explain the need for a pension age extension...

wmahcm · 26-01-2020 11:42am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

The elderly are spoiled beyond belief in this country

In what way exactly ? and do you think by attacking them your going not going to get old ? Turkey's cheering on Christmas.

Mad_maxx · 26-01-2020 11:42am

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

On the "people have been working x years and then being entitled to the pension at the end" standpoint.

Say a state pension of 230 or whatever its is. Considering the amount of people on low income , or no income, how many are actually paying upwards of 230 a week in tax?

Enough to cover, say, 20 years of getting that every week guaranteed?

The vast majority of people on the state pension ( contributory as well) will draw down multiples of what they made in PRSI contributions during their working life

When you hear that the elderly more than paid for what they are getting, it's entirely false in most cases

Mad_maxx · 26-01-2020 11:44am

wmahcm wrote: »

In what way exactly ? and do you think by attacking them your going not going to get old ? Turkey's cheering on Christmas.

Is that a serious question?

Pensioners saw no cuts whatsoever during the crisis years of 2008 to 2013, they are thee most pandered to voter demographic in the land

The state pension in thirty years will be tiny compared to today, it's completely unsustainable in it's current form

wmahcm · 26-01-2020 11:45am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

The vast majority of people on the state pension ( contributory as well) will draw down multiples of what they made in PRSI contributions during their working life

When you hear that the elderly more than paid for what they are getting, it's entirely false in most cases

Well hopefully the contributory state pension will be removed along with any other remaining benefits for any elderly who worked and paid taxes by the time you get to that age. Oh and your house should be removed from you as well.

Galwayguy35 · 26-01-2020 11:45am

TDs especially in FG and FF know the so called grey vote is key to them getting their arses back in the Dail at election time so that's why they will ignore it rather than do anything to reduce the pension.

Like everything else the can will be kicked down the road for as long as possible and let some future government handle it when it can be no longer ignored.

Mad_maxx · 26-01-2020 11:46am

wmahcm wrote: »

Well hopefully the contributory state pension will be removed along with any other remaining benefits for any elderly who worked and paid taxes by the time you get to that age. Oh and your house should be removed from you as well.

Reductive ****e

Mad_maxx · 26-01-2020 11:47am

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

TDs especially in FG and FF know the so called grey vote is key to them getting their arses back in the Dail at election time so that's why they will ignore it rather than do anything to reduce the pension.

Like everything else the can will be kicked down the road for as long as possible and let some future government handle it when it can be no longer ignored.

Willie o dea is the biggest cheerleader of more largesse for the elderly which is entirely in keeping with that kind of cheap hustler politician

wmahcm · 26-01-2020 11:48am

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

TDs especially in FG and FF know the so called grey vote is key to them getting their arses back in the Dail at election time so that's why they will ignore it rather than do anything to reduce the pension.

Like everything else the can will be kicked down the road for as long as possible and let some future government handle it when it can be no longer ignored.

Do you really believe falling for all this fostering of hatred for older people is not going to effect you when you are older ?

wmahcm · 26-01-2020 11:49am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Reductive ****e

What a devastating and well thought out counter argument.

FishOnABike · 26-01-2020 11:59am

Nijmegen wrote: »

Unless I’m reading you wrong, that is what occurs? So when you’re in your 20’s you can contribute 15% of your income into a PRSA net of tax. In your 60s you can contribute 40% and there’s a sliding scale in between based on age.

So, let’s say I’m earning €50,000 per year and I decide to contribute 10% of my income to my pension, that comes out before tax. So in my paycheque I actually only lose about €2,500 of net pay, €208 per month, versus the €416 I’m actually contributing.

Better than deferred tax then, there are really beneficial tax rules when I decide to start taking out my pension. I can draw down a tax free lump sum at retirement. Yes if my pension is worth a lot I’ll pay income tax on part of what I get month to month thereafter, but my total effective tax bill on the €5,000 I put into my pension this year will be significantly lower than if I paid 52% on it at the top marginal rate today.

You pay USC and PRSI on pension contributions and a government levy on the pension fund so pension contributions are not free of tax.

Nijmegen · 26-01-2020 12:00pm

wmahcm wrote: »

In what way exactly ? and do you think by attacking them your going not going to get old ? Turkey's cheering on Christmas.

To your latter point, I think that it is in our interests to ensure that by the time we all retire there is a sustainable pension arrangement in place that is more likely to continue as planned than today's arrangement, which is more likely to have to be changed dramatically given that gradual solutions built over time are not being adhered to.

To your former point, in what way are pensioners well looked after in Ireland, we could start with the fact that basically nothing of what they get is properly means tested. "Pensioners" are no more a homogenous group than anyone else. If I retire with no pension but the state, or if I retire with a gold plated defined benefit public sector pension, or if I retire with a well funded private pension after a lifetime of good earnings, I'll be entitled to many of the same things regardless of my need despite the fact (if I have a large private pension) that I'm benefitting from some of the most favourable tax treatment available.

The range of benefits afforded all pensioners regardless of status is directly related to their position as reliable voters.

Nijmegen · 26-01-2020 12:02pm

FishOnABike wrote: »

You pay USC and PRSI on pension contributions and a government levy on the pension fund so pension contributions are not free of tax.

Very true. But the most substantial part of the tax is waived on the way in and then waived again on the way out on a substantial part of the pension that is paid. It's not free, but it's the most tax subsidised activity most of us will ever undertake in our lives.

4068ac1elhodqr · 26-01-2020 12:08pm

Beasty wrote: »

As the population ages (and it will - that's the pattern across the developed World and Ireland will be no different, there will be more pensioners are fewer people paying tax to fund those pensions

Sheer quantity is actually going to be a disadvantage over smaller amounts of higher quality assets. Hence many states are now using points-based migration, all with very strict criteria including language skills. Even going to the 'wrong' University, or not being offered enough starting wages will fail the test. Health (chest x-rays), and 10yr background checks for signs of criminality are likely also.

Automation will make about 40% of all current jobs (human assets) redundant by the early-mid 2030's. Young males without graduate degrees, experience or lacking fluency will be the most at risk, of life-long welfare redundancy.

Beasty wrote: »

It's been forecast for at least 2 decades ....

But is now starting to become invalid, when accounting for this great new emerging 4th industrial reveloution.

Mad_maxx · 26-01-2020 12:09pm

wmahcm wrote: »

Do you really believe falling for all this fostering of hatred for older people is not going to effect you when you are older ?

Do you really believe this kind of emotive argument will pay the piper in the future

Burying the head and appealing to sentimentality won't cut it

Phoebas · 26-01-2020 1:48pm

wmahcm wrote: »

Funny how this "choice" didn't apply to borrowing billions for generations to preserve developers, politicians and bankers pensions and wealth.

We have an impending and completely foreseeable problem with pensions funding. We need to deal with that and this kind of whataboutery adds nothing to the debate.

TimeToShine · 26-01-2020 1:58pm

893bet wrote: »

I am building a small private pension. Hopefully a reasonable one by the time I retire. A couple of 100 a week to add to the state one.

My big fear is that in 20 years time who ever is in power will look and see “ah paddy fair play, you were wise when you were young and put a few quid away, tell you what we are going to means test the state pension and as you put a few quid away we are gonna **** you”.

If you are under 35 you should assume that this will be the case.

Brendan Bendar · 26-01-2020 2:00pm

Phoebas wrote: »

We have an impending and completely foreseeable problem with pensions funding. We need to deal with that and this kind of whataboutery adds nothing to the debate.

That was why I ignored it.

Phoebas · 26-01-2020 2:04pm

TimeToShine wrote: »

If you are under 35 you should assume that this will be the case.

If you are under 35 then this pensions issue should be even more important to you than it is for older people - because you are going to bear the brunt.

lozenges · 26-01-2020 2:14pm

Pensioners are often asset rich and in particular are very likely to own their own home by the time they come to retirement age. They are entitled to free travel, medical card no matter their income - which may be substantial.
As they get older they are also the greatest recipients of healthcare and of home/nursing care which again is State funded. That has to be paid for somehow.

As the population changes the proportion of pensioners will massively increase compared to those currently in work.

Meanwhile young people are stuck with high rents, high childcare costs, many finding it difficult to impossible to save a deposit or buy a home.

When pensioners insist on the pension age remaining static they are simply passing on the cost to the next generation - already struggling - to fund them. The political parties should be ashamed of themselves for falling over themselves to placate them.

Mad_maxx · 26-01-2020 2:25pm

lozenges wrote: »

Pensioners are often asset rich and in particular are very likely to own their own home by the time they come to retirement age. They are entitled to free travel, medical card no matter their income - which may be substantial.
As they get older they are also the greatest recipients of healthcare and of home/nursing care which again is State funded. That has to be paid for somehow.

As the population changes the proportion of pensioners will massively increase compared to those currently in work.

Meanwhile young people are stuck with high rents, high childcare costs, many finding it difficult to impossible to save a deposit or buy a home.

When pensioners insist on the pension age remaining static they are simply passing on the cost to the next generation - already struggling - to fund them. The political parties should be ashamed of themselves for falling over themselves to placate them.

true but the younger segment of the population really need to cop on to what is happening too

Phoebas · 26-01-2020 2:31pm

"The demographics will look after itself"
-- MLmD

Jesus wept.

4068ac1elhodqr · 26-01-2020 3:15pm

Let's see how this event plays out before any new decisions on the pension age. (GIS live data map of 2019-nCoV):
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

Stovepipe · 26-01-2020 5:27pm

lozenges wrote: »

Pensioners are often asset rich and in particular are very likely to own their own home by the time they come to retirement age. They are entitled to free travel, medical card no matter their income - which may be substantial.
As they get older they are also the greatest recipients of healthcare and of home/nursing care which again is State funded. That has to be paid for somehow.

As the population changes the proportion of pensioners will massively increase compared to those currently in work.

Meanwhile young people are stuck with high rents, high childcare costs, many finding it difficult to impossible to save a deposit or buy a home.

When pensioners insist on the pension age remaining static they are simply passing on the cost to the next generation - already struggling - to fund them. The political parties should be ashamed of themselves for falling over themselves to placate them.

The "free travel" is usually restricted to off-peak hours so isnt as useful as you think. It is nonexistent outside the cities because of the chronic lack of rural buses....They don't means-test it because the bureaucracy involved in doing so would melt your head. As for your house, in old age, you paid handsomely for it, you are entitled to stay in it but the Govt will try and force you to sell it to pay for your care in hospital, unless you are a farmer, of course.

iamwhoiam · 26-01-2020 5:35pm

lozenges wrote: »

Pensioners are often asset rich and in particular are very likely to own their own home by the time they come to retirement age. They are entitled to free travel, medical card no matter their income - which may be substantial.
As they get older they are also the greatest recipients of healthcare and of home/nursing care which again is State funded. That has to be paid for somehow.

As the population changes the proportion of pensioners will massively increase compared to those currently in work.

Meanwhile young people are stuck with high rents, high childcare costs, many finding it difficult to impossible to save a deposit or buy a home.

When pensioners insist on the pension age remaining static they are simply passing on the cost to the next generation - already struggling - to fund them. The political parties should be ashamed of themselves for falling over themselves to placate them.

Over 70’s are entitled to a GP Visit Card only not a full medical card

hmmm · 26-01-2020 5:39pm

Raising the pension age gradually was one of the few adult things we were doing right as a country for the long-term. Everything else is short-term thinking. Younger people are going to be screwed in the future as the ratio of older people grows.

Just a pity that it only took one election campaign for it to be all thrown away - thanks SF, look forward to more of this populist rubbish in the future.

BarryD2 · 26-01-2020 5:42pm

Samara Bumpy Storybook wrote: »

The French didn't agree with such proposed age rises, and so have now theirs reduced down to 64.

In fairness, the French have a different education system and view of society I think. There your second level school more or less dictates your future role and level of education, what cog you'll fill in society.

Here, 3rd level has now become the old Leaving Cert it seems. Most young people expect to go to 3rd level and not join regular employment till mid 20s.

So your average French worker will likely start a few years before your Irish citizen. Hence earlier retirement?

lozenges · 26-01-2020 5:46pm

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Over 70’s are entitled to a GP Visit Card only not a full medical card

Fair enough. The point though is that they are well looked after by the State and many are comfortably well off rather than poor and struggling as the media likes to portray.

As others have pointed out as the demographics change and the ratio of people in work to those receiving a pension decreases, a smaller number is going to be expected to subsidise a growing population of pensioners. The burden will be disproportionately placed on younger people. That's unfair.

Means testing the free travel, GP visit card and contributory State pension would be a start, but no party would be brave enough to do it.

BarryD2 · 26-01-2020 5:50pm

893bet wrote: »

I am building a small private pension. Hopefully a reasonable one by the time I retire. A couple of 100 a week to add to the state one.

My big fear is that in 20 years time who ever is in power will look and see “ah paddy fair play, you were wise when you were young and put a few quid away, tell you what we are going to means test the state pension and as you put a few quid away we are gonna **** you”.

This is exactly what was happening already - government policy seems to have been that those with private pensions would use these to bridge the gap when any 'dole' payments would be means tested. Similar to the way that property is used to partly fund nursing home care and so on.

I've no objection in principle to this logic as long as it's applied equitably and fairly across all sectors of society including public servants & politicians themselves.

What has people's ire up is that they strongly suspect there's one rule for one group and another for the rest.. That will not wash.

Eric Cartman · 26-01-2020 5:56pm

Pension age should be 67 for public and private , cut off the non contributory pension for people born from 2002 onwards, adapt the contributory pension to needing 30 years of contributions, put in place a worplace pension plan like the UK where your employer matches euro for euro up to 15,000 a year.

James Brown · 26-01-2020 6:53pm

All TD's get one pension based on time served in public office. That's it.

Stovepipe · 26-01-2020 9:09pm

TDs also get ministerial pensions, lump sums, a seat on a committee guarantees more money, free parking in Dail Eireann for life, free post, free printing, etc,etc. No wonder they'd stab their mothers to become TDs...if they get into Europe, it's money for jam.

Stovepipe · 26-01-2020 9:35pm

So, the main argument for pushing the pension age away is that there are not enough contributors to the national pension fund, as it stands, to pay for anticipated (not proven) pension demands so they established a pension reserve fund and then raided it to keep German pensioners in sauerkraut, because the EU told them to and they stung us for the bill. I think we should all move to Germany, specifically to Frau Merkel's town and get our pensions there. The EU allows us to do this. If anyone asks, we'll just say that "Mutti" will look after us, like she protected her citizens before ours.
So, solutions as we see it: Force everyone to open a pension, the day they start work......give everyone a PRSA account,force them to put AVCs into it and then restrain from taxing the **** out of it......force people to open a credit union account, give them a pension tax credit for every year they hold an active account, to reward saving instead of penalising it; promote early retirement, to get old farts out of the workforce and leave room for newbies. If you've been paying a pension for 40 years, eff off and spend it. Irish pensions are based on the 40/60ths system so anything after 40 years contributions is essentially wasted, especially if your employer closed down the pension, like they did in my job........ If you volunteer to work longer than 65, you're a mug. I'd rather be on an Italian beach than commuting in Irish rain in January. Save as much as you can and get out early.

Philo62 · 26-01-2020 9:43pm

hmmm wrote: »

Raising the pension age gradually was one of the few adult things we were doing right as a country for the long-term. Everything else is short-term thinking. Younger people are going to be screwed in the future as the ratio of older people grows.

Just a pity that it only took one election campaign for it to be all thrown away - thanks SF, look forward to more of this populist rubbish in the future.

Good point & it seems to the point majority are missing. This Failure to stick with the change if it comes about is a big FU to the younger workers who will have to foot the bill. They will have to foot an ever increasing bill because the cowardly political parties primary concern is getting elected not doing the right thing. They will continue to pander to the grey vote as it grows. In a time of full employment & extending life expectancy the focus should be on retaining people in the workforce & retraining people in more physically strenuous jobs to do something else less physically taxing.

Brendan Bendar · 26-01-2020 10:24pm

Stovepipe wrote: »

So, the main argument for pushing the pension age away is that there are not enough contributors to the national pension fund, as it stands, to pay for anticipated (not proven) pension demands so they established a pension reserve fund and then raided it to keep German pensioners in sauerkraut, because the EU told them to and they stung us for the bill. I think we should all move to Germany, specifically to Frau Merkel's town and get our pensions there. The EU allows us to do this. If anyone asks, we'll just say that "Mutti" will look after us, like she protected her citizens before ours.
So, solutions as we see it: Force everyone to open a pension, the day they start work......give everyone a PRSA account,force them to put AVCs into it and then restrain from taxing the **** out of it......force people to open a credit union account, give them a pension tax credit for every year they hold an active account, to reward saving instead of penalising it; promote early retirement, to get old farts out of the workforce and leave room for newbies. If you've been paying a pension for 40 years, eff off and spend it. Irish pensions are based on the 40/60ths system so anything after 40 years contributions is essentially wasted, especially if your employer closed down the pension, like they did in my job........ If you volunteer to work longer than 65, you're a mug. I'd rather be on an Italian beach than commuting in Irish rain in January. Save as much as you can and get out early.

Paragraphs dude......

blanch152 · 26-01-2020 11:43pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Pension age should be 67 for public and private , cut off the non contributory pension for people born from 2002 onwards, adapt the contributory pension to needing 30 years of contributions, put in place a worplace pension plan like the UK where your employer matches euro for euro up to 15,000 a year.

The non-contributory pension should be frozen and the age increased to 70.

That would save enough money so that the contributory pension, which is paid to those who paid PRSI for 40 years would be protected.

Geuze · 27-01-2020 10:25am

Matt Barrett wrote: »

All TD's get one pension based on time served in public office. That's it.

That's the way it works anyways.

pure.conya · 27-01-2020 12:10pm

Stovepipe wrote: »

Can anyone explain why, in an intelligent fashion,why the pension age has to be pushed out to 68? I'm of the opinion that the Govt are only doing so because Europe or the Troika told them to do so, while protecting pension rights for more expensive workers like the Germans or French? Why should we tolerate the pension mess?

they're doing it because why not, sure we don't give a sh1t, not a damn thing will unify this country to the point where government decisions will be reversed and not cost us dearly

facehugger99 · 27-01-2020 12:36pm

893bet wrote: »

My big fear is that in 20 years time who ever is in power will look and see “ah paddy fair play, you were wise when you were young and put a few quid away, tell you what we are going to means test the state pension and as you put a few quid away we are gonna **** you”.

Unfortunately, I think that not only will they seek to deprive you of the State pension, but they'll probably tax the fcuk out of your private pension.

The money will then be given to lads that have never contributed a red cent to the State coffers in their life.

The prudent will be once again raided to pay for the reckless and feckless and populist arsehole parties like SF will champion the move because of "fairness".

The day the Government decided to dip into our private pension pots in 2013, we should have blocked the streets, most of us were too busy working trying to keep a roof over our heads and pay for everything else in the country.

Ger Roe · 27-01-2020 12:49pm

893bet wrote: »

I am building a small private pension. Hopefully a reasonable one by the time I retire. A couple of 100 a week to add to the state one.

My big fear is that in 20 years time who ever is in power will look and see “ah paddy fair play, you were wise when you were young and put a few quid away, tell you what we are going to means test the state pension and as you put a few quid away we are gonna **** you”.

This is what happens and why we have a dismal private pension participation rate. Governments can't be trusted with pensions.

I first took out a pension plan in the early 80's. All the advantages were explained to me at the time, including tax breaks, long term investment projections and the cruncher... the government couldn't touch my savings. It was all protected .... until the big crash and they changed to rules to allow them to raid the pot. That and the gradual withdrawl of various old age benefits such as free landline phone and the imposition of new 'levies' such as, bin charges, property tax and the means testing of old age medical cards.... all will result in my private pension having to pay for far more than originally expected - making it obviously worth less in disposable income terms.

The above is why the private pension takeup is so low. The answer will be to have a compulsory 'private?' pension contribution scheme imposed on people. Wasn't this what the state pension was supposed to be?

Phoebas · 27-01-2020 12:54pm

Ger Roe wrote: »

Wasn't this what the state pension was supposed to be?

Yes - back in the day when they ratio of working people to retired people supported it.

Those days are gone and it's predicted to get a lot worse - just two workers per retired person predicted by 2050.

We need to be looking at lot less at the past in this debate and start looking at the future.

Stovepipe · 27-01-2020 12:59pm

Also, that's what housing used to be; a potential pension, but that's getting less and less viable. Too many renters in too small a market. As another forum pointed out, today's pension system is essentially a Ponzi scheme; pay out from what you take in and it's not a permanent,managed fund, so it will always run out of money if the number of contributors fall.

facehugger99 · 27-01-2020 1:04pm

Lads working in the public sector that are in their 20's-30's that think they have a DB pension are basically being lied to.

Public sector pensions are a ponzi scheme being paid for out of current taxation. If the demographics continue, do people honestly believe the young workers in 30-40 years time will pay the taxation levels required to keep ex-public servants in a comfortable pension?

The way pensions are continually politicized as a vote-buying measure by various political parties is absolutely reckless and outrageous.

Ger Roe · 27-01-2020 1:07pm

Phoebas wrote: »

Yes - back in the day when they ratio of working people to retired people supported it.

Those days are gone and it's predicted to get a lot worse - just two workers per retired person predicted by 2050.

We need to be looking at lot less at the past in this debate and start looking at the future.

Well, we need to look at it in a way that doesn't make people think that they will be financially mugged, if they take out a private pension. A bit of incentive will work better than a heap of compulsion.

Mad_maxx · 27-01-2020 1:12pm

facehugger99 wrote: »

Lads working in the public sector that are in their 20's-30's that think they have a DB pension are basically being lied to.

Public sector pensions are a ponzi scheme being paid for out of current taxation. If the demographics continue, do people honestly believe the young workers in 30-40 years time will pay the taxation levels required to keep ex-public servants in a comfortable pension?

The way pensions are continually politicized as a vote-buying measure by various political parties is absolutely reckless and outrageous.

True but the public reaction this past two weeks has shown practitioners of cheap hustler politics like Willie o dea that they have the wise approach

Spoiling current pensioners is a vote winner even with the younger generations ( for now)

facehugger99 · 27-01-2020 1:27pm

Mad_maxx wrote: »

True but the public reaction this past two weeks has shown practitioners of cheap hustler politics like Willie o dea that they have the wise approach

Spoiling current pensioners is a vote winner even with the younger generations ( for now)

Absolutely, it works, right up until it doesn't.

Politicians have never been shy about exploiting the selfishness and ignorance of the electorate for a few votes.

Phoebas · 27-01-2020 1:56pm

Ger Roe wrote: »

Well, we need to look at it in a way that doesn't make people think that they will be financially mugged, if they take out a private pension. A bit of incentive will work better than a heap of compulsion.

There is a heap of incentive to saving for a private pension - I don't think there's a problem there (but I would like some guarantees that they will never again raid private pension pots).
We also need auto-enrolment to encourage people to make private provision.

But none of that touches on the problem with the state pension. It isn't feasible to do nothing (or move backwards) as most of the parties are currently advocating.
I think it was Newstalk yesterday who went reporters out to do vox pops on this issue - they asked a whole lot of retired people what they thought, but didn't bother to ask the people who are going to pay dearly for it.

Winning_Stroke · 27-01-2020 2:07pm

The vast majority of Irish people have their heads in the sand when it comes to pensions. Either laugh it off with witty original "sure I won't live that long", moan when it's pointed out how much a person needs to save themselves (God forbid people cut back on crap) or just ignore it entirely. There's a rude awakening coming.

Nijmegen · 27-01-2020 2:14pm

facehugger99 wrote: »

Lads working in the public sector that are in their 20's-30's that think they have a DB pension are basically being lied to.

Public sector pensions are a ponzi scheme being paid for out of current taxation. If the demographics continue, do people honestly believe the young workers in 30-40 years time will pay the taxation levels required to keep ex-public servants in a comfortable pension?

Very true, but I think a lot of people in the PS in their 20s and 30s, the new entrants basically, are well aware of this. Some people I know comment quite bitterly about doing the same work on totally different payscales to people who have vastly better pension entitlements, too. Apparently the retention rates at the moment among new entrants are crap.

So you're on lower pay scales and the pension is a % of career average salary rather than final salary. So (a) you can't get to as high a final salary anyway and (b) your career average is well dragged down. Capital.

Now I think DB pensions are always a ponzi scheme and we should just crystallise what we're on the hook for already and raise some big bond at the 0.45% interest rate the NTMA has been getting for Irish debt lately and put the value of what's promised so far into a PRSA for all serving public servants and make it defined contribution, but I can imagine the walkouts if you tried that...

I was chatting to one fella who was appointed to a senior administrative officer grade. Nowadays starts at €55k and tops out at €87k after 7 years. Working with some pre-95 entrants who are on the scale starting at €118k and topping out at €151k after 6 years and toddling towards their pension of €100k per year plus a lump sum, and not putting in a whole lot of effort in the meantime.

Irish Stones · 27-01-2020 2:18pm

blindside88 wrote: »

I’m not fan of the age increase but I would imagine the rational is to do with increased life expectancy. Look at the average life expectancy when the old age pension was introduced compared to today.

Life expectancy isn't the same across the world. In some countries people live longer than in other, nevertheless the pension age is the same nearly all over.

If life expectancy was the rational, the age pension should have been tailored according to it country by country. Otherwise there will be country where people would benefit of the retirement much longer than people in the next country.

blanch152 · 27-01-2020 2:21pm

Nijmegen wrote: »

I was chatting to one fella who was appointed to a senior administrative officer grade. Nowadays starts at €55k and tops out at €87k after 7 years. Working with some pre-95 entrants who are on the scale starting at €118k and topping out at €151k after 6 years and toddling towards their pension of €100k per year plus a lump sum (plus the state pension of another €12k), and not putting in a whole lot of effort in the meantime.

That is completely made up rubbish, about which you don't have a clue.

Somebody on €151k can only get a maximum pension of €75.5k, if they have full service. If they are pre-95, they are Class D PRSI and not entitled to the state pension. You suggest that they are getting a pension of €112k, when the reality is a lot let.

Now that is still a nice pension. However, somebody on €151k in the civil service is in the Assistant Secretary grade. People at that level and above form less than 0.1% of the civil service, a tiny tiny minority. There are very very few who will be retiring with a pension like that.

Someone on the "senior administrative grade" is a long way from there and the two are not comparable. I haven't seen a more ill-informed gripe.

explain the need for a pension age extension...

Comments