The BBC really is the last bastion of defence for bloated Public Sector finances. Biased BBC contributor Alan notes;
‘Public sector workers will be “dramatically” better off in retirement and receive significantly higher wages than those in the private sector.’
Not so, suggests the BBC.
Fascinating example of BBC
deliberately down playing good news for the public sector employees and choosing words
very carefully to give the facts but in a way that almost reverses their true meaning.
Regarding the IFS’ latest report on pension reforms….
For the
BBC the reforms
reduce pensions and increase working life for all…..
‘The government’s latest public sector pension changes will make “little or no difference” to their long-term cost, an economic think-tank has said. However, it points out that the earlier decision to shift the inflation link for pension increases has substantially reduced costs and expectations.Unions point out that, overall, public workers must pay more and work longer. The report said that lower earners in the public sector were better protected that higher earners.’
Contrast that with the Telegraph’s report in which it reveals public sector workers will not only get higher pensions than now but also get over 8% higher pay than their equivalents in the private sector...and that it is only higher paid workers in the public sector who will see a reduction in pensions…..
‘Public sector workers will be “dramatically” better off in retirement and receive significantly higher wages than those in the private sector despite government attempts to scale back the generosity of their pay and pensions, ministers have been warned. The institute’s findings will call into question the widespread disruption caused by trade union protests over the treatment of public sector workers. “In general, lower earners in the public sector will actually get a more generous pension as a result of the recently announced reforms. That is, they will be able to retire at age 65 with a higher annual pension than they would receive under current arrangements. Conversely, higher earners are likely to lose out.” ‘
Of course this is the BBC in which a gloating Evan Davis tried to claim that RBS boss, Stephen Hester, refused his bonus because of Labour plans to have a Common’s vote on the subject…..where was his proof of that decision making?….more likely it was Hester’s wife who made him refuse it! Let’s also not forget that Hester (who is overpaid like all these people) received over £4 million in 2008 and £6 million in 2009…..wasn’t that when Labour was running things?…how soon they forget!
‘Mr Hester’s huge potential bonuses come on top of a total pay package of £35.54million since joining the bank in 2008. Brought in to turn the ailing bank around after a £45billion taxpayer bailout, Mr Hester was handed £4.99million in restricted shares, forgoing pay and bonuses. The next year, 2009, his pay package was worth £6.9million, and in 2010 that rose to £8.16million.’