Posts: 12,937
Threads: 282
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation:
0
PEGASUS, post: 384775, member: 32 Wrote:No need to apologise to anyone Bill. Tipping out at 50 plus years at 3 in the morning takes it's toll. It's not all about money.
I had to work on a driver who was 55, at an early morning shout who went down with a heart attack, while waiting for the Ambo, because the arrsole gaffer felt he was due a BA wear. Tam Broon died the next day. Threw in my papers to retire the next day. I fear for those that have to work till 60 under the new scheme.
No reply from brasshat yet, wonder why?
Me to peg, I was a lucky sod got out at 50, I am 61 now run 10k three times a week, enjoy great health, but I am nowhere near as fit as I was at 50, and nowhere near fit enough to be an ff. Working till 60 operationally is plain crazy, something many wont manage through ill health.
Whatever brasshat decides I wish him well.
We all have opinions, thank god they are not all the same, or there would be no debate.
Posts: 1,075
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation:
0
bill.advanced, post: 384729, member: 10308 Wrote:Most of us don't get it, but then we are all different. For me it's utter madness but some just don't like the idea of retiring. Hi Bill
What we need to remember is as good as the pension schemes are because of events throughout an individual life they may not be in the financial position to retire (as they would probably like). Break up in relationships (with claims on the pension), the negative equity housing trap many got stung with in the late 80's and 90's are just a couple of things that may have altered their retirement plans.
I do however agree with retiring from one industry and getting a job in another. But maybe many industries allow this. I suppose the problem for the fire service (away from the cuts to staffing levels) is that it is "dead mans shoes" and those just starting out in the world of work will not get access or skills training if we by staying on block their route into the industry?
I have no doubt some are institutionalised, others fear the un-known, some just like the comfort of doing what they know.
My pension was never going to be enough to live on with a mortgage still to pay, kids wanting to go to uni etc, etc.
But by working elsewhere am I really doing any thing different to them?, just a different industry?
Posts: 12,937
Threads: 282
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation:
0
I get your drift Benito, but someone in that position would be better of taking the pension, lump sum, and getting another job.
Someone staying on is working for less than £100 per week in comparison to what his pension pays. With regards to negative equality hopefully the lump sum would take care of that.
I reckon most don't do it for financial reasons, my mate didn't, I reckon it's more to do with their life choice.
But it's for them to decide not for others to critisise them.
We are all differnt.
We all have opinions, thank god they are not all the same, or there would be no debate.
Posts: 1,075
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation:
0
Bill spot on with your assessment of the wages/pension issue and staying on (although I am not sure of the figure) but you are right effectively you work for reduced pay, you do not pay into the scheme which is unfunded and has always relied on serving scheme member payment to help pay for those of us in retirement, and the brigade thinks it is getting work on the cheap (but the reality is pension payments come out of their budget and if this continues then more payments out of a budget with less pension payments going in to help with this?
Posts: 12,937
Threads: 282
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation:
0
Benito my mate was working for £30 a week.
His take home pay in 2004 was £310 pw
His pension would have been £220 pw
His lump sum would have been £65,000
6% interest was available at that time.
= £60 per week after tax
Pension and lump sum interest £280. pw
And if he used the lump sum to pay of a mortgage he was working for free.
There is no sound financial reason for working on without getting your pension, but I respect those that chose to do so for other reasons.
We all have opinions, thank god they are not all the same, or there would be no debate.
Posts: 12,937
Threads: 282
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation:
0
When you retire as you know Benito, you don't pay pension contributions, NHS, fbu, travelling expenses, etc all you pay is tax. So although your gross salary is only half if you take the lump sum, your net salary has not halved.
We all have opinions, thank god they are not all the same, or there would be no debate.
Posts: 3,848
Threads: 136
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation:
0
bill.advanced, post: 384787, member: 10308 Wrote:When you retire as you know Benito, you don't pay pension contributions, NHS, fbu, travelling expenses, etc all you pay is tax. So although your gross salary is only half if you take the lump sum, your net salary has not h bill.advanced, post: 384787, member: 10308 Wrote:When you retire as you know Benito, you don't pay pension contributions, NHS, fbu, travelling expenses, etc all you pay is tax. So although your gross salary is only half if you take the lump sum, your net salary has not halved.
Would still like a response from brasshat on where he is coming from. He started this and buggered off! So do tell Brassy!!!
Now freed from the asylum.
Posts: 1,075
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation:
0
bill.advanced, post: 384787, member: 10308 Wrote:When you retire as you know Benito, you don't pay pension contributions, NHS, fbu, travelling expenses, etc all you pay is tax. So although your gross salary is only half if you take the lump sum, your net salary has not halved. Not disputed Bill 
Posts: 141
Threads: 5
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation:
0
PEGASUS, post: 384684, member: 32 Wrote:Brasshat, not having a go, or being cheeky, I know everyones's situation is different. But why don't you just retire and enjoy your pension, and get another job if need be, therefore giving a youngster a chance of a start in the job? What happened to doing your 30 years and giving a youngster a job when you left?
Pegasus. I agree with part of that. I will retire after 30 years (in 18 months or so) and hopefully somebody else can enjoy a career in the fire service.
However, due to family financial reasons I will need to get a different job to top up my pension. I believe there are prospects of part-time Non-Opaerational jobs in the my service. I just want to find out in advance any implications regarding tax and pensions etc.
Posts: 3,848
Threads: 136
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation:
0
brasshat, post: 384967, member: 2974 Wrote:Pegasus. I agree with part of that. I will retire after 30 years (in 18 months or so) and hopefully somebody else can enjoy a career in the fire service.
However, due to family financial reasons I will need to get a different job to top up my pension. I believe there are prospects of part-time Non-Opaerational jobs in the my service. I just want to find out in advance any implications regarding tax and pensions etc.
Fair due's, as I said wasn't having a go, it's all down to personal circumstances. Just have a thing about people holding on to the job, and holding up promotion and recruitment to feather their nest as they see it. It wasn't a viable financial thing to do up until recently when you still had to pay into the pension if you stayed on for a lesser return, but many did it.
The fact that you are looking into Non -Operational jobs and freeing up a space for a youngster to get in I applaud. Something I might have done if it was available at the time. Good luck with your endevours, and as you say, make sure that you check out the implications.
Now freed from the asylum.
|
