around it as one side says it is a deficit while others say it is there but the likelihood of all employees claiming their pensions tommorrow is ridiculous. So the deficit would never come into play.
Dave_Notts
From what I understand about the LG scheme is that it has an annual defecit, ie the outgoing payments are greater than the ingoing contributions and the difference has to be funded by the taxpayer.
Thats the strange thing Max. You say it is a deficit but the unions and the LG pension groups say the members pay in more than they pay out.
Dave_Notts
Dave, as ever it comes down as to how statistics are viewed.
Have a look at the following link,

From the paper in the link, it is true that the scheme has a positive cash flow, meaning that there is more money going in than out but this is after taking into account the employer ( tax payers) contributions which average a whopping 18%. ( ranging from 14-25%)
In 2008-9, the cash flow is shown as:
Employer contributions £5.5 billion
Employee Contributions £1.8 billion
Total £7.3 billion
Pension payments £5.6 billion
Investments £1.3 billion
Operating expenses £0.4 billion
Total £7.3 billion
As you will see, only some 18% of all contributions are able to be invested.
The paper also states that the investments cover only 75% of future liabilities and that recent investment returns had been lower than expected ( as Cubes suggested). These investment returns will no doubt have deteriorated further since the date of the paper, July 2010.