ASTI Ballot results **SEE MOD ANNOUNCEMENT IN LAST POST***

Sir123

salonfire wrote: »

The demographics of Ireland is changing in the next few years where there will be 1:2 workers:pensioners as opposed to 1:5 today.

This is a huge additional burden on the State's finances.

How to you suggest this increase in current expenditure is paid for? Or are you looking to shift the cost to someone else?

Source please? I'm trying to follow your posts here salonfire, but I seem quite lost as a result of your lack of evidence to back up your statements.

Why should I pay the same rates for my pension when I'll be paying into a less generous scheme that will end up costing me more than what I put in. It's called fraud.

evolving_doors

Sir123 wrote: »

Source please? I'm trying to follow your posts here salonfire, but I seem quite lost as a result of your lack of evidence to back up your statements.

Why should I pay the same rates for my pension when I'll be paying into a less generous scheme that will end up costing me more than what I put in. It's called fraud.

Don't forget private sector can get up to 40% tax relief on yearly contributions through a PRSA

salonfire

Sir123 wrote: »

Source please? I'm trying to follow your posts here salonfire, but I seem quite lost as a result of your lack of evidence to back up your statements.

Why should I pay the same rates for my pension when I'll be paying into a less generous scheme that will end up costing me more than what I put in. It's called fraud.

Table 2.6 Summary of Population Projection in the following document:

www.welfare.ie/en/downloads/greenpaperchapter2.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwieks3Vy4DaAhXFKsAKHQ6pDp0QFjAGegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw017vs_cj8VqIYjHjATR4Fn
If you are on the career average scheme, then you could be paying in more than you get back which is unfair and nobody is advocating for that.

But for pre 2013 entrants, I stand by my comment that the new pension levy introduction is justified purely based on the numbers. Individually, every one is going to be paying more. Or receiving less (or none) pension wise.

acequion

feardeas wrote: »

On every conceivable level words fail me. Completely and utterly fail me.

Why? What was said in that post that wasn't 100% true?

acequion

salonfire wrote: »

You're correct, everyone will be auto-enrolled in a pension from 2020 onwards. Everyone will be paying more for their pension (which for the vast majority of us, is not even guaranteed). The changing demographic comes at a cost if you want to retain the benefit you signed up to. Teachers cannot expect someone else to pick up the tab while their benefits remain the same.

I am glad the banks were bailed out and I have no doubt you are too. The savings I had in them were saved, thanks to the bailout.

Long-term, it is looking likely the State will profit from AIB and BOI, through dividends and eventual sell-off.

Delighted for you that you're well off enough to have savings. Because as a teacher and one who's been around for a while,I'm not. Any spare cash I have is being pumped into an AVC to top up the very paltry pension I will get for reaching age 65 with 30 years and not the 40 required.

As for younger teachers having savings,that really is a joke when the job just about pays the rent.

evolving_doors

salonfire wrote: »

Table 2.6 Summary of Population Projection in the following document:

www.welfare.ie/en/downloads/greenpaperchapter2.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwieks3Vy4DaAhXFKsAKHQ6pDp0QFjAGegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw017vs_cj8VqIYjHjATR4Fn
If you are on the career average scheme, then you could be paying in more than you get back which is unfair and nobody is advocating for that.

But for pre 2013 entrants, I stand by my comment that the new pension levy introduction is justified purely based on the numbers. Individually, every one is going to be paying more. Or receiving less (or none) pension wise.

I'm a bit confused as to your position.
The new pension scheme you maintain is unfair but the old one you hold to be fair.
So which one do you think all teachers should be on?
The unfair one or the fair one?

And I don't agree that everyone (excluding teachers) is going to be receiving ' less (or none )
Pension wise'. At a top rate of 40% tax relief on a private pension, you'ld want to be having Robert Mugabe manage your fund to come out with less!

acequion

There are some excellent pension schemes out there for private sector workers.In fact they can shop around and find the best deal. The important thing, as for all workers,is to start paying in early and continue this over their entire working lives. Those who do that can retire on decent pensions.

The problem is that so many private sector workers leave it until too late to fund their pensions and then look bitterly at public sector workers who they assume are way better off pension wise. The reality is,they're not.

ASISEEIT

Valid point-Media hypes Public sector pensions. Many are not high pensions because they dont have full service or basic is low. A lot of teachers crawl out of job early because society cant raise their children with manners anymore (in a lot of cases but not all). Then teachers die earlier than most.
Teachers contributed to pensions before Levy which most non teachers dont seem to know. We had our own separate scheme but DEV took the money and started paying out of exchequer funds. I have seen some figures to indicate Teacher Pensions are largely self financing. I must make contact with pension committee again on this issue.

I dont intend to fall for more click bait in the meantime
Bottom line is-its politicians who change laws not irate posters!

salonfire

evolving_doors wrote: »

I'm a bit confused as to your position.
The new pension scheme you maintain is unfair but the old one you hold to be fair.
So which one do you think all teachers should be on?
The unfair one or the fair one?

And I don't agree that everyone (excluding teachers) is going to be receiving ' less (or none )
Pension wise'. At a top rate of 40% tax relief on a private pension, you'ld want to be having Robert Mugabe manage your fund to come out with less!

Neither is fair.

The old one is unfair to future taxpayers, to be on hock to fund the pension liabilities of the state. Some cities in the US are practically broke compounded by ongoing pension payments of public employees; eg in Michigan. Ireland will have fewer taxpayers trying support a greater number of pensioners.

It is my opinion that the all employees should be in a defined contribution scheme, funded by the employer and employee.

Already we have the increase in retirement age for the State pension. The double whammy to workers, is we will be paying additional contributions and have to wait longer to draw down the Old Age Pension. So, it is fair to say everyone is worse off in that regard.

salonfire

Chilli Con Kearney wrote: »

Good fella. This post is one of those dangerous posts or comments I see/hear all the time.

The trouble with a little information is that people misconstrue it as knowledge, thinking that they 'get' it.

You can pipe on whatever way you like, but the hard reality is that many of the new teaching jobs are not full time and so are a fraction of the starting salary. Which I might add, is the new lesser/lower paid salary. That's the reality behind the blurb from the minister and department.

Then the focus should be on the employers to stop turning teaching into a gig economy. Even if new pay is restored, new teachers will stay face the same hardship if full time jobs are not given.

It may be the lower salary, but at €34,000, it is still among the highest graduate salaries. To restore new entrants pay will have starting salaries in teaching of around €36,000. Pretty much unheard of for graduate jobs, except maybe in niche areas like law in Dublin.

evolving_doors

salonfire wrote: »

Then the focus should be on the employers to stop turning teaching into a gig economy. Even if new pay is restored, new teachers will stay face the same hardship if full time jobs are not given.

Would you be in favour of increasing the sub rate or perhaps not tying it to a salary/pro rata?
I'm not sure that would attract back teachers who've left though... or discourage others from leaving.

salonfire wrote: »

It may be the lower salary, but at €34,000, it is still among the highest graduate salaries. To restore new entrants pay will have starting salaries in teaching of around €36,000. Pretty much unheard of for graduate jobs, except maybe in niche areas like law in Dublin.

It's a bit of an untruth to say that sub teachers starting out are on this 'salary' though. It's usually pro rata with intermittent periods of unemployment.

Also when you mention 'graduate' do you mean compared to degree level graduates. I.e like someone finishing a degree in engineering?

At 34k I wouldn't say it's among 'the highest levels'.. especially with the additional masters qualification.

https://ie.indeed.com/jobs?q=graduate+engineer&l=ireland&matchtype=b&network=g&device=m&devicemodel=&creative=225944208209&keyword=+ireland +graduate +engineer jobs&placement=&param1=&param2=&random=11413038616159358396&aceid=&adposition=1t3&gclid=CjwKCAjw7tfVBRB0EiwAiSYGM1YxskO7wqqC8FffvHA2mQSpC5e6V4pl_TkAfyopcxHxvmg-C4cQJBoCciIQAvD_BwE

Plus.. the above jobs on offer are mostly permanent, pending probation.

Go to educationposts.ie and find a comparable permanent job contract.
So is it more financially worthwhile for say a maths graduate to go into teaching To get this 34k... or a piece of it starting out.

Chilli Con Kearney

salonfire wrote: »

Then the focus should be on the employers to stop turning teaching into a gig economy. Even if new pay is restored, new teachers will stay face the same hardship if full time jobs are not given.

It may be the lower salary, but at €34,000, it is still among the highest graduate salaries. To restore new entrants pay will have starting salaries in teaching of around €36,000. Pretty much unheard of for graduate jobs, except maybe in niche areas like law in Dublin.

You really haven't a clue to be honest. Go off and inform yourself before you spout more half baked truths.

Most new teachers do not get full time positions. They get, say 12 hours, which equates to 34000 x 12/22. They get this for a few years if they are lucky. Of course, each of these years contributes towards their apparent gold plated pensions.

As for salary comparisons with other graduates -you're joking, right? Is it the teachers with undergraduate degrees who compare favourably to their peers? Like their mates in law, veterinary, medicine, computer software, or engineering? Or the lads with a teaching masters who compare favourably to their mates who work in accounting, finance, or science?

ASISEEIT

I know moderators will smack my behind over this but what the heck does a discussion about pensions have to do with asti ballot? Why are people continuing to feed a troll that has zero influence in real world?! He is misinformed. Big deal. But he is one voter

Inspector Coptoor

salonfire wrote: »

Then the focus should be on the employers to stop turning teaching into a gig economy. Even if new pay is restored, new teachers will stay face the same hardship if full time jobs are not given.

It may be the lower salary, but at €34,000, it is still among the highest graduate salaries. To restore new entrants pay will have starting salaries in teaching of around €36,000. Pretty much unheard of for graduate jobs, except maybe in niche areas like law in Dublin.

Teachers are not just graduates in the main.
They are double graduates with a level 8 degree and now a level 9 Masters in teaching.
6 years of 3rd level education and you think that €34k starting wage is commensurate with other level 8 only “graduates” who earn €26k per year while learning in the job for PWC or KPMG??
Why aren’t teachers paid to do the Masters in education as graduates as accounting graduates are?

You’re talking through your hat.

evolving_doors

on that note ..

we've taken the decision to lock the thread as it was getting a bit unwieldy (but acknowledging the good points made by everyone).

***There will be new threads on the way anticipating the conferences.***
Further details to follow. So maybe just hold off for a couple of days till we sort out the rules of engagement. As you can appreciate, things get a bit heated and off-topic every year so we're trying to plan to avoid that lessen that.

MOD