Madam, - Brendan McGinty of Ibec gives the misguided impression that civil and public servants enjoy wonderful pensions at the taxpayer's expense and contribute nothing to those pensions ("State must act quickly to avert crisis over public sector pension liabilities", Opinion & Analysis, July 25th). The reality is somewhat different.
Is Mr McGinty unaware that direct contributions from public servants to their own pension funds began in fact as far back as April 1995 for all new entrants after that date? The fact that this money currently goes back into central superannuation funds and is not at present ring-fenced into a dedicated public sector pension fund does not negate the fact that it is being deducted at source from public servants' salaries. Even those appointed before 1995 pay a compulsory dependent spouse and children contribution from their salaries.
He also seems unaware that there are some public sector agencies where staff are already funding their own pension schemes in full. This will no doubt become increasingly the norm in the future.
I can assure Mr McGinty and all your readers that we do not enjoy the wonderful benefits he suggests. If a public servant is seriously ill, for example, and unable to work long term, the Exchequer provides a pension of just 18 per cent of annual income to live on, once normal sick pay has been exhausted. These are the rules for all public servants. Does Mr McGinty feel this is too generous? Most civil and public servants purchase critical illness cover from the private sector like everyone else or they would be financially destitute in long-term illness.
Mr McGinty also forgets that the vast majority of public servants retire with pensions based on very average incomes. He is making the classic mistake of assuming all public servants retire at the top of their profession. This is obviously not the case.
The majority of those who do manage to collect a full pension after a minimum of 40 years' service do not by any means enjoy a huge retirement income. The income paid to spouses of deceased public servants, in particular, can be shockingly low. Those who wish to retire even a few years early on so-called revenue-neutral schemes often find themselves with tiny pensions from the State.
I appeal to Mr McGinty to try to leave behind the old-fashioned, ideological, public-versus-private arguments if he is genuine in seeking to contribute in a meaningful way to the great pensions debate.
We are all, whether public- or private-sector workers, part of this debate. The emerging demographic realities dictate that none of us will enjoy decent retirement incomes in the future unless we make significant personal provision.
For the vast majority, being in the public sector does not now, and will not in the future, guarantee a feather-bedded retirement. This is one of the great myths that persist in Irish life. - Yours, etc,
PETER MEANY, Dublin 11.