It would seem my earlier post elicited some responses I was not expecting but then emotions seem to be running at an all time high.
Mr777
Perhaps i didn't choose the right words.
No where have I seen a written statement that clearly proves that the Barron will get any bonus/car solely from the passing of this pensions deal. His contract like most others in senior management affords him a bonus based on performance. Something I do not agree with, especially when it is people like you and I that bear the brunt of it.
I also stand to lose similar amounts to you, but I have not yet stated which way I will vote. So lets not jump to conclusions that I am a yes man.
Finally I do not think I compared the pensions debate to the Iraq/Afghanistan conflict. I just remarked that my T&C's along with pay and pension are much better than many other people. I used the Armed Forces as an example as I have first hand experience, having served my time. There will always be people better off and many more worse off. I just happen to think we currently have a bloody good deal and not much worthy of complaining about, I would feel very guilty to be complaining of my lot in life to the friends who currently serve and those families whose other halfs have made the ultimate sacrifice.
Anotherthing
I understand what you are saying about the pension break, but it is not the sole reason in my opinion why the pension fund is in the state it is. Not paying the underlying rate has also contributed to the situation, however management were only committed to ensuring the fund was 100% funded, which it would appear was the reason the actuaries let them pay less into it.
There are no doubt other reasons for the pension defecit, so lets not just focus on a couple of contributing factors, if we want reasoned debate we need to accept all points of view.
DEE MAC
Perhaps my choice of words offended you, If so then I apologise. The choice of phrase never offended me when I donned my uniform and served my time. I have nothing but respect for the armed forces and have many friends who still serve, who I know would not take offence.
I too stand to lose the same as youand many others on this forum if the deal goes through. However dont assume I am a yes man because of the comments I have posted. I feel we need to leave the emotion and various rumours out of the debate and focus only on the information that can be supported by fact.
Also I wished you had read on as your logic regarding my as then single post on this forum. I fail to see any arguement that states 1 post = Union/Management, perhaps you could expand. Especially as my penultimate sentance quite clearly stated I am neither management or union.
If this logic is being used to make your decision in the pension ballot, then I do hope you read it carefully before making your mark, I would hate you to make a mistake.
As I have intimated before lets leave our like/dislike of the CEO out of it. Lets focus on fact and not wild rumour, we can speculate all we want about a NATS/NSL/NERL sell off or about bonus agreements or what car someone drives and how it was paid for. None of them have any baring on the pension deal we stand to lose and the two new schemes that have been proposed.
I would still like a pot to P$$$ in when I retire. Unless something is done I don't think anyone will be getting anything.
P.s. 2 posts does that make me senior management now
