0bserver Posted June 4, 2022 Share Posted June 4, 2022 Collapse the scheme now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleepyJoe Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 Everyone should have the same Manx state pension - if CS/PS folk want to arrange their own additional pensions then it is up to them, not the taxpayer 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleepyJoe Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 It's all a bloody mess since Fast Eddie got involved, in my very personal opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 15 hours ago, 0bserver said: Collapse the scheme now. You’ve not thought that through, have you? 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 10 minutes ago, wrighty said: You’ve not thought that through, have you? Best to just stick our fingers in our ears while singing la laa la laa laa then! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0bserver Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 18 minutes ago, wrighty said: You’ve not thought that through, have you? We collapse the scheme. Take a hit for a few years and then start fresh with a new scheme. It's either a short sharp pain for a couple of years or a long slow death as we haemorrhage revenue funds to prop up the scheme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 2 minutes ago, 0bserver said: We collapse the scheme. Take a hit for a few years and then start fresh with a new scheme. It's either a short sharp pain for a couple of years or a long slow death as we haemorrhage revenue funds to prop up the scheme. Collapse what scheme? the pensioners already getting pensions are legally entitled to receive their pension until death, the employees still working are now paying towards pensions. If you closed the scheme now to existing & new entrants then no money is coming in to pay existing pensions meaning the deficit is even more for many years. There is no underlying fund as there is in private schemes to pay the pensions so pointless closing the government schemes. The issues are with the legacy pensions which can’t be resolved until they die or government defaults on paying them!! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 4 minutes ago, 0bserver said: We collapse the scheme. Take a hit for a few years and then start fresh with a new scheme. It's either a short sharp pain for a couple of years or a long slow death as we haemorrhage revenue funds to prop up the scheme. Collapse the scheme. Do you mean instantly stop paying existing pensioners, and stop taking in new contributions? How do you suggest the government then defends the inevitable legal actions that would ensue? What would you say to the people who’ve paid in for years and will be getting nothing in return? Do they get compensated, or do they have to sue the government too? Or do you mean close the scheme to new entrants? A reasonable proposition that would mean the pension scheme is gone in about 70 years, but may well cost treasury more in the short to medium term. Or do you mean freeze existing accrued benefits, close to new entrants, but continue to pay existing pensioners? Will cost more. Or how about settling up with everyone now, all members of the scheme get paid off? That’s where your 2.5 to 4 billion costs come in (the actuarial present value of the scheme, depending on how you determine the discount rate) All of these things, and more, have been thought about. The best option is to keep it going. Costs 30 million a year or thereabouts. Everything else would cost more. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 The only way I could see that being done is what large private companies did in the early 2000s. Pay a lump sum into the fund to ensure existing commitments are covered. Move current employees to a defined contribution scheme. But I've no idea where the lump sum would come from, and it would be politically difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Flint Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 31000 people Thar must be around 40% of the population? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ham_N_Eggs Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 2 hours ago, 0bserver said: We collapse the scheme. Take a hit for a few years and then start fresh with a new scheme. It's either a short sharp pain for a couple of years or a long slow death as we haemorrhage revenue funds to prop up the scheme. They've already started a new scheme. A new defined contribution scheme. Not available for current Government workers to switch into though so the problem will keep getting bigger. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 6 minutes ago, Ham_N_Eggs said: They've already started a new scheme. A new defined contribution scheme. Not available for current Government workers to switch into though so the problem will keep getting bigger. No one in right mind would switch from a final salary scheme into a defined benefit one & it would be immoral to encourage staff to do so & possibly lead to future legal claim. The new DC schemes are for new younger staff who may not want to contribute 10% into DB scheme . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newsdesk Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 2 hours ago, Declan said: The only way I could see that being done is what large private companies did in the early 2000s. Pay a lump sum into the fund to ensure existing commitments are covered. Move current employees to a defined contribution scheme. The commercial equivalent you refer to is a Section 32 buyout bond where the risk is transferred and then assumed by an insurance company but I would imagine if you went to an insurance company and said you have £4 Billion of unfunded liabilities you’d like to transfer the quote to take it on would start round about £4 Billion just to buy it out. https://www.onlinemoneyadvisor.co.uk/pensions/pension-transfers/transferring-a-section-32-pension/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ham_N_Eggs Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 9 minutes ago, Banker said: No one in right mind would switch from a final salary scheme into a defined benefit one & it would be immoral to encourage staff to do so & possibly lead to future legal claim. The new DC schemes are for new younger staff who may not want to contribute 10% into DB scheme . Who said encourage? If public servants wanted to switch across then they could offer it and have them sign a waiver. There is always a way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Helmut Fromage Posted June 5, 2022 Share Posted June 5, 2022 1 hour ago, Derek Flint said: 31000 people Thar must be around 40% of the population? I know and some of them aren’t even classed as part of the population these days 👊🏻👊🏻👊🏻👊🏻 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.