Y:\Cantieri\Rassegna stampa\Rassegna\2011\07_LUGLIO

Rassegna stampa
01/07/2011 : Notizie di oggi
Boston Globe, The
Britain faces massive strike over pension changes
Corriere del Sud
Online, Il
Gb:pensioni, pubblico impiego in piazza
Corriere della Sera
Bollo più caro sul dossier titoli Rendite e conti tassati al 20%
Pensioni delle donne, dal 2020 un mese in più al lavoro
Giornale, Il
Pensioni, aumento soft per le donne Vitalizio a 65 anni solo dal 2030
Guardian, The
Biggest school strikes since 1980s as doubts grow on pension reform
Public sector strikers clean up after giving dressing down to
government
Public sector strikes provide a mix of harsh words and high spirits
Putting the case for public service
These strikes could become the coalition's Iraq moment
Herald Scotland
Online
Scots GPs vote for industrial action over pensions
Independent, The
David Prosser: The biggest loser from the LSE's Canadian débâcle:
Free trade
Italia Oggi
Bendinelli: costruiamo la nostra pensione con responsabilità
Enpacl fa i conti con Lehman
Manifesto, Il
In sciopero, senza il Labour
New York Times
Public Workers Strike in Britain Over Pensions
Two Rulings Find Cuts in Public Pensions Permissible
Reuters UK
Teachers and civil servants strike over pensions
Teachers, civil servants walk out over pensions
Rinascita
La riforma delle pensioni ferma la Gran Bretagna
Sole 24 Ore, Il
Calendario senza credibilità
Gran Bretagna. Guerra di cifre sullo sciopero per contestare la riforma
delle pensioni Statali in piazza contro Cameron
La cessione del quinto è sicura ma costosa
Senza titolo
Sondaggio. Panel di Invesco su 150 tra fondi pensione e assicurazioni
europee Corporate bond preferiti ad azioni e titoli di Stato
Do you want your PRESSToday ?
La soluzione per le tue rassegne stampa on-line: www.presstoday.com
Rassegna stampa
Boston Globe, The
Data: 01/07/2011
"Britain faces massive strike over pension changes"
Stampa
Indietro
Public workers in Britain strike over pensions
By Karla Adam
Washington Post / July 1, 2011
E-mail |
Print |
Reprints |
Text size – +
LONDON - Airports, courts, and more than 10,000 schools were among the services hit by a massive publicsector strike across Britain yesterday as thousands of workers staged what they said was the biggest walkout in a
generation.
Union organizers said that more than 750,000 public employees - including teachers, court staff, passport officers,
and other civil servants - walked out during the one-day strike over proposed changes to their pension system.
The strikes are the first major uprising over the Conservative-led government’s plans to slash $128 billion in
spending over the next four years.
The rationale behind pension changes, the government says, is the same for Britain’s austerity program as a
whole: Current levels of spending are unsustainable.
But like public-sector employees across Europe, those striking in Britain argue it is unfair that millions of workers
are being forced to carry the burden of reducing a deficit that ballooned after the financial crisis.
Under the proposed changes, public-sector workers will have to work longer and contribute more, and generally for
smaller pensions.
“We don’t get many rewards,’’ said Sarah Newman, 29, a teacher who was on the subway traveling to a rally in
central London. She said she simply wanted the pension plan that was promised when she first became a
teacher, but now “they are trying to make us work longer and pay more and get less.’’
London’s Heathrow Airport, Europe’s busiest, warned passengers that there may be delays as they snake through
immigration control with fewer passport officials on hand. The British government insisted that it has contingency
plans in place and that security at its borders and ports remains a priority.
Three teachers unions and Britain’s largest civil service union, Public and Commercial Services, took part in the
strike, but many more have warned that this is the start of a larger wave of industrial action if the pension dispute
is not resolved.
Under proposals penned by John Hutton, a former Labor Party pensions minister, the public-sector retirement age
would increase to match the state-pension age, which is rising to 66 by 2020. He also recommended that pensions
be based on less generous “career average salaries’’ rather than “final salaries,’’ hurting high-fliers who were
earning a lot at the end of their careers. There are also plans to increase pension contributions by three
percentage points.
Members of the British public, who also are feeling the pinch of austerity measures, are not effusive in their
support of the strikers. According to a recent ComRes/ITV News poll, 63 percent said that the public-sector
strikers will not elicit much sympathy “because everyone has to shoulder the burden of cuts.’’
Prime Minister David Cameron has called the pension changes necessary and fair, adding that the unions are
wrong to strike while negotiations are continuing.
There are more than 7 million trade union members in Britain, down from a peak of 13 million in 1979.
Worried that the threats of industrial unrest might escalate, some Conservatives, including the mayor of London,
have called for new legislation to make it harder for unions to go on strike.
Rassegna stampa
Corriere del Sud Online, Il
Data: 01/07/2011
"Gb:pensioni, pubblico impiego in piazza"
Stampa
Indietro
Gb:pensioni, pubblico impiego in piazza
BY AT 30 GIUGNO, 2011, 11:40 AM
30-06-2011 11:40
Cameron condanna agitazione che arriva a negoziati ancora aperti
(ANSA) – LONDRA, 30 GIU – Settore pubblico in sciopero in Gran Bretagna
contro la riforma delle pensioni: centinaia di migliaia di lavoratori – nelle previsioni
della vigilia fino a 700 mila – incrociano oggi le braccia per protestare contro il
progetto governativo di innalzare l’etÃ
pensionabile ed i contributi che deve
pagare ciascun lavoratore del pubblico impiego. Il primo ministro David Cameron
ha condannato l’agitazione che arriva a negoziati ancora aperti tra sindacati e
governo.
Rassegna stampa
Corriere della Sera
"Bollo più caro sul dossier titoli Rendite e conti tassati al 20%"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
CORRIERE DELLA SERA - CORRIERE DELLA SERA
sezione: Primo Piano data: 01/07/2011 - pag: 5
Bollo più caro sul dossier titoli Rendite e conti
tassati al 20%
La nuova aliquota prevista nella delega, esclusi i Bot
Subito: andrà in onda un ritocco al bollo sul deposito titoli. Domani: arriva l'aliquota unica al 20%per le
rendite finanziarie. In estrema sintesi queste sono le novità fiscali per investitori e famiglie. Nel
provvedimento che entrerà in vigore tra qualche giorno spunta a sorpresa un ritocco all'imposta di bollo sul
dossier titoli, che oggi ammonta a 34,20 euro l'anno per chi possiede valori per più di mille euro. Archiviato
invece con grande sollievo degli intermediari e dei trader grandi e piccoli il ritorno del fissato bollato sulle
transazioni di Borsa. La delega per la riforma fiscale, presentata ieri dal governo, mira a ridisegnare
completamente le imposte sui guadagni finanziari, portandole a livelli più simili a quelli del mercato
internazionale e anche a quelle attualmente sopportate da chi fa investimenti immobiliari. Un sistema nuovo,
tutto da mettere a punto, che farebbe scendere drasticamente il prelievo sui conti correnti (oggi al 27%) e
salire un po' quello su azioni, fondi e altri strumenti finanziari (oggi al 12,5%). Con la promessa di sconti
interessanti, però, a chi investe con obiettivi di lungo termine utilizzando conti «appositamente istituiti» . E i
titoli di Stato? Il governo li ha chiamati fuori. Anche inseguendo il progetto dell'aliquota unica, Bot e Btp,
secondo quanto è stato definito finora, continuerebbero a pagare le tasse sui rendimenti alla stessa aliquota
di oggi, pari al 12,5%. Per chi possiede invece gestioni patrimoniali, fondi, azioni e qualunque strumento
offra «reddito da capitale» la delega del governo parla di un livello unico che può salire dall'attuale
12,5%(una delle aliquote più basse d'Europa) fino al 20%. Il 20%quindi è un tetto massimo, che potrebbe
anche non essere raggiunto. Il provvedimento, però, oltre ai titoli di Stato, chiama fuori «piani di risparmio»
, fondi pensione e forme di assistenza socio-sanitaria complementare, a cui si promettono aliquote inferiori al
fatidico 20%. La previdenza complementare che già oggi gode di una tassazione agevolata inferiore al
12,5%e nonostante questo fatica a decollare continuerebbe quindi ad avere un fisco di riguardo. I piani di
risparmio a lungo termine, invece, per l'Italia sarebbero una novità. Non a caso nel provvedimento si fa
riferimento a conti «appositamente istituiti» . Di che cosa si tratta? Strada facendo si chiarirà. In Francia,
negli Stati Uniti e in Inghilterra, per esempio, esistono conti agevolati dove è possibile investire in fondi o in
altri strumenti finanziari, impegnandosi a mantenere la soglia del patrimonio immutata per periodi
sufficientemente lunghi (cinque, dieci anni), in cambio di un'imposta vantaggiosa. Se l'idea è questa, la
riforma spingerebbe per agevolare investimenti privati a lungo termine, una sorta di ulteriore «gamba»
previdenziale che non avrebbe però i pesanti vincoli di partecipazione imposti dai fondi pensione. Tutte
queste novità non sono però dietro l'angolo: c'è un cammino legislativo da fare che dovrà riempire la cornice
disegnata dal governo. E non mancheranno, pare, eventuali norme transitorie. Per regolare senza eccessivi
traumi la staffetta tra vecchio e nuovo. Giuditta Marvelli RIPRODUZIONE RISERVATA
Rassegna stampa
Corriere della Sera
"Pensioni delle donne, dal 2020 un mese in più al lavoro"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
CORRIERE DELLA SERA - CORRIERE DELLA SERA
sezione: Primo Piano data: 01/07/2011 - pag: 3
Pensioni delle donne, dal 2020 un mese in più al
lavoro
Dal 2020 ci vorrà un mese di più, ossia 60 anni e un mese, per consentire alle donne che lavorano nel
settore privato di andare in pensione. I 65 anni verranno raggiunti nel 2032. È una norma ammorbidita
rispetto alle intenzioni iniziali quella che ha trovato posto nel decreto varato ieri dal governo. E che, come ha
detto il ministro per il Welfare, realizzerà «in tempi congrui» la parità previdenziale tra i sessi. Altre misure
riguardano la previdenza anche degli uomini. Come l'agganciamento dei requisiti di età e contributivi per
l'accesso alla pensione all'aspettativa di vita media calcolata dall'Istat. In pratica nel 2020 l'età di vecchiaia
sarà intorno ai 67 anni e di anzianità attorno ai 63-64 anni. Bisognerà invece aspettare la pubblicazione del
decreto, limato fino all'ultimo momento nel corso della discussione a Palazzo Chigi, per sapere se sono
rimasti in piedi gli interventi sulle pensioni più elevate, oltre i 2.500 euro al mese. Che vanno, per il biennio
2012-2013, dal blocco della rivalutazione automatica della fascia di importo degli assegni pensionistici
superiore a 5 volte il trattamento minimo Inps alla riduzione del 45%per le fasce da 3 a 5 volte superiori il
minimo. Dovrebbe poi scattare la riduzione (parametrata alla durata del matrimonio) delle pensioni di
reversibilità degli over settanta verso il coniuge più giovane di oltre vent'anni. S. Ta. RIPRODUZIONE
RISERVATA
Rassegna stampa
Giornale, Il
"Pensioni, aumento soft per le donne Vitalizio a 65 anni solo dal 2030"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
Il fatto
01-07-2011
PREVIDENZA
Pensioni, aumento soft per le donne Vitalizio a 65 anni solo dal 2030
L’aumento dell’età pensionabile per le donne nel settore privato, come nel pubblico, avverrà
gradualmente a partire dal 2020 fino ad arrivare a 65 anni nel 2030.Quindi dal 2020 le lavoratrici
dovranno avere compiuto 60 anni - il requisito anagrafico attualmente richiesto per l’accessoalla pensione
di vecchiaia-e un mese per andare in pensione. Tali requisiti saranno poi aumentati di 2 mesi dal gennaio
2012, tre mesi dal 2022, 4 mesi dal 2023, 5 mesi dal 2024, sei mesi dal 2025 e per ogni anno successivo
fino al 2031 e di ulteriori tre mesi a decorrere dal 1 gennaio 2032. Il settore privato si allinea così nel
pubblico impiego, dove il governo ha già attuato la parità a 65 anni tra uomini e donne aderendo ad una
richiesta comunitaria.
Rassegna stampa
Guardian, The
Data: 01/07/2011
"Biggest school strikes since 1980s as doubts grow on pension reform"
Indietro
Stampa
Biggest school strikes since 1980s as doubts grow on pension
reform
Forecast that cost of pensions will fall in the future leads to row over David Cameron's claim that system could 'go
broke'
Polly Curtis, Hélène Mulholland and Dan Milmo
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 30 June 2011 21.00 BST
larger | smaller
Public sector workers take part in a march through Bristol on Thursday in protest at the government's planned cuts to pensions. Photograph: Matt
Cardy/Getty Images
One of the government's key arguments for reforming public sector pensions crumbled when it was made clear that
they are projected to become more affordable in the future, not less, as teachers staged the biggest school strikes
since the 1980s over the plans.
The forecast that the cost of paying pensions to 6 million public sector workers will fall by £67bn over the next 50
years undermined David Cameron's claim earlier this week that the system could "go broke" if it is not reformed.
More than 2 million pupils missed classes as a group of four breakaway unions staged the first mass strikes against
the coalition's austerity plans.
Thousands of parents were forced to take a day off work with nearly 6,000 schools closed and 5,000 partially
closed. In total, half of schools were affected.
"Today's action across the country demonstrates the anger and distress that this government is causing teachers,"
Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said.
"Teachers are dedicated to the children and young people whom they teach. But they cannot stand back and see
their pensions attacked when all the evidence shows that they are affordable and sustainable and that their costs are
falling."
Ministers claimed a lower turnout in the civil service betrayed a lack of support for the unions' tactics. Downing
Street said that just half of members of the PCS – the civil service union that has been at the forefront of the strikes
– took part and that the impact was minimal.
"The figures speak for themselves," the prime minister's official spokesman said. Some rival unions also turned on
the strikers accusing them of a "tactical error".
Indicative figures compiled by government departments suggested that 100,000 civil servants had walked out,
reducing services and triggering contingency plans at job centres, tax and benefit offices, ports, courts and airports.
PCS insisted that 200,000 people took action.
Warnings of chaos at airports, triggered by the UK Border Agency suggesting people should fly another day, failed
to materialise. UKBA reported "minimal" impact on the estimated 500,000 passengers.
Thousands marched through central London where there were minor skirmishes between some protesters and the
police. In total, 30 people were arrested.
Mark Serwotka, leader of the PCS, claimed that the strike was the biggest in their history. "It's a very, very clear
signal to the government that they have been rumbled," he said.
"This is not about pensions, this is about making public sector workers pay for the economic problems, and we are
determined to keep going until they change direction." He pointed out that the 100,000 was substantially in excess
of the 48,500 who backed the strike in the ballot.
Serwotka accused the Cabinet Office minister, Francis Maude, who is leading the negotiations, of "floundering"
when asked to justify earlier statements that pensions were becoming unaffordable.
Maude would only say that the Hutton report, on which the pension plans are based, had "very clearly" said that the
status quo was not tenable. "You cannot continue to have more and more people in retirement being supported by
fewer and fewer people in work," he said.
He later argued that public sector workers would have to justify the cost of their pensions as schools and hospitals
were cutting their budgets.
The report by Lord Hutton, the former Labour work and pensions secretary who wrote the blueprint for the
government's reforms, said that the cost of public sector pensions, as a proportion of GDP, was set to fall after
peaking last year at 1.9% to 1.4% by 2059/60.
The prime minister's official spokesman dismissed the row. "People are getting caught up in a semantic debate," he
said.
The Treasury later claimed that the graphs containing the figures included reforms the unions objected to, including
a switch from CPI to RPI for up-rating pensions and the benefits of a "cap and share" scheme to cover extra costs
of life expectancy changing. Without these factored in, the cost as a proportion of GDP would remain static at
1.8%.
Government ministers took to the airwaves highlighting the fact that the strikers had not been joined by the
majority of unions.
Michael Gove, the education secretary, said: "Two particular teachers' unions thought that it would be a good idea
in a way to pre-empt the completion of talks by going out on strike to demonstrate the strength of feeling. I think
that's unnecessary."
Unions not involved suggested that early strikes had damaged their argument. "This was a tactical error. It's
allowed the government to hone it's propaganda," one union boss said. "PCS was warned that this was the wrong
time and could backfire. A lot of other unions will feel frustrated with PCS. Most unions will say today hasn't
helped and wasn't very necessary."
Chris Keates, the general secretary of the NASUWT union, the only teaching union not to strike, said: "It is
important to keep the high moral ground. That has been a key factor in our strategy. We're sticking with the
negotiating and responding to what our members tell us."
Rassegna stampa
Guardian, The
Data: 01/07/2011
"Public sector strikers clean up after giving dressing down to government"
Stampa
Indietro
Public sector strikers clean up after giving dressing down to
government
The day was a respectable, but not sensational, success. And it all finished early – just like school
Michael White
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 30 June 2011 20.05 BST
larger | smaller
Demonstrators walk through central London as they take part in the national day of strikes to defend their pensions. Photograph: Carl Court/AFP/Getty
Images
As demonstrations go it was very good about its litter. When the good-natured crowd shuffled gently down the
Strand towards Trafalgar Square, marchers repeatedly stopped to drop their sandwich cartons and coffee cups into
Westminster city council's big black bin outside that citadel of privilege, the Savoy Hotel.
Obviously Miss and Sir couldn't risk being seen by their pupils on the TV news dropping bus tickets or paper
tissues, as well as baring their knees in the hot weather. Striking civil servants would probably have had to invoke
bylaws and fine themselves if similarly litter-compromised on camera.
The orderly treatment of litter symbolised an earnest respectability at the London pensions demo, reportedly
repeated at events across the country. (Touch wood. As the rally broke up in late afternoon 30 arrests were made).
The day was a respectable, but not sensational, success.
Ministers who had predicted "minimum disruption" conceded that more than 11,000 state schools – more than half
the total – were affected, along with airports, benefits offices, driving tests and galleries and museums. "I feel
disappointed," admitted the education secretary and former strike picket, Michael Gove, one of the day's top hate
figures.
Banners were almost as fierce as usual, ranging from the NUT's "Fair Pensions for All" (they mean the poor sods
trapped in poor private sector deals, as well as themselves) through "Billions for Bankers, Peanuts for Pensioners"
to the evergreen demands of the Socialist Workers Party: "24-hour public sector general strike NOW."
Marchers chanted "2-4-6-8/ We Won't Work 'Til 68." They took well over an hour to pass.
These were strikers, many of them first-timers, acutely aware that public opinion is finely balanced in its attitude
towards their fight against the government attempt to whittle down the public sector pensions bill. They didn't want
the testosterone-fuelled aggro that marred last winter's student demo and the TUC's Day of Protest. No fire
extinguishers or champagne buckets were hurled off the Savoy roof.
Doctoral student Harry Pitts, 24, one of the last self-proclaimed Marxists in the Labour party, had come from
Falmouth where his father works in the docks and his mother teaches. The government's attack "is probably a way
of breaking down people's sense of vocation within the current capitalist mode of production, preparing us to be
more pliant and amenable to bursts of temporary work or call centre jobs", he said.
Most marchers seemed to have more tangible concerns. Noel Hall ("I'm 59") and his wife Bernice Shamplim ("I'm
over 60") both teach in north London, edging towards retirement via part-time work. "It's an exhausting profession,
I feel sorry for younger colleagues," he says.
"I don't have to work, I do it because I love my job and am good at it," she adds. "And I'm a taxpayer. People
forget that."
Long before the first buses converged on Lincoln's Inn Fields and the first "We Won't Work Until Death" and "If
You Can Read This Thank a Teacher" banners were unfurled, the demo brought a couple of moral victories. Strike
action was rumoured to have reached David Cameron's old school, South Slough Comp, better known as Eton.
Though it was not confirmed, Mark Serwotka, fiery leader of the PCS (one of three striking unions) later revealed
that a few of his members were bravely striking at No 10.
The Cabinet Office minister, Francis Maude, who is handling negotiations with the unions ("Why go on strike when
we're still talking?" ministers ask), was kebabbed on Radio 4's Today programme by Evan Davis, the BBC's
economics pixie. Why all the pressure when the Hutton report on pensions confirmed that – largely thanks to
Labour reforms of public sector pensions – the annual taxpayer bung of 1.9% of GDP (about £32bn) to fill the
contributions gap had peaked and would fall to 1.4% by the time younger marchers retire in the 2050s?
Maude floundered. Throughout the day, his name usually raised a hiss, as did Gove, Treasury fall-guy Danny
Alexander, assorted bankers and Ed Miliband – whose refusal to back the day's strike earned him a special black
mark. He got one of the biggest boos at the rally at Methodist Central Hall where Serwotka said ministers were
"either badly briefed or lying. My mother brought me up to think the best of people, so I think they're lying."
It was the University and College Union's Mark Campbell, who targeted bankers' profits, which he said extra civil
servants should be hired to track down, and Serwotka — the Daily Mail's idea of a foaming union militant — who
rattled off the 999 calls disrupted, juries sent home, driving tests postponed, as if the public would be positively
grateful.
Yet amid time-honoured rhetoric of class struggle (Tony Benn popped up to sprinkle some historic context on the
occasion), classroom struggle kept bursting through. Christine Blower of the NUT, appalled yet delighted at being
dubbed a "Scar-Girl" by the Sun, said the proper response was one applied to children squabbling in the
playground: "That isn't really appropriate, is it?''
Vicky Josiah, a 22-year-old teacher, dripping with youthful idealism, spoke of the amazing teachers all children
know "who changed our lives. I want to be one of those." But she also wants to pay off her student loan, do a
master's degree and buy a car like her friends.
Not all the marchers seemed much better briefed than Maude about "having to work to 68" or about some
negotiation details (career average pensions?) which might help many of them, if better explained.
A points win for the unions, then, and on to round two in October. At least it all finished early – just like school.
Rassegna stampa
Guardian, The
Data: 01/07/2011
"Public sector strikes provide a mix of harsh words and high spirits"
Indietro
Stampa
Public sector strikes provide a mix of harsh words and high
spirits
Around the UK, thousands of people took to the streets in protest against proposed changes to the pensions of
public sector employees
Martin Wainwright, Steven Morris, Paul Owen, Helen Carter, Dan Milmo, Severin Carrelll, Hannah Waldram and
Press Association
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 30 June 2011 19.43 BST
larger | smaller
A children's creche is made available to those taking part in public sector pension protests at City Hall, Sheffield. Photograph: John Giles/PA
Merthyr Tydfil
Protesters said they hoped this would be the first of a series of days of action.
It was obvious from the number of youngsters in the skate park and McDonald's on the edge of town that most of
the area's schools had not opened fully or at all.
Garhard Williams, divisional secretary of the NUT, said most of his members had been keen to strike. "I got them
to use the NUT's online calculator to see what pension they were looking at. It was a no-brainer after that."
Williams, 43, a chemistry and physics teacher at Cyfarthfa High School in Merthyr, said rising living costs meant
he was struggling to make ends meet. His daughter will go to university in nearby Newport rather than going
further afield because she can live at home and the family cannot afford to go on holiday this summer. According
to the NUT calculator, Williams will have to work more than six years longer and pay £88 extra a month for his
pension.
The Public and Commercial Services Union claimed that all of its 85 members at HM Revenue and Customs had
stayed away from the Merthyr office.
Union rep Margaret "Mags" Davies had brought her dog, Jack, along to irritate the few who ignored the picket. "I
bring him to every strike because he barks and annoys the people inside," said Davies.
Down the road on the picket line at Merthyr Tydfil College, Kathleen Evans said she and her husband, Simon,
faced double the financial hardship because both are lecturers. They have two children who they would like to go to
university, just at the time they would hope to start drawing the pension. Factor in elderly parents to be looked after
and, Evans said, hard times were ahead.
There were passionate speeches during a rally in front of the civic centre. Tom Roberts, secretary of the town's
trades union council, said the strikes were a "shot across the bows" of the coalition government. He claimed the
cuts amounted to an "attack on the working class" but insisted: "We're going to fight and we're going to win."
Brighton
A carnival atmosphere pervaded in Brighton and Hove as more than 1,600 strikers marched in opposition to the
government's pension plans. People young and old banged drums, waved flags and banners, and listened to music
from a stage set up on the Level near the city centre.
From there they marched through the streets to Hove town hall for a rally highlighting discontent at government
plans to raise pension contributions and increase the retirement age.
One banner read: "2,4,6,8, I'm not teaching that late." Another stated: "Gove, be a love, go back to school on this
one."
Greater Manchester and Cheshire
Bev Dickson, a mother of two who runs a financial recruitment consultancy in Warrington, was among thousands
of parents who had to take time off work because of schools being shut.
She said: "I've had to rearrange my work schedule and worked from home this morning, but have managed to get a
childminder for the afternoon. While I sympathise with the teachers wholeheartedly, working in recruitment I've
seen a lot of examples of people in the private sector having their pay and benefits hit – unfortunately it's a sign of
the times."
Schools in north-west England were more affected by strikes than the national average, particularly in Warrington,
where more than six out of 10 closed. Courts were particularly hit, with Salford magistrates shutting up shop for the
day and their counterparts in Manchester writing in advance to some litigants delaying cases, though not all the
letters arrived on time. Only three of 16 scheduled hearings in the city's central courts building were sitting, with
some difficulty according to pickets, although some union members were understood to have reported to work and
helped to keep the skeleton service going.
Strangeways prison in Manchester used emergency backup procedures for prisoner transfers after disruption by
administrative staff.
Manchester Airport said it was "business as usual", with operations running "smoothly".
Heathrow
At Heathrow strikers were in defiant mood as 70,000 passengers passed through passport control without
significant delays, despite walkouts by UK Border Agency staff affiliated to the PCS union. A branch officer said
more walkouts were likely in the autumn.
Sue Smith, deputy president of the PCS Home Office group, said "a lot" of UKBA staff had come out on strike.
"They are absolutely furious about the cuts that have already taken place in the border force, including voluntary
redundancies at Heathrow, where people have left and have not been replaced."
Passengers appeared to take the strikes in good humour, as non-EU travellers were left waiting for no more than 45
minutes at passport control, in line with government targets. Moutie Abrahams, 42, who flew in on a packed BA
flight from Cape Town, said: "We came here two months ago and we stood in queues for a really long time. Today
it was much quicker. In South Africa our strikes are more efficient. You would still be standing there."
Scotland
Union leaders claim that the civil service strike in Scotland was the best-attended "in years" after thousands of
office workers, immigration staff, defence workers and government officials stayed away from work.
The Scottish parliament and the Scottish government's headquarters in Edinburgh, Faslane nuclear submarine base,
Glasgow and Edinburgh airports, museums and job centres were all affected by the strike, although there was little
reported impact on the public.
Many public servants, including teachers, have their salaries and pensions set by the Scottish government.
Joy Dunn, political officer for the PCS union in Scotland, said she believed 90% of its members in Scotland took
part in the strike action. About a thousand PCS members took part in a rally in central Glasgow at noon.
Cardiff
About 600 people gathered in Sophia Gardens in Cardiff before making their way through the city centre to
Cathays Park on an organised march at 12.30pm.
Edmund Schluessel, a member of the University College Union at Cardiff University, said: "There's a small
speakers' corner and people are mainly standing around chatting – talking about their own pensions – including a
couple of policemen."
Schluessel said there was not a great police presence, with four policemen on horseback to control the crowds –
which were made up of members of the UCU, ATL and NUT. Many members had brought their children too.
"Everyone is showing their support for the members today and the education sector. A lot of the universities are
already out – so we expect to build support over the summer and see bigger strikes taking place in September.
"We're a bit worried about the possibility of rain, but everyone is smiling and chatting with friends and there's a
feeling of support for the strikes – people were driving past the picket lines honking their horns this morning."
Sheffield
About 1,500 people gathered in the city centre for a rally, march and even a singsong. A series of speakers
addressed the crowd from the steps of the city hall before the Sheffield Socialist Choir led a singalong and the mass
of teachers, civil servants and students moved off for a mile-long circuit of the city centre.
Teacher Lisa Tunnell was cheered as she told the crowd: "The government's pay freezes and proposed cuts to
pensions have already forced many to consider leaving the profession."
Liverpool
The strike in effect stopped work at the passport office in Liverpool, with all but a dozen of the 550 staff walking
out for the day. Other bodies disrupted included the Criminal Records Bureau and Ministry of Defence offices.
Local councils said that 400 of Merseyside's 900 schools shut down and a further 200 were running limited
activities, giving many thousands of children the day off. The World museum and the Walker art gallery also
closed, but the city's John Lennon airport suffered no disruption.
A peaceful march wound its way through Chinatown and Liverpool city centre as strikers chanted "Unity is
strength" and "No ifs, no buts, no public sector cuts". A police helicopter whirred overhead but there was no
reported trouble.
Rassegna stampa
Guardian, The
Data: 01/07/2011
"Putting the case for public service"
Indietro
Stampa
Letters
Putting the case for public service
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 30 June 2011 21.00 BST
larger | smaller
I am a relatively low-ranking civil servant (the top banana in my department gets almost six times my salary)
approaching retirement. Because I didn't join the service until my early 20s I won't get the full "gold-plated"
pension that people outside public service think we all get (Editorial, 30 June). A civil servant in the "classic"
pension scheme would have to work 40 years to retire on half pay.
Illustration: Gillian Blease
Civil servants don't get many perks. We don't get company cars, private health insurance, staff discounts and the
like. We do get a day off for the Queen's birthday, a half-day around Easter and the leave is good. But I don't see
the pension as a perk. The pension is recompense for a long period of dedicated public service, in many cases spent
doing the government's dirty work, trying to put the politicians' poorly thought through, hare-brained schemes into
practice and getting the blame when they fail.
I've been listening to the vox pop on the radio, people complaining about the disruption these selfish public servants
are causing, with working mums having to take a day off or arrange expensive childcare because of school
closures, delays to travellers going through immigration, driving tests cancelled. But this just demonstrates how
important and necessary public servants are to the smooth running of people's lives and the wider economy. So
what about a bit of recognition for a change? The only time public servants get any notice is when they aren't there
to do their jobs.
Bob Ross
London
•?As a teacher who is 63, the reasons for the current strike do not affect me, but I supported the call for action
because I sympathise with my younger colleagues and fear for the future effectiveness of my profession. I am
retiring soon, not because I do not enjoy my job but because I no longer have the energy to deliver consistently
good lessons. It is physically exhausting to gear yourself up to enthuse maybe 30 teenagers up to six times a day to
ensure they individually meet targets, demonstrate learning and behave well. Then their work has to be marked,
assessed, examined, reported on and the next round planned – inevitably outside school hours. I am lucky to be in
good health, but if older teachers are regularly expected to carry this workload there will not only be an ageing
workforce blocking career progression for younger staff but a less effective, less efficient and less healthy cohort.
Standards will fall and our students will be the losers.
Mary Ellis
London
•?As a retired member of the NUT I am uncertain as to the correctness of their industrial action as negotiations
with the government are stll ongoing. I am additionally alarmed by the lack of teacher union solidarity.
Nevertheless, I attended a rally held by the NUT in support of its pension campaign. Despite these reservations I
feel obliged to support present and future teachers because I believe it is impossible to sustain the qualities needed
in the classroom when you are 68. I ran out of steam after 35 years at the age of 58. My emotional fortitude simply
collapsed! The proposed pension changes will not serve the long-term future educational health of this country
well.
Geoff Reynolds
Reading
•?Could it please be noted that public servants are also taxpayers, consumers, parents and pensioners? We cannot
let the government – and, it seems, all MPs – reduce public service pensions while keeping their pensions secure.
We have some of the worst pensions in the EU and should be looking to increase private pension arrangements for
the poorest instead of giving more to the financial industry.
As someone whose "gold-plated" public service pension plus a reduced old-age pension (reduced because of the
married women's stamp – perhaps the biggest mis-selling racket of all time) gives an income below the tax
threshold, I am incensed that yet again we are being told that we have to go without and make do and mend. It is
about time all women stood up to be counted.
Kathleen Hines
Washington, Tyne and Wear
•?The problem facing the public sector is that this is a war of attrition that the public sector is not able to fight
effectively. The general public have no interest in supporting the strike as the terms of reference are alien to them
because the conditions of employment are so different.
The public sector needs to wise up and start to fight a "guerrilla" offensive in order to make the private sector
aware that public sector workers subsidise private sector workers, and this has to stop. Once private sector perks
are threatened then perhaps a rational debate can take place.
For example, as a public sector taxpayer, I subsidise a private sector employee's contribution to a private
stakeholder pension by 25% or £720 per annum. What is the annual cost of this perk to public sector taxpayers of
this subsidy? What is the amount for higher rate taxpayers?
Additionally, as a public sector employee, I am now entering the second year without a pay increase. I do not have
the luxury of additional perks of spot recognition bonuses, annual bonus, pizza days, corporate events, staff
discounts, Christmas meals and parties…
All these costs have to be paid through increased costs to the private sector business and are recouped through
increased prices subsidised by public sector employees through their purchases.
In order to win the argument, "guerrilla" tactics have to be fought to make the private sector realise that if they
want changes to terms and conditions, so do public sector workers. Equalisation needs to be imposed as we are all
apparently in it together
Once they realise that their "gold-plated" benefits are under attack, perhaps they will realise that public sector
benefits are not as golden as they think.
Gerard Friel
Twickenham, Middlesex
•?I am old enough to remember a time when private sector pension schemes were so awash with money that
employees were given a "payment holiday" from time to time. The teaching unions, and I was a member of one,
bemoaned the fact that if our pension scheme were funded in the same way, benefits could be higher or
contributions could be reduced. We didn't get our way of course; we were told that our less favourable scheme had
the advantage that we were protected from the risk inherent in any private pension arrangement by the guarantee
that maintaining the benefits was a charge on general taxation.
Now the private sector is in trouble and the government says we must share the misery in the bad times though we
didn't share in the gains when things were going well: "Heads we win, tails you lose." This "all in it together" stuff
is remarkably flexible.
John Parry
St Albans, Hertfordshire
•?The present dispute between the state and its employees shouldn't distract us from looking at pensions policy in
the whole. For instance, tax-privileged individual pension pots of £1.5m are unseemly given the penurious old age
which awaits too many Britishers. The coalition's proposed modest upgrading of the state pension won't do and the
forthcoming opt-in workplace scheme will prove irrelevant.
What is needed is an even-handed pensions contract between the state and the individual, where the state would
dangle a carrot by matching the individual's voluntary after-tax contributions up to a limit. The resulting indexed
pension should be roughly double the present basic state pension. The stick, of course, would be that the feckless
who spurn such a subsidised scheme would have to endure a less than dignified retirement.
The contract would be financed by axing tax relief for all pension schemes. The handsomely rewarded and, by
definition, the middle classes do not need the government's helping hand to provide further for their old age.
Yugo Kovach
Winterborne Houghton, Dorset
•?In the current debate about pension "reform", little or nothing has been said about employment prospects for
those reaching their 60s in the future. The voice of employers has been noticeable by its absence. Given that the
average age of retirement has been falling for years, will employers now be willing to pay teachers, nurses, and
many other workers until the age of 66 or 68? If not, how will people live and pay their way until their (reduced)
pensions begin?
Mike Bury
Beckenham, Kent
•?The present fracas over teachers' pensions surely misses the true need for pension reform that exists, which is that
the state pension is entirely inadequate.
A realistic state pension, adequately funded by contributions and with some choice of ultimate benefit, would:
remove the need for people to jealously defend a career pension; overcome the problems of pension portability;
ensure that people, who for various reasons may not have an earnings-related pension, do not have to first fund
their old age by spending all their savings and then have to beg for benefits to achieve a survival income (present
interest rates make that a reality for many).
If the thought of a huge national pension business raises the spectre of a nationalised entity, surely it would not be
hard to provide it via a consortium of private suppliers?
Hugh Jenkins
Goodwick, Pembrokeshire
•?The letter from your Newark reader (27 June) advises Michael Gove to echo the words of Richard II when
negotiating with teachers' unions: "I will be your leader. You shall have from me all you seek." Trade union leaders
beware. Wat Tyler was cut down and his fellow rebels were slaughtered as they endeavoured to return home to
Kent.
Terry Price
Silchester, Hampshire
Rassegna stampa
Guardian, The
Data: 01/07/2011
"These strikes could become the coalition's Iraq moment"
Stampa
Indietro
These strikes could become the coalition's Iraq moment
David Cameron owns this dispute. If he's not careful, he might end up irreversibly alienating the public
Martin Kettle
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 30 June 2011 20.30 BST
larger | smaller
Placards lie on the floor following a one-day strike against public sector pension changes. Photograph: Chris Ison/PA
It doesn't always happen to every government. But all prime ministers need to be aware of it. Sooner or later, they
risk getting on the wrong side of the voters over an issue that can permanently define their government, weaken its
legitimacy in the public mind and, in the end, can help to bring it down. It happened to Harold Wilson over
devaluation and to Ted Heath with the three-day week. John Major had the exchange rate mechanism crisis and
Tony Blair had Iraq. If David Cameron is not extremely careful, the public sector pensions dispute could be the
coalition government's Iraq moment.
That's not to say that the issues at stake in the pensions battle, though important, are as lethal as those involved in
Iraq, because they aren't. Nor, even more emphatically, is it to say that a botched coalition confrontation over public
sector pensions will automatically play Labour's or the unions' way, because it may not. But it is to say that the
public pensions argument resonates in some unpredictable and sometimes contradictory ways with the public.
Public sector workers' terms and conditions are a delicate subject for a Conservative government to manage, even
in coalition with the Liberal Democrats. And since Cameron's Conservative party are increasingly putting their
mortgage on the line over this dispute, it is worth stressing that they could lose it if they make foolish errors or lack
clarity about the outcome they seek.
So far, that has not happened. The strikes came and went. But public opinion is volatile about this dispute. It is
currently on the unions' side, albeit narrowly, over maintaining existing pensions rights – but against them, again
narrowly, over striking on the issue. That could change if either side overplays its hand. For the moment, ministers
seem to grasp that sweet reason is better for their cause than striker-bashing. But they seem less clear about what
compromises they are willing to make when the talks resume. That is ominous.
The tragic coincidence of the death at Glastonbury of Cameron's constituency chairman Christopher Shale at the
beginning of the week, along with the one-day strikes by a group of unions at the end of it, perhaps illuminate the
political risks with particular harshness. But Shale's leaked weekend memorandum, with its eloquent frankness
about the Tory party's strategic failings, is a reality check for a party that may have enjoyed a charmed political
year but which is not currently riding so high in the polls – 37% at the last count – that it can afford to get the
pensions dispute badly wrong.
Shale's memo is full of sometimes brutal observations: that "we are not always an appealing proposition"; that the
Tories have come across as "graceless, voracious, crass, always on the take"; that, within its own walls, "we
sometimes morph into something different, less attractive" and that Tories must "try to see ourselves as others see
us". Shades there of Theresa May's "nasty party" remark in 2002. Or as a revered journalistic colleague used to put
it: "I like going to Tory party conference every year. It reminds me why I still vote Labour." But Shale was talking
about Cameron's party today, not the William Hague, Iain Duncan Smith or Michael Howard vintages of
yesteryear.
However, the key comment comes when Shale, citing the Downing Street political strategy director Andrew
Cooper, observes how politics is deeply off-putting to most people. The country can be divided into two groups,
says Shale. There are those who are "politics heavy", who are interested in politics the whole time. And there are
those who are "politics light", who are not interested in politics except in an unusual crisis or when an election
comes around. The two groups, says Shale, inhabit different worlds. The heavies can never get it into their heads
that the lights aren't as interested as they themselves are, while the lights simply switch off when the heavies start
talking. But his killer point is this. Two per cent of people are heavies, while 98% are lights.
Shale chose his figures to make a point not on the basis of detailed research. Nevertheless, if Shale was even threequarters right, then both Cameron and the unions need to think extremely carefully about how the pensions dispute
looks through the eyes of politics-light people, and not get too distracted by the politics-heavy people on either
side of the divide. Leftwing heavies may want to bring down the government, while rightwing heavies may want to
break the unions as they did in the 1980s. But the great mass of lights want, above all, for this dispute to be solved
on reasonable terms, so that they don't have to think too much about it.
Tory-leaning lights want to be reassured that Cameron, whom they instinctively (and correctly) recognise as
someone with a clear understanding of politics light, is still the man they voted for, and that he is not another
politics heavy in disguise. Labour-leaning lights also want to think about Ed Miliband in the same way. But the
stakes are higher for Cameron. Having embarked on the dispute, he cannot now afford to fail. Cameron owns it –
just as Wilson, Heath and the other prime ministers also owned the issues which eventually undermined their
governments. But does he know how he wants it to end? It is not clear that he does.
By and large, the coalition won the public argument in 2010 in favour of a severe fiscal tightening to pay down the
deficit. But ministers need to be careful not to assume that the public has a bottomless appetite for austerity. That is
especially the case when the austerity message is delivered by ministers who by now may have, in Shale's words,
morphed into something less attractive than they perhaps appeared in the immediate aftermath of Gordon Brown.
The fact that the government puts up consensual-sounding figures like Cameron, Michael Gove and Francis Maude
to deliver its message is a sign that the dispute is being run by people with political nous (though Maude was pretty
hopeless when interviewed on yesterday's Radio 4 Today programme).
These are not the 1970s or the 1980s, when the unions could so easily be framed as a threat to economic prosperity
and social stability. Today the unions are neither the source of Britain's economic problems nor a threat to national
order. Most want a negotiated settlement based on the defined benefit pension that the government has already
promised. Ministers will be lucky to find a better time to settle than now. The politics-light public may not be
paying detailed attention, but they get all this too. Cameron should remember his history. He has been warned.
Rassegna stampa
Herald Scotland Online
"Scots GPs vote for industrial action over pensions"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
Scots GPs vote for industrial action over pensions
John Swinney
Kate Devlin UK Political Correspondent
Share
1 Jul 2011
DOCTORS have threatened to close their surgeries in a new wave of strikes after Scottish GPs voted to
consider industrial action.
The move came as tens of thousands of public sector workers staged a walkout against changes to their pensions.
With the UK facing a summer of discontent, the British Medical Association (BMA) said 4000 GPs and a similar
number of hospital doctors would proceed with the action unless there was a U-turn on similar plans for NHS
pensions.
Unions predicted that up to four million public sector workers could be involved in walkouts before the end of the
year after thousands of schools were yesterday closed because of walkouts across England and Wales, together with
Scottish Jobcentres, border controls and passport offices.
Dozens of people were arrested during protest rallies across the country as anger over the reforms spilled on to the
streets.
Finance Secretary John Swinney provoked anger after he said that there was “no case” for the walkout at present.
Labour leader Ed Miliband backed that position, saying industrial action was wrong while negotiations were still
ongoing.
However, unions insisted members had the right to strike in protest at plans that would see them have to work for
longer and pay more into their pension schemes.
The Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union estimated that across Scotland around 30,000 of their members
took part.
Across the UK that figure was around 750,000, bolstered by the support of three teaching unions in England and
Wales.
Delegates at the BMA annual conference yesterday voted to ballot members on all forms of industrial action if the
Coalition Government presses ahead with changes to their pensions.
A spokesman for BMA Scotland called on the Scottish Government to get involved in the fight.
She said: “John Swinney last week made very clear that the Scottish Government was not supportive of the changes
to the NHS pension scheme.
“We appreciate that and hope that he will make that case strongly to the UK Government.”
Dr Andrew Dearden, chairman of the BMA’s Pensions Committee, said that feelings were “running high” but that
doctors would strike only as a “last resort”.
Other union leaders raised the spectre of more public sector workers joining the protest.
Mark Serwotka, the leader of the PCS union, predicted that up to four million could be involved in strike action in
the autumn if the row is not resolved.
Across the UK one in five civil servants walked out on strike.
In Scotland there were picket lines outside the Scottish Parliament, Glasgow Sheriff Court and Faslane naval base,
while around 700 workers took part in a protest rally in Glasgow.
PCS Scottish secretary Lynn Henderson said that the feeling among members was one of an “immense sense of
anger” and “extreme worry” over the future.
Grahame Smith, general secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress, said: “The Prime Minister says that the
so-called ‘gold-plated’ pensions enjoyed by public sector workers are not fair on the taxpayer.
“What is not fair on the taxpayer is to deny us quality public services, by denying public service workers decent
pay and a decent pension.”
In England and Wales only a quarter of schools were able to remain open all day.
In London, all police leave was cancelled and by late afternoon 37 arrests had been made for offences including
criminal damage.
Scotland Yard was also forced to pull officers from the street to man phone lines after nine in 10 emergency call
handlers joined the walkout.
Unions denounced Labour leader Ed Miliband as a “disgrace” for failing to support the action.
But a new survey, by pollsters YouGov, also showed that almost half of those asked thought that public sector
pensions were too generous and needed reform.
The Scottish and the UK Government insisted that essential services were preserved despite the strike action.
A Scottish Government spokesman said ministers did have some responsibility for regulations around NHS
pensions but that they were “essentially reserved”.
“If we were to try to make changes we would still need the consent of the UK Treasury,” he said.
Meanwhile, union negotiators said it would recommend a pay offer for security staff at Highlands and Islands
Airports, worth around 8% for 160 staff at Inverness, Dundee and eight other airports.
The offer, which unions said would be recommended to members, would raise their pay from £7.15 an hour to a
minimum £7.50 of an hour.
Rassegna stampa
Independent, The
"David Prosser: The biggest loser from the LSE's Canadian débâcle: Free trade"
Indietro
Data: 01/07/2011
Stampa
Outlook For every winner, there must be a loser. In the story of the London Stock Exchange's aborted merger with Canada's TMX, the principals
are not difficult to identify. In the loser's corner stands an embattled Xavier Rolet, whose failure to pull off this deal could cost the LSE its
independence (and thus lose him his job). The winner, meanwhile, is Dwight Duncan, the finance minister of Ontario, who made his opposition to
the merger of TMX and the LSE clear from the moment the deal was announced. Mr Duncan has got his way, even though he was powerless to
intervene.
It is now clear the LSE played its cards pretty ineptly. Although the deal was portrayed as a merger, it was always very obvious who would be the
senior partner. That left many Canadians feeling uncomfortable about the deal even before a rival proposal emerged. Worse, Maple's arrival on the
scene appeared to catch the LSE by surprise and its subsequent efforts to explain away its opponent's more valuable bid as not properly funded
were not convincing. The sweetener announced last week was too little, too late and smacked of desperation.
Related articles
Takeover fever at the London Stock Exchange after TMX embarrassment
Search the news archive for more stories
All that said, the embarrassment of the LSE over this episode is a parochial concern relative to the weighty questions it prompts about free trade
and protectionism. This is the second major international transaction involving a Canadian company that has been derailed this year. The collapse
of the LSE's merger with TMX follows the reverse suffered by BHP Billiton in its pursuit of the Potash Corporation. The former deal was scuppered
by private shareholders, while the latter was killed off by the government, but in both cases, it was Canadian concern about losing control of
domestic assets that motivated opponents of the transactions.
Nor is Canada alone in acting on such anxieties. Australia, for example, has just vetoed a merger between its stock exchange and the bourse in
Singapore.
Are we seeing a backlash to what has been the dominant economic trend of recent years – the move towards globalisation and trade
liberalisation? If so, the danger is of a spiral, in which countries aggrieved by the actions of the likes of Canada and Australia resurrect their own
trade barriers.
Many of the world's leading economies, particularly in the West, are enduring a loss of confidence as they try to bounce back from the worst
financial crisis since the Great Depression. In that context, the temptation to put up the shutters is understandable.
It is still a mistake, however. All the evidence is that free trade and economic growth go hand in hand: look, for example, at the growth rates
achieved by China and – to a lesser extent – India as they have opened their economies to the world over the past two decades.
Is it fair to expect Mr Duncan – who described Maple Group as "Canadian patriots" – to see the bigger picture as he juggles the demands of
domestic politics? Maybe not, but in the long run, Canadians will be losers too if the world succumbs to protectionism.
Why employers really dumped final salary
Can we just nail one myth in the row over public-sector pensions? Contrary to what you will have heard almost everywhere during the debate
about yesterday's strikes, the private sector has not closed down defined benefit pension schemes because of their expense. The overriding factor
for the majority of companies has been the unpredictability and volatility of the cost of guaranteed pensions, for which they have recently been
required to account much more openly.
Final-salary pension scheme costs are volatile because they provide benefits by investing in assets with volatile returns. In a good year for the
pension fund, the company may be able to report that its scheme has a surplus of assets put aside compared with its liabilities. In a bad year,
the scheme's funding deficit may look horrendous, putting huge pressure on the sponsoring employer to increase contributions or to make special
payments.
In the private sector, employers have understandably become very uncomfortable with the risk that a pension funding problem might blow up in
their faces at any moment. But in the public sector, with some notable exceptions, this is not how schemes operate. Rather, they are pay-asyou-go operations, with the contributions made by today's workers financing the pensions of those who have not retired. And in the absence of a
pension fund, volatility simply ceases to be an issue.
Does this negate the case for public-sector reform? Not necessarily, in an age of improving mortality rates. But the idea that guaranteed pensions
are too expensive for the public sector because they were too expensive for the private sector is based on a misunderstanding of what has
happened in the latter over the past decade.
More action, less talk on ETFs please
In warning of his concerns about exchange-traded funds yesterday, the Bank of England's Paul Fisher is just the latest in a series of luminaries to
flag up such dangers.
The problem is that what began as a straightforward, low-cost vehicle for tracking the performance of an asset has, with the introduction of
"synthetic ETFs" – where the manager does not buy the assets in question but a derivatives contract instead – become much more risky.
Suddenly, counter-party risk has entered the equation.
The question now is what we propose to do about ETFs, to which, by the way, retail investors have a growing exposure. In the US, the Securities
and Exchange Commission has already introduced more stringent regulation of these vehicles. In Europe, however, they continue to sit within the
regulatory framework that governs collective investments, which is less demanding.
retweet
Rassegna stampa
Italia Oggi
"Bendinelli: costruiamo la nostra pensione con responsabilità"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
ItaliaOggi
sezione: Periti Industriali data: 01/07/2011 - pag: 31
autore:
Parla il presidente dell'Ente di previdenza dei periti industriali
Bendinelli: costruiamo la nostra pensione con
responsabilità
Domanda. Presidente Bendinelli, apriamo sul sistema previdenziale pubblico: tira ancora aria di riforma?
Risposta. Esprimo un parere da cittadino che da qualche anno si occupa di previdenza in prima persona. Il
governo, per la previdenza pubblica, lavora su due aspetti in linea di principio condivisibili: si tratta di
agganciare l'età per andare in pensione alla speranza di vita, sostanzialmente innescando un meccanismo che
innalzi l'asticella dell'età quanto più si innalza la speranza di vita. Diversamente il sistema previdenziale non
è più sostenibile.Poi, si tratta di considerare le donne, dal punto di vista previdenziale, al pari degli uomini:
entrambe in pensione con almeno 65 anni di età, tanto più che la speranza di vita femminile è maggiore di
quella maschile. In questo modo la previdenza pubblica si adeguerebbe alla previdenza privata dei liberi
professionisti.D. I provvedimenti vengono però anticipati.R. Sì questa è la scelta politica, voluta
probabilmente anche dalla necessità di trovare risorse utili per la manovra da circa 40 miliardi di euro, se i
numeri verranno confermati. Non entro nel merito della politica, dico solo che è tecnicamente giusta: bisogna
lavorare un po' di più, se si vive più a lungo, e le donne devono avere pari diritti e pari finestre di uscita dal
lavoro.D. Stessi problemi anche nella previdenza privata?R. Le questioni che oggi sono all'ordine del giorno
nel sistema pubblico lo sono state per i professionisti 15 anni fa e ogni categoria professionale, in base alla
sua storia, ha fornito le sue risposte. Oggi sta esplodendo nella previdenza privata che applica il sistema
contributivo una diversa ma grande ed importante questione di sostenibilità sociale: dobbiamo garantire
pensioni più congrue con proposte e riforme fattive.D. Per esempio?R. È noto che finalmente è stata
approvata la miniriforma Lo Presti, che ci permetterà di utilizzare una parte di quello che tecnicamente
prende il nome di «contributo integrativo», cioè una percentuale di risorse versate dai nostri clienti, per
migliorare le pensioni. Io qui pongo un obiettivo, che esplicito in modo chiaro: mi batterò per portare la
pensione dei miei colleghi giovani, quindi di chi potrà risparmiare per 35 anni, al 40% rispetto al reddito,
utilizzando la leva della Lo Presti ma anche convincendo i miei colleghi a versare responsabilmente di più.
Questo «sacrificio» previdenziale è necessario se vogliamo raggiungere un obiettivo di maggiore tranquillità
nel momento della nostra uscita dal mondo della professione.D. Esiste una proposta?R. I contenuti delle
nuove regole sono compito dell'organo di indirizzo generale il quale con professionalità e responsabilmente
sta lavorando alle leve di intervento. Quando la proposta sarà elaborata bisognerà spiegarla porta e porta,
ufficio per ufficio, con la collaborazione di tutti i collegi sul territorio.D. Quali sono le ragioni della riforma?R.
È lampante, dobbiamo evitare che una popolazione di giovani professionisti abbia una terza età senza una
adeguata copertura assicurativa. Mi perdoni le parole crude, ma dobbiamo uscire dalla finzione delle
metafore: solo se risparmio di più aumento il mio conto pensionistico. Il nostro sistema pensionistico si fonda
sulla regola elementare che la pensione di ciascuno di noi è condizionata solo dai contributi versati.D. Le
nuove regole toccheranno anche gli over 65?R. Mi lasci dire che il risparmio per la pensione non ha età, ed è
utile a 30 come a 65 anni. Noi abbiamo avuto un contenzioso con l'Inps, peraltro non ancora risolto, in cui
l'Istituto nazionale spingeva per limitare la nostra autonomia imponendo il versamento anche ai pensionati
lavoratori periti industriali, in contrasto con il nostro regolamento. L'imposizione non l'ho accettata n'è
l'accetterò in futuro ed è per questo che l'ente ha sostenuto i nostri iscritti anche nella fase di massima
criticità giudiziale. Coerentemente con il principio e la regola previdenziale, oggi rivisitata dal governo,
secondo cui l'adeguatezza sociale della pensione non può essere sganciata dalla speranza di vita, ritengo
necessario ed opportuno rivalutare l'opportunità di incrementare il risparmio previdenziale anche se sono
maturati i requisiti per la pensione.
Rassegna stampa
Italia Oggi
"Enpacl fa i conti con Lehman"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
ItaliaOggi
sezione: Lavoro e Previdenza data: 01/07/2011 - pag: 28
autore:
Enpacl fa i conti con Lehman
L'Assemblea dei delegati dell'Ente nazionale di previdenza e assistenza per i consulenti del lavoro (Enpacl),
riunitasi ieri a Roma, ha bocciato il bilancio consuntivo relativo all'anno 2010. Quest'ultimo era stato
predisposto dal Consiglio di Amministrazione uscente nei giorni immediatamente precedenti al termine del
proprio mandato. L'attuale presidente Alessandro Visparelli, su mandato del Consiglio di amministrazione in
carica, ha posto all'attenzione dei Delegati le risultanze dei recenti approfondimenti documentali in ordine alle
ristrutturazioni di alcuni investimenti finanziari, effettuate dall'Ente nel corso dell'anno 2010, tali da
evidenziare perdite di capitale che non trovano corretta rappresentazione in bilancio. Analoga valutazione
sugli stessi investimenti risulta nelle relazioni al bilancio rilasciate dalla società di certificazione e dal collegio
sindacale dell'Ente. L'Assemblea dei Delegati non ha dunque approvato il bilancio consuntivo 2010 ed il
Consiglio di Amministrazione provvederà a rielaborarlo, alla luce delle osservazioni e dei rilievi evidenziati,
anche nel corso della discussione assembleare. L'Assemblea tornerà a riunirsi per l'approvazione della nuova
versione del bilancio consuntivo 2010 il 28/29 luglio 2011 a Roma. Il Presidente Visparelli, nel commentare
positivamente le risultanze della riunione odierna, ha sottolineato che la situazione finanziaria dell'Ente resta
solida e che le perdite di capitale derivanti dal fallimento della banca di affari americana Lehman Brothers
nonché dallo sfavorevole andamento del mercato, non pregiudicano la sostenibilità dei conti pensionistici dei
Consulenti del Lavoro. A tale proposito, Visparelli incontrerà oggi il Direttore Generale per le politiche
previdenziali presso il Ministero del Lavoro, Edoardo Gambacciani. “E' intenzione del Consiglio di
Amministrazione”, ha aggiunto il Presidente Visparelli, “migliorare e rendere più efficiente la gestione del
patrimonio dell'Ente, e in particolare degli investimenti, anche tenendo conto del lavoro che si sta
sviluppando in sede AdEPP”. L'Assemblea ha infine accolto la proposta di costituire una apposita commissione
cui affidare lo studio e l'elaborazione di una riforma strutturale del sistema pensionistico dell'ENPACL.
Rassegna stampa
Manifesto, Il
Data: 01/07/2011
"In sciopero, senza il Labour"
Stampa
Indietro
Condividi su
09 INTERNAZIONALE
2011.07.01
ARTICOLO di Paolo Gerbaudo
LONDRA Il settore pubblico e della scuola contro i tagli al welfare e l'età pensionabile a 66 anni
In sciopero, senza il Labour
In 50mila hanno sfilato per «salvare le pensioni» e per «difendere i servizi pubblici»
LONDRA
«Il più grande sciopero degli ultimi 10 anni», hanno festeggiato i leader sindacali degli
insegnanti e degli impiegati pubblici alla fine dello sciopero contro la riforma delle pensioni
dei lavoratori pubblici. Oltre 750.000 lavoratori non si sono presentati al lavoro, portando
alla chiusura totale di due terzi delle scuole pubbliche. La giornata di mobilitazione ha
visto picchettaggi affollati di fronte a istituti scolastici e uffici di collocamento, e grandi
manifestazioni in decine di città da Londra a Newcastle. Ma ha pure messo in evidenza la
debolezza di un movimento sindacale diviso di fronte alla politica di austerità del governo
liberal-conservatore e fatalmente privo del sostegno del Labour Party.
Allo sciopero di ieri hanno aderito i membri dei sindacati degli insegnanti Association of
Teachers and Lecturers (Atl) e National Union of Teachers (Nut). A loro si sono uniti molti
lavoratori della Public and Commercial Service Union (PCS) che conta 270.000 membri.
Ma i grandi sindacati come Unison, Unite e Gmb, che rappresentano assieme la
maggioranza degli impiegati pubblici, tutti quanti minacciati da simili tagli alle pensioni, si
sono astenuti dallo sciopero pur minacciando proteste nell'autunno.
Il piano di riforma che ha spinto i lavoratori pubblici allo sciopero prevede l'innalzamento
dell'età pensionabile a 66 anni per uomini e donne. Una volta raggiunta l'età pensionabile i
lavoratori si ritroverebbero con una pensione più magra perché calcolata non sull'ultimo
salario, ma sulla media delle retribuzioni percepite durante l'impiego. Infine i dipendenti
pubblici dovrebbero pure versare il 3,2% in più di contributi previdenziali.
A Londra 50.000 persone hanno marciato con i tradizionali striscioni di tessuto dei
sindacati di categoria e con cartelli pre-stampati che chiedevano di «salvare le pensioni» e
di «difendere i servizi pubblici». Nonostante il clima di paura sollevato dalla stampa di
destra del Sun e del Daily Mail, durante il corteo ci sono state solo piccole scaramucce tra
la polizia e gruppi di studenti e anarchici che si sono uniti alla protesta: una ventina gli
arresti.
«Ancora una volta vogliono fare pagare a noi lavoratori pubblici il malfunzionamento del
sistema finanziario», si lamenta Martin un insegnante di 46 anni di una scuola media
superiore a Londra. A essere colpiti dai tagli alle pensioni non saranno solo gli insegnanti
ma anche assistenti sociali, vigili del fuoco, poliziotti e impiegati della pubblica
amministrazione. «Non si tratta solo delle pensioni. Nel mio posto di lavoro ci sono stati
tagli del 25%», afferma la 38enne Ruth che lavora ad un servizio per la salute mentale
nell'est di Londra. «Aiutiamo ragazzi che hanno problemi di alcoolismo e
tossicodipendenza. I tagli significano meno servizi per queste persone».
Tra molti lavoratori serpeggiava il malcontento per l'arrendevolezza della dirigenza di un
sindacato frammentato in decine di sigle di categoria. «I membri del nostro sindacato
avevano votato in stragrande maggioranza per scioperare. Ma la leadership sembra
addormentata e ha promesso scioperi solo nell'autunno», dichiara Tony Phillips, un vigile
del fuoco della Unison, sceso in piazza contro il volere del proprio sindacato. «Dicono che
vogliono continuare a negoziare. Ma la trattativa con il governo si sta rivelando una
farsa».
David Cameron ha definito lo sciopero «prematuro», e un portavoce di Downing Street ha
dichiarato che la Gran Bretagna è rimasta «aperta per il business», senza conseguenze
su trasporti e aeroporti e con lievi intoppi ai servizi pubblici. Pure il Labour si è dissociato
dalla mobilitazione. Il leader Ed Miliband ha sostenuto che lo «sciopero è stato fatto al
momento sbagliato e le famiglie e i bambini sono stati trattati ingiusamente da entrambe
le parti, perché il governo si è comportato in modo arrogante e provocatorio»
Rilasciando questa dichiarazione l'indeciso leader del Labour - che pure è stato eletto
poco meno di un anno fa proprio grazie al sostegno dei sindacati - avrà pensato ad un
recente sondaggio, secondo il cui solo il 32% dei cittadini britannici è a favore dello
sciopero, in un paese che a dispetto della crisi economica e dei tagli alla spesa pubblica
continua ad essere in maggioranza profondamente anti-sindacale.
Rassegna stampa
New York Times
Data: 01/07/2011
"Public Workers Strike in Britain Over Pensions"
Stampa
Indietro
Public Workers Strike in Britain Over Pensions
Chris Ison/Press Association, via Associated Press
A protester was arrested on Thursday in London as tens of thousands of workers hit the streets to demonstrate against
the government's economic moves.
By SARAH LYALL
Published: June 30, 2011
LONDON — Joining a growing wave of unrest in Europe over government austerity
measures, tens of thousands of British teachers and public-sector workers walked off their
jobs on Thursday to protest proposed changes to their pension plans.
COMMENTS
SIGN IN TO EMAIL
PRINT
Related
Greek Parliament Approves
Implementation of Austerity Plan
(July 1, 2011)
Enlarge This Image
More than 10,000 schools were affected by the strikes, as were
universities, Social Security offices, courtrooms, airport
customs desks and other government operations. Union
officials warned that the strike could be the first of a series of
walkouts here in the next few months, reflecting growing
unhappiness over layoffs, salary freezes, tax increases and a
persistently sluggish economy.
SINGLE PAGE
REPRINTS
Much of the workers’ anger, said Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public
and Commercial Services Union, has to do with a feeling of helplessness and
resentment at having to suffer from the mistakes of bankers and others who caused
the economic crisis. The government, Mr. Serwotka said in a statement, is “forcing
some of the most vulnerable people in our society to pay for a crisis that was not of
their making.”
Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images
Demonstrators swarmed central
London on Thursday as tens of
thousands of teachers and other
public workers walked off their jobs to
protest belt-tightening changes to their
pensions.
Around Europe, workers are feeling the same way. In recent months, the Irish and
Portuguese governments have been voted out of office on a tide of voter anger at
their part in the financial upheavals and at the austerity measures that were
imposed as a remedy. Britain has experienced waves of student protests,
sometimes violent, over the government’s decision to increase tuition and cut
education spending. In the past week, Greece has been convulsed with riots as
residents reacted with fury to its harsh austerity package.
In Britain, it has come down to a test of Prime Minister David Cameron’s resolve,
and his political fortunes, as he tries to hold firm to his stringent budget in the face
of public unhappiness.
The issue exercising the strikers in Britain on Thursday was the government’s proposal to change their pension
plans. Public pensions currently cost Britain nearly $50 billion a year, and the government says that with an
aging population, the current pension arrangement is unsustainable.
As a result, it has proposed raising the working age to 66 by 2020, increasing the monthly amount that publicsector employees are required to contribute toward their pensions, and changing the way pensions are calculated.
Under the current system, pensions are based on workers’ final salaries; the new plan would base them instead
on an average career salary.
“Basically, it means we pay 50 percent more each month and get less when we retire,” said Olayinka Williams,
27, a middle manager at a secondary school in Camden, who took part in a large demonstration in central
London.
Another protester, a 27-year-old teacher at an Islington elementary school, said that basing a pension on a career
average, rather than a final salary, discriminated against women who take maternity leave or work part time to
raise their children.
“We could have made a lot more in the private sector, but we chose to go into teaching,” said the teacher, who
asked that her name not be used because she was afraid of reprisals from her school. The government’s budget
cuts are really hitting home, she said: her parents, 55-year-old social workers, both lost their jobs this week.
Her anger, and that of other strikers, is set against a backdrop of wider complaints as the Conservative-led
coalition government’s austerity program — which has imposed spending reductions of as much as 20 percent
across most government departments — begins to bite.
Mr. Cameron has said the cuts are essential if Britain is to avoid falling into a situation as severe as that in
Greece, which is swimming in debt, barely hanging on to its international bailout and enduring violent protests
and strikes over its own, far harsher, austerity measures. But the growing unhappiness with Mr. Cameron’s plans
demonstrates the difficulties faced by governments across Europe that have decided to save, rather than spend,
their way out of the economic crisis.
The International Monetary Fund recently applauded Britain’s spartan approach, saying that “strong fiscal
consolidation” is “essential to achieve a more sustainable budgetary position, thus reducing fiscal risks.” But since
the 2008-9 recession, the country’s recovery has been anemic, and many economists say they are alarmed by its
direction.
1
2
NEXT PAGE »
Rassegna stampa
New York Times
"Two Rulings Find Cuts in Public Pensions Permissible"
Data: 01/07/2011
Stampa
Indietro
Two Rulings Find Cuts in Public Pensions Permissible
By MARY WILLIAMS WALSH
Published: June 30, 2011
Judges in Colorado and Minnesota have dismissed court challenges by retired public workers
whose pensions had been cut — developments that may embolden other states and cities to
use pension reductions as a tool to help balance their budgets.
SIGN IN TO EMAIL
PRINT
REPRINTS
BUCKS
The
Impossible
Public
Pensions
Choices
Should all taxpayers pay more in
taxes and accept large cuts in
government services to pay for the
promises to government
employees? Or should we break the
promises because they're too
expensive?
Post a Comment
Related
Minnesota Budget Talks Fail;
Shutdown Is Likely (July 1, 2011)
Add to Portfolio
Hyatt Hotels Corp
Go to your Portfolio »
The two lawsuits sought to reverse reductions in the cost-ofliving adjustments that Colorado and Minnesota had
previously promised to retired public workers. Generally
speaking, once lawmakers have agreed to provide certain
pension benefits to public workers, it is difficult, if not impossible, to roll them
back because of protective language in state laws and constitutions and years of
court interpretations.
Public pensions are considered so bulletproof that when the city of Vallejo, Calif.,
recently restructured its finances in bankruptcy, it cut other costs but left worker
pensions intact.
The two court decisions, issued Wednesday, suggest that the legal tide may be
changing for public pensioners. The political tide has already turned in some
places — in addition to Colorado and Minnesota, South Dakota and New Jersey
have also cut cost-of-living benefits for current retirees, and other states have been
awaiting legal guidance before doing the same.
In their court filings, retirees in Colorado and Minnesota had argued that their
benefits were contractual in nature, and therefore protected by state and federal
constitutional language barring the impairment of contracts.
However, in his ruling dismissing the Minnesota case, Judge Gregg E. Johnson of the state’s Second Judicial
District Court wrote that the retirees in that state “have not met their burden to show unconstitutionality beyond
a reasonable doubt.”
Judge Robert S. Hyatt, a district judge in Denver, offered a different line of thinking, noting that the 2010 state
law that cut the benefits did not actually allow the state to remove money from the pension fund and use it to
balance the budget.
Rather, he wrote, the law required the state to send even more money to the pension fund at the same time that
it required retirees to give up part of their benefit, “in order to create a larger pool of investable funds and thus
provide for sustainable pension benefits in the future.”
He also drew a distinction between a base pension and a cost-of-living adjustment, often called a COLA. He
suggested that the inflation adjustment could be reduced, but the base pension could not.
William T. Payne, a lawyer in Pittsburgh whose firm represented the retirees in both cases, said his clients were
studying their options and might appeal.
Another lawyer at the firm, Stephen M. Pincus, said in a statement: “Under the courts’ reasoning, the legislatures
could eliminate the entire COLA and the retirees would have no recourse.”
There has not yet been a decision in a third lawsuit challenging a cost-of-living adjustment cutback in South
Dakota.
The three cases have been closely watched as bellwethers. Many states and cities have been trying to rein in the
cost of their pension systems, but the easiest changes — like closing the pension plans to new members and
making fixed contributions to 401(k) accounts instead — can take decades to produce any savings. Cuts in
COLAs, by contrast, produce big savings immediately.
Mr. Pincus said it was not clear whether the two new rulings would affect the thinking of officials in other states.
“Trial court decisions are not binding on courts in their own states, let alone other states,” he said. He added that
appellate courts in other states, including California and West Virginia, had found that cost-of-living adjustments
could not be reduced.
Cost-of-living adjustments are found primarily in the public sector, and in the past, states and cities have prided
themselves on the practice of shielding their retirees from inflation. Very few companies offer pensions with costof-living adjustments. Social Security benefits are adjusted for inflation, but the adjustments can go both up and
down.
Ever since the stock market crash of 2008 wiped out many people’s retirement savings, officials have had a hard
time persuading taxpayers of the virtues of covering the cost of inflation-adjusted pensions, which typical
taxpayers no longer get themselves.
Rassegna stampa
Reuters UK
"Teachers and civil servants strike over pensions"
Indietro
Data: 01/07/2011
Stampa
Teachers and civil servants strike over pensions
Thu, Jun 30 2011
By Stefano Ambrogi and Paul Sandle
LONDON (Reuters) - Hundreds of thousands of teachers and civil servants went on strike on Thursday in the opening salvo of what could be
months of widespread industrial action over planned pension reforms and austerity measures.
Echoing protests across Europe against spending cuts imposed to reduce budget deficits, the strikes closed many schools, as well as a small
number of courts and other public offices, while thousands joined rallies in cities and towns across the country.
The year-old government said the impact was limited and many civil servants had ignored the industrial action, with the protests largely
peaceful and modest in size.
"This country is being led by people who are privileged, people who earn too much money. The gap between rich and poor is getting bigger.
We don't think it should be us who are made to suffer for it," said Martin Pitcher, 35, a primary (elementary) school teacher taking part in the
biggest march in central London.
Police said the rally, which stopped traffic on some of the capital's main streets and around parliament, involved up to 15,000 people carrying
banners and blowing whistles.
But there was no sign of the violence seen in recent days in Greece over its austerity plans, or at previous mass protests in London in
December and March against government spending cuts. There were small scuffles with police and 35 arrests for minor offences.
The Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union called the walkout the "biggest coordinated public sector strike for a generation" and said 84
percent of its 285,000 members had gone on strike against moves to cut pensions for state employees.
Around half of schools in England and Wales were closed or disrupted by the stoppage. Air travellers faced some delays as immigration
officials joined the walkout.
Business groups also voiced concern, with some parents forced to miss a day's work to look after their children.
However, ministers said the disruption was minimal, arguing that a majority of civil servants had not gone on strike and contingency measures
meant essential services continued to run.
"What today has shown is that the vast majority of hard working public sector employees do not support today's premature strike and have
come in to work today," said Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude, a member of Prime Minister David Cameron's Conservative party.
The strikes, though, could be just the start of wider, labour stoppages with union leaders, who say their members are bearing the brunt of a
financial crisis caused by rich bankers, warning of further action by Britain's 6 million public sector workers.
CAMERON'S CHALLENGE
"It's about standing up to the bully," said sports teacher Martin Patching at a rally in Welwyn Garden City, Herfordshire. "I hate striking but it
gets to the point where you've got to stand up with your colleagues and say enough's enough."
Cameron has condemned the strikes as irresponsible, saying that talks between unions and ministers have not concluded.
He argues that longer life expectancy means public sector pensions must change, as many in the private sector have done, to ensure that they
are affordable. The changes are part of government plans by 2015 to virtually wipe out a budget deficit that peaked at more than 10 percent of
national income.
Consequently, workers face higher contributions to their pensions and retiring later in life. The proposals have hit a raw nerve at a time of wage
freezes and job insecurity.
Analysts said the protests would challenge the government anew after it retreated on plans to restructure state-funded health care following
lobbying from the medical profession.
Markets, which have reacted positively to government deficit-cutting plans, could take fright at any sign of a government climbdown over an
issue like pensions.
"If Cameron backs down on this one, he's a busted prime minister," Nottingham University politics professor Steven Fielding told Reuters. "He's
nailed his colours to the mast."
Some Britons sympathise with the strikers but others say they are being unrealistic at a time when households have suffered their biggest fall in
disposable income for more than 30 years.
"They're not paying for my pension. I work for myself -- I have to provide my own pension," said Martyn Hall, a 50-year-old IT consultant from
London. "I think it's a case of get real, this is the way it is."
(Additional reporting by Avril Ormsby, Adrian Croft and Michael Holden; Writing by Keith Weir and Jodie Ginsberg; Editing by David Stamp)
Rassegna stampa
Reuters UK
"Teachers, civil servants walk out over pensions"
Indietro
Data: 01/07/2011
Stampa
Teachers, civil servants walk out over pensions
Thu, Jun 30 2011
By Keith Weir
LONDON (Reuters) - The government faces a test of its determination to drive through its austerity programme when teachers and civil
servants strike on Thursday over plans to reform public sector pensions.
Many schools across the country will remain closed and air passengers face delays when immigration officials join a walkout that could involve
up to 750,000 workers.
The strikes, mirroring protests across continental Europe against government-imposed austerity, could be a taste of wider protests to come
later this year over pensions, an area where public sector unions appear determined to fight their corner.
Prime Minister David Cameron has condemned the strikes as irresponsible, saying that talks between unions and ministers have not
concluded.
Cameron argues that longer life expectancy means that public sector pensions must change to ensure that they are affordable. The changes
are part of government plans by 2015 to virtually wipe out a budget deficit that peaked at more than 10 percent.
Workers face higher contributions to their pensions and longer working lives. The proposals have hit a raw nerve at a time of wage freezes and
job insecurity.
Union leaders claim their members are bearing the brunt of a financial crisis caused by rich bankers.
"It is hardly surprising that public sector workers are on strike today," said Brendan Barber, head of the Trade Union Congress (TUC) union
body.
"They know that they are being asked to play an unfair part in deficit reduction. What adds insult to injury is that this is wrapped up in attacks
on public service pensions as gold-plated, unreformed and unsustainable," he added.
Right-wing newspapers backed Cameron, head of the right-leaning Conservative Party, and the Daily Mail newspaper covered its front page
with a "Defy the strike bullies" headline. The Telegraph highlighted the "generosity" of current public sector pensions on its front page.
Left-leaning newspapers the Guardian and the Mirror's coverage was more muted, perhaps highlighting the unpopularity of strikes among many
private sector workers, who say they have already had to deal with tougher pension terms and see no reason why public sector workers should
be protected.
Analysts say the protests are a test of the government's resolve after it retreated on plans to restructure the state-funded National Health
Service following lobbying from the medical profession.
Markets, which have reacted positively to government deficit-cutting plans, would take fright at any sign of a climbdown over an issue like
pensions.
Thursday's protests involve about one in eight public sector workers, but other unions are gearing up for stoppages later this year if talks break
down.
Some Britons sympathise with the strikers but others say they are being unrealistic at a time when households have suffered their biggest fall in
disposable income for more than 30 years.
"The state of the country is pretty bad, they are a bit too focussed on themselves," said Michael Hayes, a railway manager from the London
suburb of Chingford.
(Reporting by Keith Weir)
Rassegna stampa
Rinascita
"La riforma delle pensioni ferma la Gran Bretagna"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
Rinascita: La riforma delle pensioni ferma la Gran Bretagna
Il governo non recede dalla sua politica dei tagli e i lavoratori del pubblico impiego incrociano le braccia
in segno di protesta
Mario Baratta
Sono circa 750mila, secondo le stime, i lavoratori del pubblico impiego che venerdì si sono astenuti dal
lavoro in Gran Bretagna per protestare contro la riforma pensionistica proposta dal governo conservatore
di David Cameron. Tra le categorie che hanno deciso di aderire alla protesta proclamata da quattro
organizzazioni sindacali, spiccano gli insegnanti (circa 600mila) e i dipendenti della Uk Border Agency,
l’agenzia che si occupa dei controlli immigrazione alle frontiere, con conseguenti disagi per i viaggiatori
che si recano nel Regno Unito. Il nuovo schema in discussione da parte del governo e che ha fatto
infuriare i lavoratori e le loro organizzazioni prevede l’innalzamento...
01 Luglio 2011 12:00:00 - http://www.rinascita.eu/index.php?action=news&id=9212
Rassegna stampa
Sole 24 Ore, Il
"Calendario senza credibilità"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
Il Sole- 24 Ore edizione: NAZIONALE
sezione: PRIMO PIANO data: 2011- 07- 01 - pag: 9
Calendario senza credibilità
Il rinvio al 2020 dell'aumento dell'età pensionabile per le lavoratrici del settore privato - al fine di equipararla sia a quella degli uomini sia a
quella delle dipendenti pubbliche - è forse una sconfitta per tutti. E questo tanto per ragioni di merito quanto di metodo. Sul primo aspetto, uno
dei grandi principi delle riforme degli anni '90 è stato l'uniformità di trattamento, che ha (in parte) sostituito la giungla di differenziazioni e
privilegi che caratterizzava il sistema pre- riforme. Si tratta di un principio dalla storia molto travagliata. Fu giustamente invocato per anni, in
particolare contro i privilegi accordati ai dipendenti pubblici per il pensionamento di anzianità: solo 20 anni di servizio per gli uomini e 15 anni
per le donne, alcuni dei quali potevano essere "figurativi", ossia comprendere gli anni di università e i congedi di maternità. Questo processo di
equiparazione dei requisiti per il pensionamento ebbe inizio con la riforma Amato del 1992 e fu completato dalla riforma Prodi del 1997.
All'equiparazione tra settori non corrispose però quella tra generi: alle donne viene infatti ancora oggi riconosciuto il diritto a pensionarsi per
vecchiaia a un'età di cinque anni più bassa di quella degli uomini; ci si appella alla logica della compensazione a posteriori degli svantaggi
riscontrabili sia nel mondo del lavoro sia in famiglia, in un paese ancora largamente ostile all'occupazione femminile e nel quale all'interno delle
famiglie proprio alle donne si assegna tradizionalmente il lavoro di cura. Nel 2008, la Corte Europea di giustizia stabilì, con riferimento al solo
impiego pubblico, l'illegittimità della discriminazione a sfavore degli uomini e costrinse l'Italia a ottemperare. Così, dal 1 gennaio 2012 l'età di
pensionamento delle dipendenti pubbliche sarà uguale a quella prevista per gli uomini (ora stabilita a 65 anni, ma destinata a salire in modo
automatico con l'aumento della longevità). Ne è derivata una nuova disparità, questa volta tra le donne, e (nemesi della storia!) a favore delle
lavoratrici del settore privato che per molti anni andranno in pensione prima delle loro colleghe dell'amministrazione pubblica. Anche tenendo
conto della necessità di ridurre la spesa pubblica, il governo avrebbe potuto correggere questa nuova disparità. Ha preferito invece rinviare
l'aggiustamento: i 65 anni si dovrebbero raggiungere solo nel 2032. Una decisione che non ha giustificazioni oggettive. Quanto al metodo, quale
credibilità può essere oggi riposta in un provvedimento che scatterà nel 2020 quando, nella stessa manovra, il governo anticipa l'adeguamento
automatico all'aspettativa di vita di tutti i requisiti (età e quote) inizialmente previsto per il 2015? L'anticipazione di un provvedimento non mina
la credibilità del rinvio dell'altro ? Quando le acque si saranno calmate, si potrà sempre dire (e magari toccherà a qualcun altro farlo) che si
anticipa "soltanto" una misura che l'elettorato aveva già "digerito". In conclusione, non c'è da essere fieri di una classe politica che gioca in
questo modo con l'elettorato. RIPRODUZIONE RISERVATA
Rassegna stampa
Sole 24 Ore, Il
"Gran Bretagna. Guerra di cifre sullo sciopero per contestare la riforma delle pensioni
Statali in piazza contro Cameron"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
Il Sole- 24 Ore edizione: NAZIONALE
sezione: MONDO data: 2011- 07- 01 - pag: 14
autore: Leonardo Maisano
Gran Bretagna. Guerra di cifre sullo sciopero per
contestare la riforma delle pensioni Statali in piazza
contro Cameron
Una lunga estate per Cameron. Un'immagine della marcia di dipendenti pubblici e
insegnanti ieri a Londra, in sciopero contro i tagli alle pensioni
IL BILANCIO DELLE PROTESTE Per il Governo adesioni non superiori al 25%; i
sindacati: risposta massiccia. I disagi maggiori nei commissariati di polizia e nelle
scuole
LONDRA. Dal nostro corrispondente Insegnanti e personale di polizia sono stati i più zelanti, i ministeriali meno pronti. La performance si misura
sugli scioperi che ieri hanno bloccato parte del Regno Unito, scosso dalla grande agitazione del personale del pubblico impiego in piazza contro la
riforma delle pensioni. Settecentocinquantamila persone sono state invitate dalle Unions a disertare scuole, uffici di collocamento, ministeri,
commissariati di polizia nella più grande azione di protesta che Londra abbia visto negli ultimi anni. Sull'esito dello sciopero le valutazioni sono
diverse. Il Governo sostiene che non più del 25% dei dipendenti dei ministeri ha aderito all'agitazione, mentre per i sindacati la risposta è stata
massiccia in tutti i settori. In realtà il quadro è a macchia di leopardo, con limitati disagi agli aeroporti - al controllo passaporti - ma forte
impatto nei commissariati, dove il personale di polizia che risponde alle chiamate ha scioperato con punte fino al 90% di adesione. Elevata anche
la partecipazione degli insegnanti: più del 40% delle scuole del Paese sono state chiuse del tutto o in parte. I cortei che hanno attraversato la
Gran Bretagna non hanno raggiunto gli obiettivi che le Unions si erano date. A Londra hanno marciato pacificamente - nonostante ci siano stati
diciotto feriti leggeri in limitati tafferugli - non più di 15mila persone. La battaglia di cifre destinata a protrarsi nei prossimi giorni non cambia
l'esito di una giornata che segna un cambio netto nelle relazioni fra le parti sociali. Lo sciopero di ieri - contestato anche dai laburisti - lo ha
proclamato la punta più avanzata del settore pubblico, altre Unions, a cominciare da quelle che riuniscono i dipendenti degli enti locali e della
sanità, hanno preferito continuare il negoziato. Se le trattative dovessero fallire nelle prossime due settimane, Londra marcerà davvero verso un
nuovo autunno del malcontento come quello che la segnò negli anni Settanta. Sei milioni di lavoratori pubblici potrebbero infatti unirsi alle
avanguardie di ieri. Motivo della protesta è la riforma delle pensioni che il Governo di David Cameron sta varando con l'obiettivo di dare un forte
contributo alla lotta contro il disavanzo statale oggi al 10% del Pil. Nel programma di risanamento dei conti pubblici tracciato dai Tory il deficit
primario dovrà essere annullato in quattro anni. Lacrime e sangue che cominciano a scorrere solo ora e che incrociano un generale rallentamento
economico del Paese, in ritardo rispetto alla tabella di crescita che si è dato. La riforma delle pensioni statali in questo contesto è passaggio
cruciale e l'Esecutivo liberal- conservatore l'ha basata su tre passaggi: innalzamento dell'età pensionabile a 66 anni per uomini e donne entro il
2020; aumento dei contributi a carico dei dipendenti; calcolo dell'assegno non più in base all'ultima busta paga. Questo è un retaggio dell'ancien
régime, rimasto solo a favore dei dipendenti pubblici: nel settore privato il final salary scheme è sparito quasi ovunque. Si tratta di misure
severe perché introdotte tutte insieme e in un limitato orizzonte temporale. La crisi ha infatti costretto ad un'accelerazione che rischia di far
esplodere gli equilibri politici e sociali del regno di Elisabetta. RIPRODUZIONE RISERVATA
Rassegna stampa
Sole 24 Ore, Il
"La cessione del quinto è sicura ma costosa"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
Il Sole- 24 Ore edizione: NAZIONALE
sezione: PUBBLICITA' data: 2011- 07- 01 - pag: 28
La cessione del quinto è sicura ma costosa
GARANZIA IN BUSTA PAGA L'accesso è possibile anche per i cattivi pagatori
Attenzione al costo dell'assicurazione e al Taeg specie sui piccoli importi
Il vantaggio della "cessione del quinto" è che non bisogna dimostrare nulla: questo finanziamento è concesso anche a chi si trova nelle liste dei
"cattivi pagatori" di banche e finanziarie. Nei primi cinque mesi dell'anno il valore delle operazioni ha sfiorato i 2 miliardi di euro in Italia ( - 4,1%
rispetto allo stesso periodo del 2010). La particolarità di questo strumento è che il debito viene saldato cedendo ogni mese un massimo del 20%
dello stipendio o della pensione. La cifra è trattenuta direttamente dal datore di lavoro o dall'ente di previdenza, pubblico o privato che sia, ed è
per questo che non sono richieste garanzie. Per ogni evenienza, inoltre, deve essere stipulata un'assicurazione, che interverrà in caso di morte,
malattia o perdita del posto di lavoro. Naturalmente, tutto questo ha un costo. A partire dall'assicurazione, che può toccare percentuali a due
cifre del capitale da rimborsare. E poi ci sono le commissioni per la gestione dei rimborsi e gli interessi. La convenienza cresce per importi
superiori ai 5mila euro: il Taeg può andare oltre il 20% per piccoli importi, mentre scende anche sotto al 10% per somme più consistenti. La
cessione del quinto di solito prevede che il debito sia estinto in 2- 10 anni, ma ci sono eccezioni importanti. Nel caso dei contratti a tempo
determinato, per esempio, la scadenza è fissata non oltre la fine del rapporto di lavoro. Per i pensionati le rate non possono mai intaccare
l'importo pari al trattamento minimo e devono avere una durata compresa tra i 3 e i 10 anni. Sono escluse le pensioni d'invalidità, inabilità e
assegno sociale. Il prestito deve essere saldato entro gli 85 anni d'età (90 per l'Inpdap). RIPRODUZIONE RISERVATA
Rassegna stampa
Sole 24 Ore, Il
"Senza titolo"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
Il Sole- 24 Ore edizione: NAZIONALE
sezione: PRIMO PIANO data: 2011- 07- 01 - pag: 9
autore: Davide Colombo Marco Rog
CASSE PREVIDENZIALI Poteri di controllo sugli investimenti alla Covip Per i
professionisti che continuano a lavorare scatta l'obbligo di iscrizione Pensioni rosa,
uscita a 65 anni nel 2032 Per le donne nel privato aumento soft dell'età dal 2020 Pensionamento-speranza vita: anticipo al 2014
ROMA L'età pensionabile delle lavoratrici private comincerà a salire molto gradualmente dal 2020 per arrivare a quota 65 anni nel 2032. È questa
l'ultima versione del piano soft sulle pensioni rosa su cui la maggioranza ha raggiunto l'accordo dopo il no della Lega all'ipotesi iniziale
prospettata dal Tesoro (aumento di un anno di età ogni due anni). Un piano soft molto simile a quello proposto nei giorni scorsi dal ministro del
Lavoro, Maurizio Sacconi, e su cui è stata costruita la mediazione. Del pacchetto previdenza inserito nella decreto sulla manovra fanno parte
anche l'anticipo dal 2015 al 2014 del meccanismo relativo all'aggancio del momento effettivo del pensionamento alla speranza di vita, il blocco
della rivalutazione sulle pensioni d'oro, il dispositivo anti- badanti per i trattamenti di reversibilità. Vengono poi rafforzati i poteri della Covip, che
vigilerà sugli investimenti delle Casse professionali, e viene introdotto l'obbligo d'iscrizione alle stesse casse per gli over 65 che continuano a
svolgere l'attività. La partita previdenziale sulla soglia di vecchiaia delle donne nel settore privato si è chiusa poco prima del varo della manovra.
La decisione di procedere con un dispositivo ultra- soft, gradito alla Lega e anche ai sindacati, è scaturita soprattutto dal lavoro di tessitura del
ministro Maurizio Sacconi. Il percorso sarà molto graduale: si partirà solo dal 2020 con l'innalzamento di un solo mese dell'età di vecchiaia. Il
requisito anagrafico viene poi incrementato di altri due mesi dal 2021, di tre mesi dal 2022, ancora quattro mesi dal 2023, altri cinque mesi dal
2024, sei mesi dal 2025 e per ogni anno successivo fino al 2031 e di ulteriori tre mesi dal 1 gennaio 2032. Quanto all'intervento sulle pensioni
d'oro, il blocco della rivalutazione scatterà nel 2012 e sarà totale per gli assegni superiori cinque volte il minimo Inps (30.500 euro lordi l'anno) e
parziale (al 45%) per quelli compresi tra tre (18.300 euro annui) e cinque volte il minimo. Nel testo approdato a Palazzo Chigi c'è anche la norma
che interviene sulla pensione di reversibilità con una penalizzazione. Nel caso di matrimoni di over 70 con coniuge che ha una differenza di età
superiore ai 20 anni, l'assegno si riduce del 10% per ogni anno mancante, nella differenza tra marito e moglie, dal numero di dieci. Si tratta di
una misura fortemente voluta dalla Lega e che prende di mira in particolare le unioni tra assistiti e badanti; non si applicherà in caso di presenza
di figli di minore età, studenti, ovvero inabili. Per le casalinghe arrivano invece i «bonus contributivi» legati alla spesa per beni domestici e che
potranno essere versati al Fondo attivo da 15 anni all'Inps ma che finora ha stentato a decollare. Sulle casse previdenziali privatizzate arriva la
vigilanza rafforzata. Al fianco del ministero del Lavoro, sulle gestioni patrimoniali e gli investimenti finanziari arrivano le ispezioni della Covip;
verifiche sulla cui base il ministro potrà poi disporre direttive sia sugli investimenti futuri sia sui limiti da non superare sotto il profilo dei conflitti
d'interesse che si possono verificare con le banche o gli intermediari finanziari. Proprio ieri Sacconi, parlando di questo intervento nel corso del
question time al Senato, è tornato ad auspicare possibili accorpamenti tra alcune casse previdenziali. La Covip assorbirà poi buona parte delle
funzioni del Nucleo di valutazione della spesa previdenziale e parte delle risorse assegnate a quest'ultimo organismo che non viene più soppresso
ma limitato ai soli compiti di osservazione, monitoraggio e analisi della spesa pensionistica. Infine un nuovo obbligo per i professionisti
pensionati. Chi svolge un'attività da cui deriva un reddito dovrà iscriversi nuovamente all'ente previdenziale e versare contributi ridotti a non più
del 50% rispetto alle aliquote ordinarie della stessa categoria di appartenenza. Il pacchetto previdenza della manovra si completa con una serie
di correzioni di profilo interpretativo, finalizzate a contenere gli effetti del contenzioso sui bilanci degli enti pensionistici pubblici. Solo nei prossimi
giorni saranno quantificati gli impatti in termini di minore spesa delle misure principali. RIPRODUZIONE RISERVATA
Rassegna stampa
Sole 24 Ore, Il
"Sondaggio. Panel di Invesco su 150 tra fondi pensione e assicurazioni europee
Corporate bond preferiti ad azioni e titoli di Stato"
Indietro
Data:
01/07/2011
Stampa
Il Sole- 24 Ore edizione: NAZIONALE
sezione: MERCATO DEI CAPITALI data: 2011- 07- 01 - pag: 43
autore: Corrado Pogg
Sondaggio. Panel di Invesco su 150 tra fondi
pensione e assicurazioni europee Corporate bond
preferiti ad azioni e titoli di Stato
L'esposizione al reddito fisso salita al 58% dal 51% nel 2009
MILANO Massima esposizione degli ultimi cinque anni ai corporate bond a fronte di una riduzione degli asset in titoli di Stato e azionari. È la
strategia scelta al momento dai gestori di quasi 150 fra fondi pensione e compagnie assicurative europee con asset per complessivi 1.200
miliardi di euro che hanno partecipato all'ultima indagine di Invesco. «Nel complesso questa indagine 2011 fornisce un'immagine contrastata
della fiducia degli investitori», ha spiegato il direttore per la divisione affari istituzionali per la Germania, Michael Gartmann. L'esposizione al
mercato del reddito fisso è salita al 58% nel 2010 dal 51% nel 2009, il livello più alto dal 2006. Di riflesso è calata l'esposizione alle azioni, al
27% dal 29% nel 2009, sebbene ancora al di sopra del 25% toccato nel 2008, all'apice della crisi finanziaria. La composizione tipica di
portafoglio vede inoltre una quota occupata da strumenti alternativi per il 12%, all'immobiliare per il 7% e liquidità al 2%, in netta riduzione dal
5% del 2009 e dal 10% del 2008. In drastico calo anche la quota investita in hedge fund che fino al 2008 avevano rappresentato il settore più in
crescita e in cui tutti cercavano di entrare: secondo l'indagine, l'esposizione media degli investitori istituzionali ai fondi del settore è calata nel
all'1,1% contro il 2,3% del 2009, un risultato su cui pesano in particolare i casi delle istituzioni francesi (che vi investono solo lo 0,7% dei propri
asset) mentre le istituzioni irlandesi e inglesi riservano agli strumenti alternativi il 3,7% del portafoglio. Nel complesso l'investimento negli hedge
fund viene scelto al momento solo dal 40% degli investitori istituzionali europei interpellati contro il 47% del 2009. Percorso inverso invece per
l'esposizione alle commodity che è salita dall'1% del 2009 all'1,4% del 2010 beneficiando del ritorno alla crescita dei prezzi dopo il crollo del
luglio 2008. Un riscontro interessante dell'indagine è quello che riguarda l'uso dei consulenti finanziari, di cui fa ora uso solo il 49% del
campione, 3 punti percentuali in meno dell'anno precedente. Le dinamiche rilevate da Invesco per il 2010 appaiono confermate anche per il
primo semestre del 2011 dalle recenti statistiche pubblicate da Dealogic. Di particolare rilievo la tendenza a emettere titoli di Stato in divise
diverse dall'euro per approfittare di tassi di interesse particolarmente favorevoli. Nei primi sei mesi dell'anno, le emissioni in corporate bond
denominati in dollari e sterline sono cresciute a 310,7 miliardi di dollari contro 241 nel primo semestre del 2010. Le più attive nell'emissione di
"yankee bonds" come sono chiamate le obbligazioni in dollari emessi negli Usa da gruppi stranieri sono state le aziende britanniche con titoli di
debito per 61,1 miliardi di dollari seguite da quelle tedesche con 36,1. Nel complesso infine tutte le emissioni di bond delle aziende europee
hanno totalizzato quota 1440 miliardi di dollari nel primo semestre, in crescita del 15% rispetto allo stesso periodo del 2010. RIPRODUZIONE
RISERVATA