Manxmouse900 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 My wage slip shows the eleven percent of taxed money that gets taken out for the pension. It also gets taxed again before being paid to us. Just rang one of my Manx colleagues who confirmed that they follow the UK system. I don't actually believe that. In any event police funding in the UK is completely different from Mannin. As to the realities of policing you went into it with your eyes open. However once again "So tell me, retiring at 55 after 35 years in what percentage of their final salary will they get as a pension? Let's put some REAL numbers around this." Why so coy I wonder????? Because I don't actually know..... ask a new officer as they are the ones that this effects. Eyes wide open, you'd be surprised. And equally people joined the police knowing the safe (not the risky private ones) benefits would be there for them. Why should that be taken off them? Sorry, forgot to mention, as above, the Manx Police do follow UK Guidelines on pay as they do on a lot of other stuff to do with policing itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 The reason it should be taken off them is because it is no longer affordable. If they want to move on elsewhere, they can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 In truth I believe that those who do join services such as the Fire Service, Forces, Police etc should be treated differently. But not at these prices... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxmouse900 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 In truth I believe that those who do join services such as the Fire Service, Forces, Police etc should be treated differently. But not at these prices... 'These prices' are not the huge number you think. As stated, the officers pay 11% of their wages for their own pensions. They still have to take jobs after retiring because unless you hit Commissioner you've got no hope of living off your pension alone. And why shouldn't officers retire at 55? Are they going to be any good dealing with pub fights etc when not far off a walking stick themselves? I know I'm a damn sight slower than 22 yrs ago when I joined and I've got another 8 to do (at which point I'll be 55)!!!! And you would be wasting even more tax payers money putting these people in office jobs until they're 65 (although we do have civilian investigators who are retired officers where I work). Would you keep somebody in the army until they were 65 walking through the fields of Afghanistan? No you wouldn't because somebody of that age would not be fit enough to do the basic job. Hence the forces early retirement age. Tugger: How do you mean 'move on'? For me to move to the island would mean being reduced in rank twice (which is only fair and right) and the same applies for an officer wishing to transfer over here. Not such a simple prospect. The 'choice' factor does keep getting brought up. Officers chose to join an occupation with a good pension. Others didn't - its all about choice!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 It's all about affordability. Taxpayers can't afford to carry the enormous burden of public sector final salary pension schemes any more. They are going to have to stop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxmouse900 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 It's all about affordability. Taxpayers can't afford to carry the enormous burden of public sector final salary pension schemes any more. They are going to have to stop What if they start going for your pensions though??? Not a nice prospect...... Thanks to all for the banter..... good to see that things are no different in the island than over here!!! All the best to all.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yootalkin2me Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Don't believe anything the rozzers tell you....look at the feemason iconography in their motifs, badges etc. jobs for the boys and pensions for the boys....I work in a dangerous job, out at sea, on the roads, working with live electricity but I damn well can't retire at 55 and claim my pension straight away...and would feel like I was taking the piss out of the taxpayer if I could, and as a government employee/public servant am happy taking into account the current economic climate to reduce my pension if every employee in government and that includes, MHK's, teachers, police, roadsweepers, caretakers, etc, etc...will too....a copper's job in the Isle of Man is about as dangerous as a bog cleaners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 .a copper's job in the Isle of Man is about as dangerous as a bog cleaners. Got to disagree with you there as I feel that it can be unpredictable and therefore dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Well it looks like the divide and conquer technique is working very well. Lots of disagreements below means its safer at the top Good job MHK's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 I know I'm a damn sight slower than 22 yrs ago when I joined and I've got another 8 to do (at which point I'll be 55)!!!! And you would be wasting even more tax payers money putting these people in office jobs until they're 65 (although we do have civilian investigators who are retired officers where I work). You'll do what most other coppers do. You'll retire at 55 on a full pension get a nice security job, or go self employed as a security or investigation consultant, or install CCTV. You'll get two very good incomes for the next 10 years and continually moan about the high price of bread and the 11% that you had to pay into your pension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spermann Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 PK, I'd gladly keep my head down on this topic as thinking about pensions makes it hurt, but you're wrong. My pension scheme is one of the many that's covered by this review. Remember, MR is owned by the taxpayer (in simple terms) with the stock held by Treasury, and the annual operating budget comprising something like 40% subvention/60% commercial income. I think I pay 5% of my monthly pay cheque into the pension pot (bit more than nothing). My company has targets for targets, no job is any safer than in the private sector, and I've just had my first three days sickie (norovirus - no option) for a considerable time. You assert that public sector workers are already ahead of their private sector counterparts by virtue of their pension - only true if the salary is the same in both cases. But let's draw a line under this - fact is, the antipathy being shown to PSW's is uncalled for. When you apply for a job, you go for the best package you can, and if part of that is a good pension, then so be it. Bit like anyone who bought an endowment mortgage years ago - on the basis that at maturity they could pay off their mortgage principle AND have a big cash payout (of course, the actuaries had got it wrong again, and the whole system fell into disrepute, with people ending up with a shortfall). Well, the pension thing is a similar con - we've all bought into a scheme with promises made by the scheme administrators (our employers), we've kept our part of the bargain (despite often needing the money more early in life) and then been told that the goalposts have shifted and we're likely to be short-changed. Doesn't matter if you're public or private sector, the proles have been shafted again by the pigs. The irony is that even our fellow animals are turning on us rather than the porkers. The world is broken. The lunatics are on the grass. Just keep drinking the cheap beer and watching Gladiators, your government knows what's best for you ('back - and to the left'). come on Stu, play fair. if we take the radio industry as an example, how many lead presenters at the private stations 3fm or energy will be on a propper pension? Not many i think, comparing private with public sector does not ring true. you know that if you want to you can take much longer sickie's without the fear of getting sacked, you only have to look at the high profile public sector workers who have pulled the stress card over the years to the annoyance of a lot of tax payers. you just dont hear of this abuse in the private sector, as these people would simply be removed from the organisation - deemed un fit to continoue with the role. in years gone by the public sector pension was better than the private sector as wage levels were generally lower, this is now no longer the case. i have to agree though with other posts that politicians should also take the pension cut and lead by example to improve the viability of a public sector service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanxfella Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 PK, I'd gladly keep my head down on this topic as thinking about pensions makes it hurt, but you're wrong. My pension scheme is one of the many that's covered by this review. Remember, MR is owned by the taxpayer (in simple terms) with the stock held by Treasury, and the annual operating budget comprising something like 40% subvention/60% commercial income. With total respect Stu, I'd really check that fact as I have advised one or two ex MR workers on financial matters and I do not believe that MR ever had a final salary scheme - certainly not unless things have changed very recently. You might find that you're getting angry about nothing. I think I pay 5% of my monthly pay cheque into the pension pot (bit more than nothing). My company has targets for targets, no job is any safer than in the private sector, and I've just had my first three days sickie (norovirus - no option) for a considerable time. You assert that public sector workers are already ahead of their private sector counterparts by virtue of their pension - only true if the salary is the same in both cases. I think surveys have consistently shown that pay levels are, in reality, very similar. But let's draw a line under this - fact is, the antipathy being shown to PSW's is uncalled for. When you apply for a job, you go for the best package you can, and if part of that is a good pension, then so be it. Bit like anyone who bought an endowment mortgage years ago - on the basis that at maturity they could pay off their mortgage principle AND have a big cash payout (of course, the actuaries had got it wrong again, and the whole system fell into disrepute, with people ending up with a shortfall). Well, the pension thing is a similar con - we've all bought into a scheme with promises made by the scheme administrators (our employers), we've kept our part of the bargain (despite often needing the money more early in life) and then been told that the goalposts have shifted and we're likely to be short-changed. I don't think people have antipathy but there is, it is fair to say, a current feeling that PSW's should maybe accept the economic reality of government finances and that taxpayers cannot keep on writing the cheques particularly as the economy shrinks. They are in a very, very lucky position compared to almost every other Manx worker. People outside government are very worried about losing their jobs / homes etc and that is not a worry for any government worker, so it sort of puts their grievances into perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginger Geordie Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Hang on a minute - if you've worked, made the contributions and you're entitled to a pension, whether you choose to spend your days gardening or doing something with pay attached should surely be your choice and not one made for you? My plan when I was a businessman at 40 in Manchester was to retire to the Isle of Man at 55 on a whacking personal pension plan, and keep my hand in by doing some radio presenting and video work. Sadly, I lost my shirt, business, private pension and everything else on a bad deal so will now probably have to work until I fall over dead. Early retirement was probably a good idea once (and way of minimising unemployment figures by freeing up jobs), but the plot seems to have changed. I'm a late entrant into the public sector pension lark, and will only get a certain number of qualifying years in, so I'll HAVE to keep working long after retirement age. Thing that riles me about this is the disparity between the schemes - the usual old boys get a much better deal than the proles as always, and the politicians who will decide this are way above having THEIR schemes looked into. Equality on Animal Farm springs to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginger Geordie Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Hang on a minute - if you've worked, made the contributions and you're entitled to a pension, whether you choose to spend your days gardening or doing something with pay attached should surely be your choice and not one made for you? My plan when I was a businessman at 40 in Manchester was to retire to the Isle of Man at 55 on a whacking personal pension plan, and keep my hand in by doing some radio presenting and video work. Sadly, I lost my shirt, business, private pension and everything else on a bad deal so will now probably have to work until I fall over dead. Early retirement was probably a good idea once (and way of minimising unemployment figures by freeing up jobs), but the plot seems to have changed. I'm a late entrant into the public sector pension lark, and will only get a certain number of qualifying years in, so I'll HAVE to keep working long after retirement age. Thing that riles me about this is the disparity between the schemes - the usual old boys get a much better deal than the proles as always, and the politicians who will decide this are way above having THEIR schemes looked into. Equality on Animal Farm springs to mind. Must agree with your final para - politicians from the Chief Minister down SHOULD & MUST be included in this current review, after all, they are simply Civil Servants under another name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilDDog Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 They still have to take jobs after retiring because unless you hit Commissioner you've got no hope of living off your pension alone. And why shouldn't officers retire at 55? Are they going to be any good dealing with pub fights etc when not far off a walking stick themselves? And you would be wasting even more tax payers money putting these people in office jobs until they're 65 Why, I'd put them into an office job until they're 65. Manual workers retire at 65. I've always thought there is something wrong when office staff retire at 60 and manual staff who are doing physically demanding work in all weathers have to wait until they are 65. Much the same as the Police, they aren't heavy lifting and out in all weathers all of the time. If it's raining they can sit in the car or the station. In my opinion the retirement age is the wrong way around, either that or make retirement age the same for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.