economic situation is dire

[tonyh29]

Bald men fighting over combs is getting mighty tiresome, more than ever really.

it was your combs fault but I'm sure we can overcomb our differences ....

[peterms]

Circumstances change if something is not viable then just because it was promised or put forward does not mean that it must be carried out.

The point being that the pension schemes are viable.

they are?

They are.

[snowychap]

They back their employers into a corner rape them...

You are really of the opinion that workers have the upper hand in the relationship? (For clarification this isn't a comment about 'rape' ).

[tonyh29]

Circumstances change if something is not viable then just because it was promised or put forward does not mean that it must be carried out.

The point being that the pension schemes are viable.

they are?

They are.

In the same way you think the Uk debt is viable ?

[Houlston]

They back their employers into a corner rape them...

You are really of the opinion that workers have the upper hand in the relationship? (For clarification this isn't a comment about 'rape' ).

Collectively almost always, individually depends on the business and the individual but sometimes.

[drat01]

You know why things are better? Because of kind, benevolent, profit-sharing management? Or perhaps, because people DID have unions (not before a few Tolpuddle-style transportations and the like) who forced the employers, kicking and screaming, to the negotiating chamber.

Actually youve just described the reasons why things are so shit, because people keep taking more and more and more and more. Again like I said its called greed.

They back their employers into a corner rape them and then when the shit hits the fan they wonder why they arent getting a pay rise or why their promised pension isnt coming to fruition.

To be honest I find it hard to argue with anyone or see sense with, however educated you may be with your Tolpuddleisms, that defends and advocates a group led by someone like Bob Crowe who represents everything that is wrong in society.

and your views are exactly what is wrong with society.

You advocate one without respect basically. It's interesting how you seem to want to put the blame at the workers rather than those who are seemingly in charge. Using words like workers "raping" the companies that they work for is a complete and utter nonsense.

What are your views on workers rights that have been again attacked by this disgusting Gvm't. The ease in which people can be sacked now, the TUPE laws that have been eroded? Where do you put the blame for the economic mess that this world is in?

It's funny how Amnesty today were talking about how countries like Saudi dealt with unions, by basically banning them. Would you see that as a good thing?

Thatcher, who this Gvmt are trying to emulate, famously talked about society and there being no such thing, the laws that are based on ideology and not necessity that this Gvmt are bringing in are following that mantra IMO.

What next from those who are in power and their supporters, a call for the abolition of the working wage?

[Houlston]

You know why things are better? Because of kind, benevolent, profit-sharing management? Or perhaps, because people DID have unions (not before a few Tolpuddle-style transportations and the like) who forced the employers, kicking and screaming, to the negotiating chamber.

Actually youve just described the reasons why things are so shit, because people keep taking more and more and more and more. Again like I said its called greed.

They back their employers into a corner rape them and then when the shit hits the fan they wonder why they arent getting a pay rise or why their promised pension isnt coming to fruition.

To be honest I find it hard to argue with anyone or see sense with, however educated you may be with your Tolpuddleisms, that defends and advocates a group led by someone like Bob Crowe who represents everything that is wrong in society.

and your views are exactly what is wrong with society.

You advocate one without respect basically. It's interesting how you seem to want to put the blame at the workers rather than those who are seemingly in charge. Using words like workers "raping" the companies that they work for is a complete and utter nonsense.

What are your views on workers rights that have been again attacked by this disgusting Gvm't. The ease in which people can be sacked now, the TUPE laws that have been eroded? Where do you put the blame for the economic mess that this world is in?

It's funny how Amnesty today were talking about how countries like Saudi dealt with unions, by basically banning them. Would you see that as a good thing?

Thatcher, who this Gvmt are trying to emulate, famously talked about society and there being no such thing, the laws that are based on ideology and not necessity that this Gvmt are bringing in are following that mantra IMO.

What next from those who are in power and their supporters, a call for the abolition of the working wage?

Thanks for the lecture, but when you put things like the ease of which you can sack people, it becomes clear you have no idea what you are on about.

I really dont see how being against greed and people taking what isnt there or theirs is all thats wrong in society.

Also I'm not putting all the blame on the workers at all.

Finally your comment re minimum wage is typical of someone taking the extreme of a point of view which only really undermines your post and any small credence you had.

Keep winding yourself up in a knot believing that its anyone elses fault but the worker, of which I am by the way.

[snowychap]

Collectively almost always, individually depends on the business and the individual but sometimes.

That's an opinion that I find utterly remarkable and distinctly at odds with my experience.

I would be interested in any examples of this imbalance that you'd like to put forward (I don't doubt there are many examples of people having the eye over their employer on occasions but I'd be incredibly dubious as to whether these would add up to a situation of 'almost always' even collectively).

[Risso]

I spent several years working as an auditor, and in that time audited many, many pension schemes. Just about every private sector defined benefit pension scheme I've ever seen has been closed, due to them being completely unaffordable. Yet we're supposed to believe that public sector defined benefit pensions are affordable merely because the cost of them relative to GDP isn't increasing? That says nothing about whether they're affordable in the first place.

This article here gives some interesting facts about the relative costs of pensions.

[Houlston]

Collectively almost always, individually depends on the business and the individual but sometimes.

That's an opinion that I find utterly remarkable and distinctly at odds with my experience.

I would be interested in any examples of this imbalance that you'd like to put forward (I don't doubt there are many examples of people having the eye over their employer on occasions but I'd be incredibly dubious as to whether these would add up to a situation of 'almost always' even collectively).

JLR, Fire Service, Alstom.

[colhint]

Collectively almost always, individually depends on the business and the individual but sometimes.

That's an opinion that I find utterly remarkable and distinctly at odds with my experience.

I would be interested in any examples of this imbalance that you'd like to put forward (I don't doubt there are many examples of people having the eye over their employer on occasions but I'd be incredibly dubious as to whether these would add up to a situation of 'almost always' even collectively).

to be fair in third party supply chain business the employees hold a lot of the cards. The nature of the business is that a major retailer will engage a company to do the warehousing and distribution. One strike will not kill the contract there and then, but it is unlikely to be renewed. I have been to the brink far too many times and had to back down on issues where I was absolutely right for fear of losing a big contract.

Most distribution is done third party, and there's an awful lot of warehouses out there.

[snowychap]

to be fair in third party supply chain business the employees hold a lot of the cards. The nature of the business is that a major retailer will engage a company to do the warehousing and distribution. One strike will not kill the contract there and then, but it is unlikely to be renewed. I have been to the brink far too many times and had to back down on issues where I was absolutely right for fear of losing a big contract.

Most distribution is done third party, and there's an awful lot of warehouses out there.

Sorry, was there an example there or an employer saying that a strike by his workforce might be detrimental to a contract he is after (with the 'I was absolutely right thrown in for good measure)?

p.s. I doubt anyone in the world has ever been 'absolutely right' on anything.

[snowychap]

I spent several years working as an auditor, and in that time audited many, many pension schemes. Just about every private sector defined benefit pension scheme I've ever seen has been closed, due to them being completely unaffordable. Yet we're supposed to believe that public sector defined benefit pensions are affordable merely because the cost of them relative to GDP isn't increasing? That says nothing about whether they're affordable in the first place.

Might that not suggest that the private sector schemes are shite?

Does this lack of 'affordability' apply to the pension schemes of bosses in the private secotr?

Have you done much audit work on the sustainability/affordability of things in the public sector?

What is your experience in public sector audit and accounting?

[snowychap]

JLR, Fire Service, Alstom.

?

Would you care to put forward any examples of this imbalance (and why you think it is Collectively almost always and so on)?

[peterms]

Circumstances change if something is not viable then just because it was promised or put forward does not mean that it must be carried out.

The point being that the pension schemes are viable.

they are?

They are.

In the same way you think the Uk debt is viable ?

Yes, but not in the same way.

UK debt is viable because the risk of default is about zero. (Footnote: the moron Osborne thinks it is because "the markets" (that herd of stampeding wildebeest) have "confidence" in his programme of cuts. Dopy queynte.

The pension schemes are viable because the cost of continuing them is projected to fall over the foreseeable future, despite the increasing age of the beneficiaries.

Two totally different things, but yes, both are "viable". In wholly different ways.

Was that just a question, or is there a point struggling to surface?

[peterms]

I spent several years working as an auditor, and in that time audited many, many pension schemes. Just about every private sector defined benefit pension scheme I've ever seen has been closed, due to them being completely unaffordable. Yet we're supposed to believe that public sector defined benefit pensions are affordable merely because the cost of them relative to GDP isn't increasing? That says nothing about whether they're affordable in the first place.

Not to repeat Snowy's excellent point, did you find, like most, that while defined benefit schemes were closed to the hoi palloi, they were maintained for the directors? Because that seems to be the common experience.

Were directors' pensions schemes affordable "in the first place"? It seems that, while share earnings slump and wages are at best static, directors' earnings go on increasing. Why is that, do you think? Did you audit that?

[colhint]

to be fair in third party supply chain business the employees hold a lot of the cards. The nature of the business is that a major retailer will engage a company to do the warehousing and distribution. One strike will not kill the contract there and then, but it is unlikely to be renewed. I have been to the brink far too many times and had to back down on issues where I was absolutely right for fear of losing a big contract.

Most distribution is done third party, and there's an awful lot of warehouses out there.

Sorry, was there an example there or an employer saying that a strike by his workforce might be detrimental to a contract he is after (with the 'I was absolutely right thrown in for good measure)?

p.s. I doubt anyone in the world has ever been 'absolutely right' on anything.

Sorry you're right, I didn't make it as clear as I would have hoped. The guys on the shoplfloor new we couldn't afford a strike and would play up to this on many occasions, threatening a strike.

One particular occasion was in the build up to christmas. I said I couldn't afford any holidays in december prior to the natural christmas break. It was our busiest time (We didn't shut down at all apart from Christmas, so they could have hols any other time of the year. I sat down with the Union in the previous February and they all accepted this was fair. It was pointed out to me a week later that 3 guys had already booked a day off in december, so I agreed to honour them. Come early december 2 chaps tried to book a day off. I said no. Straight in with their union rep 10 mins later saying I was victimising them as I had allowed 3 guys days off already. 30 mins walk out before I got them back to work

[peterms]

Quite astonishing. The nation with probably the most proud and distinct national identity of any in the EU is signalling a wish to crawl down the dirt road of obedience to the ECB technocrats.

Charles de Gaulle, you dopy git, did all your grandstanding lead to this?

...The French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, has said France and Germany must come together to ensure stability at the heart of Europe.

In a major speech in the port of Toulon, Mr Sarkozy said he and the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, would meet on Monday to propose measures to "guarantee the future of Europe".

He warned that economic convergence would be long and difficult.

But he promised that France would not give up its sovereignty.

He said the euro could not continue to exist unless eurozone economies pulled together...

[tonyh29]

Was that just a question, or is there a point struggling to surface?

well it was a question , hence the "?" at the end , but since you put it so politely I guess my curiosity leads me to wonder that seeing as pensions come out the government coffers and say we lost our AAA rating through having to much debt , we would simply not be able to borrow money at any price, meaning that we couldn't pay these very same "viable "pensions ... so if we have a structural deficit which seems to be what you advocate then something has to give surely ?

[Risso]

I spent several years working as an auditor, and in that time audited many, many pension schemes. Just about every private sector defined benefit pension scheme I've ever seen has been closed, due to them being completely unaffordable. Yet we're supposed to believe that public sector defined benefit pensions are affordable merely because the cost of them relative to GDP isn't increasing? That says nothing about whether they're affordable in the first place.

Not to repeat Snowy's excellent point, did you find, like most, that while defined benefit schemes were closed to the hoi palloi, they were maintained for the directors? Because that seems to be the common experience.

Were directors' pensions schemes affordable "in the first place"? It seems that, while share earnings slump and wages are at best static, directors' earnings go on increasing. Why is that, do you think? Did you audit that?

Not at all. Most directors were in exactly the same final salary scheme as the rank and file, and when the defined benefit schemes closed, they were closed to everybody, and all workers and bosses were just lumped into defined contribution schemes.

As for the nonsense about this being ideological, what were the reasons in 2004 and 2005?