|
Post by slicko on Nov 25, 2020 7:32:34 GMT
My first job out of university was as a Graduate Engineer working in the Public Sector. As a part of my degree I had previously spent 1 yr working in the private sector. The difference between the two was massive. I lasted 18 months in the public sector before I quit and moved to the private sector. I just couldn't handle the lack of drive within the organisation. I thought it may just be the dept. I was in so I moved from Manchester to Leeds within the same organisation but the result was the same. No one seemed accountable for mistakes. No sense of urgency. Problem came in at 4.30pm? It could wait until tomorrow. Same problem in the private sector? You stayed until it was fixed or actions had been put in place to ensure it was fixed as soon as practically possible. When I was with the public sector my pension contributions were matched by my employer. So, there was an element of 'free' money associated with this benefit. This makes a huge difference to your pension pot after 35 yrs of working. Not many private sector people can afford to retire at 50-55 . I appreciate that public sector pensions today may not be as good as they once were but they are still much better than most private sector schemes. That's not true though, my (sort of) mate retired from Leeds City council at 44 and did around three years of living at home doing his house up before his Mrs left him. He then got bored as he had no house or Mrs to do and started working for the fire service. I also know a planning officer at South Staffs who retired (don't know how old but deffo less than 55). She is receiving a pension but then started back at the same council less than two weeks later as a consultant. Even had a retirement doo with presents and a cake Both those circumstances are not entitled to a public sector release of their pension unless incapacitated and unable to work.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Nov 25, 2020 7:50:15 GMT
I got my military pension after 22 years at 40 however as I rejoined the next day on a different contract on less wages I am allowed a small amount of my pension to top my wages up to the level of pay I left on. It’s based on 22/37ths and goes index linked at 55
The military are a different case when it comes to public sector. pensions
On my new contract I’m accruing a new pension. Payable at 65 (or 60 if I remain in service until 60 - which I want) I believe I can take it at a reduced rate at 55. This is my intention
It’s worth noting the military pension was always paid immediately out for the ranks after 22 years and officers at 16 for a number of factors. Life expectancy plus the fact after such a long time it was harder to get a second career. In modern times this is not as much the case and since 92 when I joined the pension scheme has changed twice to update it. New entrants moan that the scheme has got worse. It’s not the case. 15 is not as good as 05 which is not as good as 75. Different rules but 05 and 15 schemes are still bloody good
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Nov 25, 2020 7:54:57 GMT
That's not true though, my (sort of) mate retired from Leeds City council at 44 and did around three years of living at home doing his house up before his Mrs left him. He then got bored as he had no house or Mrs to do and started working for the fire service. I also know a planning officer at South Staffs who retired (don't know how old but deffo less than 55). She is receiving a pension but then started back at the same council less than two weeks later as a consultant. Even had a retirement doo with presents and a cake Both those circumstances are not entitled to a public sector release of their pension unless incapacitated and unable to work. Correct.
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Nov 25, 2020 8:48:01 GMT
Both those circumstances are not entitled to a public sector release of their pension unless incapacitated and unable to work. Correct. I must have imagined both then, I never knew I had such an amazing imagination. It's a shame really, I did think it was too good to be true when I thought I saw Stoke score five goals at Wembley.
|
|
|
Post by butlerstbob on Nov 25, 2020 9:25:18 GMT
I must have imagined both then, I never knew I had such an amazing imagination. It's a shame really, I did think it was too good to be true when I thought I saw Stoke score five goals at Wembley. You either did imagine it or they were made redundant with an early retirement enhancement which wasn't uncommon in the 80s and 90s, I know a few people who were offered redundancy with a package which allowed them to draw their pension, the name of the package escapes me atm. But as it stands public sector are not allowed to take their pension until 55 and even then its massively reduced.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Nov 25, 2020 9:34:43 GMT
I must have imagined both then, I never knew I had such an amazing imagination. It's a shame really, I did think it was too good to be true when I thought I saw Stoke score five goals at Wembley. You might have it wrong though because the situation you gave doesn't allow for a pension at that age through straight up retirement.
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Nov 25, 2020 10:44:27 GMT
I must have imagined both then, I never knew I had such an amazing imagination. It's a shame really, I did think it was too good to be true when I thought I saw Stoke score five goals at Wembley. You might have it wrong though because the situation you gave doesn't allow for a pension at that age through straight up retirement. Well they must have both lied to me then.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Nov 25, 2020 11:12:24 GMT
You might have it wrong though because the situation you gave doesn't allow for a pension at that age through straight up retirement. Well they must have both lied to me then. Dunno but the story you gave isn't correct as far as retiring there must be another reason like injury or illness leaving them unable to work they then would get a pension of some description. Depending on where they were injured at work or say playing sport and years of service they dont get a full pension either. There are quite rightly provisions to claim for an injury at work to top up the pension you would receive but if you were injured out of work say playing football you get what you have earned by service not a full pay out. And on top of that any injury award is open to reviews and can be reduced at any time to very little so its not for life either.
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Nov 25, 2020 11:33:12 GMT
Well they must have both lied to me then. Dunno but the story you gave isn't correct as far as retiring there must be another reason like injury or illness leaving them unable to work they then would get a pension of some description. Depending on where they were injured at work or say playing sport and years of service they dont get a full pension either. There are quite rightly provisions to claim for an injury at work to top up the pension you would receive but if you were injured out of work say playing football you get what you have earned by service not a full pay out. And on top of that any injury award is open to reviews and can be reduced at any time to very little so its not for life either. There's no chance of the planner having a football injury as she was way too fat to be playing sport. As for my mate up north, I'm pretty certain he wasn't too ill or injured to work as he joined me on three skiing holidays after he'd left. There's no chance of any bending of the rules or corruption in the public sector as they are responsible to government officials and polititians and we all know they have to be squeaky clean.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Nov 25, 2020 11:45:03 GMT
Dunno but the story you gave isn't correct as far as retiring there must be another reason like injury or illness leaving them unable to work they then would get a pension of some description. Depending on where they were injured at work or say playing sport and years of service they dont get a full pension either. There are quite rightly provisions to claim for an injury at work to top up the pension you would receive but if you were injured out of work say playing football you get what you have earned by service not a full pay out. And on top of that any injury award is open to reviews and can be reduced at any time to very little so its not for life either. There's no chance of the planner having a football injury as she was way too fat to be playing sport. As for my mate up north, I'm pretty certain he wasn't too ill or injured to work as he joined me on three skiing holidays after he'd left. There's no chance of any bending of the rules or corruption in the public sector as they are responsible to government officials and polititians and we all know they have to be squeaky clean.
Given what you've said i can only assume they've bullshitted you about something. There are enough people on here in public sector pensions who'll tell you how they work mate.
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Nov 25, 2020 11:53:56 GMT
There's no chance of the planner having a football injury as she was way too fat to be playing sport. As for my mate up north, I'm pretty certain he wasn't too ill or injured to work as he joined me on three skiing holidays after he'd left. There's no chance of any bending of the rules or corruption in the public sector as they are responsible to government officials and polititians and we all know they have to be squeaky clean.
Given what you've said i can only assume they've bullshitted you about something. There are enough people on here in public sector pensions who'll tell you how they work mate. I'm sure there are. I'm also sure if they've lied to me then they're capable of lying to their employers as well but you seem so sure that would never happen in the public sector.
|
|
|
Post by mattyd2 on Nov 25, 2020 11:55:25 GMT
There's no chance of the planner having a football injury as she was way too fat to be playing sport. As for my mate up north, I'm pretty certain he wasn't too ill or injured to work as he joined me on three skiing holidays after he'd left. There's no chance of any bending of the rules or corruption in the public sector as they are responsible to government officials and polititians and we all know they have to be squeaky clean.
Given what you've said i can only assume they've bullshitted you about something. There are enough people on here in public sector pensions who'll tell you how they work mate. Can't you transfer a public sector pension into a SIPPS which then gives you a lot more flexibility.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Nov 25, 2020 11:57:44 GMT
Given what you've said i can only assume they've bullshitted you about something. There are enough people on here in public sector pensions who'll tell you how they work mate. I'm sure there are. I'm also sure if they've lied to me then they're capable of lying to their employers as well but you seem so sure that would never happen in the public sector. I've said no such thing.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Nov 25, 2020 12:01:37 GMT
Given what you've said i can only assume they've bullshitted you about something. There are enough people on here in public sector pensions who'll tell you how they work mate. Can't you transfer a public sector pension into a SIPPS which then gives you a lot more flexibility. No idea mate but I do know you cant retire with a public sector pension in your 40s without something else in place or a reason.
|
|
|
Post by slicko on Nov 25, 2020 13:05:14 GMT
Sunak: public sector pay paused as they’re 4% better off during the pandemic period - not a figure I recognise.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Nov 25, 2020 13:10:46 GMT
Sunak: public sector pay paused as they’re 4% better off - not a figure I recognise. Typical Tory three card trick that stands up to no scrutiny after public sector wages fell in real terms for a decade. Sets worker against worker. The Tory wet dream.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 25, 2020 13:10:49 GMT
Sunak: public sector pay paused as they’re 4% better off - not a figure I recognise. Ah but those earning less then 24 thousand will still get a pay rise putting the money where it really matters
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Nov 25, 2020 13:17:12 GMT
Unfortunately we always knew this was coming I've stated before I didn't agree with lockdown and this is the reason. The "covid" bill will be paid for decades the billions spent will be clawed back for years to come. Wait until taxes go up too a double whammy.
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Nov 25, 2020 13:49:35 GMT
Got to claw back the £22 billion (about a fifth of total NHS budget) spent on the world class test and trace system somehow.
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Nov 25, 2020 14:18:37 GMT
In the case of the 2 people I know who retired early. Their employers were encouraging people to take early retirement. I thought the Fire Officer was younger than 55. Could he take the lump sum at 53 and then his pension at 55?
|
|
|
Post by slicko on Nov 25, 2020 14:22:45 GMT
In the case of the 2 people I know who retired early. Their employers were encouraging people to take early retirement. I thought the Fire Officer was younger than 55. Could he take the lump sum at 53 and then his pension at 55? Ask them and report back to us.
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Nov 25, 2020 14:24:12 GMT
I got my military pension after 22 years at 40 however as I rejoined the next day on a different contract on less wages I am allowed a small amount of my pension to top my wages up to the level of pay I left on. It’s based on 22/37ths and goes index linked at 55 The military are a different case when it comes to public sector. pensions On my new contract I’m accruing a new pension. Payable at 65 (or 60 if I remain in service until 60 - which I want) I believe I can take it at a reduced rate at 55. This is my intention It’s worth noting the military pension was always paid immediately out for the ranks after 22 years and officers at 16 for a number of factors. Life expectancy plus the fact after such a long time it was harder to get a second career. In modern times this is not as much the case and since 92 when I joined the pension scheme has changed twice to update it. New entrants moan that the scheme has got worse. It’s not the case. 15 is not as good as 05 which is not as good as 75. Different rules but 05 and 15 schemes are still bloody good My nephew is in the Submarine Service. Been there for about 12 years. His first goal is to get to 40yrs old. I think this is the age when he can take some benefits if he wanted to. I think he quite likes being stuck in a tube under the ocean so will probably continue beyond 40. He likes his life up in Scotland. He will be on the 05 pension scheme I think.
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Nov 25, 2020 14:37:32 GMT
In the case of the 2 people I know who retired early. Their employers were encouraging people to take early retirement. I thought the Fire Officer was younger than 55. Could he take the lump sum at 53 and then his pension at 55? I think it's on a sliding scale - it can be taken at 55 but there are pretty big penalties on the lump sum and annual pension amount (X% taken off per year if it is taken early) There are online calculators to help you work it out but I guess it's different depending on which section of the public sector you are in.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Nov 25, 2020 14:59:56 GMT
So Sunak has announced a cut on foreign aid, met with derision in parliament but what do we think?
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Nov 25, 2020 15:20:29 GMT
In the case of the 2 people I know who retired early. Their employers were encouraging people to take early retirement. I thought the Fire Officer was younger than 55. Could he take the lump sum at 53 and then his pension at 55? Ask them and report back to us. Re. the Fireman. I am not in direct contact with him but spoke to his brother. In his brother's words "He was 52. I think he was able to take it immediately. He certainly has never worked again since". So, we are no further forward in terms of working out whether he accessed his pension at 52 or 55. We only know he stopped working at 52. Not sure why he would do that if there was no money available to him either via his pension or the lump sum. If he did access his full pension at 52 then maybe he did a deal with the Fire Service as per Franklin's comments that allowed him to retire on the grounds of 'ill-health' or some other agreement. The next time I meet him I may ask him for more info but I am not going to badger his brother for more answers so we will have to leave it there.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Nov 25, 2020 15:40:32 GMT
So Sunak has announced a cut on foreign aid, met with derision in parliament but what do we think? Charity begins at home and we're in shit creek so its right imho.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Nov 25, 2020 15:46:01 GMT
I got my military pension after 22 years at 40 however as I rejoined the next day on a different contract on less wages I am allowed a small amount of my pension to top my wages up to the level of pay I left on. It’s based on 22/37ths and goes index linked at 55 The military are a different case when it comes to public sector. pensions On my new contract I’m accruing a new pension. Payable at 65 (or 60 if I remain in service until 60 - which I want) I believe I can take it at a reduced rate at 55. This is my intention It’s worth noting the military pension was always paid immediately out for the ranks after 22 years and officers at 16 for a number of factors. Life expectancy plus the fact after such a long time it was harder to get a second career. In modern times this is not as much the case and since 92 when I joined the pension scheme has changed twice to update it. New entrants moan that the scheme has got worse. It’s not the case. 15 is not as good as 05 which is not as good as 75. Different rules but 05 and 15 schemes are still bloody good My nephew is in the Submarine Service. Been there for about 12 years. His first goal is to get to 40yrs old. I think this is the age when he can take some benefits if he wanted to. I think he quite likes being stuck in a tube under the ocean so will probably continue beyond 40. He likes his life up in Scotland. He will be on the 05 pension scheme I think. But all service post 15 be on 15 scheme. No grandfather rights. He can’t take any benefits out of it u til he leaves Still a good pension and one any person with 12 years plus service would be unwise to leave and give up.
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Nov 25, 2020 15:48:55 GMT
My nephew is in the Submarine Service. Been there for about 12 years. His first goal is to get to 40yrs old. I think this is the age when he can take some benefits if he wanted to. I think he quite likes being stuck in a tube under the ocean so will probably continue beyond 40. He likes his life up in Scotland. He will be on the 05 pension scheme I think. But all service post 15 be on 15 scheme. No grandfather rights Still a good pension and one any person with 12 years plus service would be unwise to leave and give up. Sorry for the confusion. His benefits under 05 were not impacted when they moved to 15? Is that correct?
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Nov 25, 2020 15:52:21 GMT
Forget that last post. I have just read it back and it is even more confusing. I know what you mean. Any benefits he accrued under 05-15 are not impacted but he is now under the 15 scheme.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Nov 25, 2020 16:32:23 GMT
But all service post 15 be on 15 scheme. No grandfather rights Still a good pension and one any person with 12 years plus service would be unwise to leave and give up. Sorry for the confusion. His benefits under 05 were not impacted when they moved to 15? Is that correct? He basically has two pensions. Enlistment date to 31/03/15 05 pension everything else 15 When he hits 40 at his 22 year point and leaves (if he does) they will calculate his pension as 7 years on 05 15 years on15. They will combine the both to give him his final lump sum and mo they pension They will real it all down on his statement so he knows what is what but it will all go in the bank together. No immediate benefits unless he does 22 years. (There is a caveat for this on 05 pension but it won’t apply to him) Does that make sense?
|
|