关于政府退休金的疑惑，请教明白人

[jytl]

For those who are federal gov employees:



Public Service Pension Plan:



http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/hr-rh/bp-rasp/index-eng.asp



The current cost sharing ratio between Employee and Gov is close to 40:60, i.e., for every dollar you contribute, the Gov contributes 1.5 dollar. There is a great indication that this ratio will move to 50:50 in next few years. But, instead of cutting down the benefit formula, which is 2%/year of service, the employee contribution rate is being raised. In other words, the Gov can save $ by putting in 1:1 contribution only. As a matter of fact, the employee contribution rate has been adjusted to 6.2%/8.6% as of January 1, 2012. And I bet you that there will be another adjustment coming as of January 1, 2013!



Keep in mind that pension plan is like a pension 'deal'. The gov offers it on a voluntary basis. It's a human resource management tool that Gov or private sector uses to attract employees. Don't forget that it costs a lot (resources+time ==> $) to manage/admin/value a pension plan, especially a big defined benefit plan that Fed Gov has!

 

[Buckwheattobe]

Agreed. I am not sure if any crown corp has actually transformed their DBPP to DCPP, but that is certainly a trend, and such motion by the management was a key issue that led to the Air Canada and Canada Post strike last year.

Even this is to happen, I believe members of the existing DBPP will be grandfathered, although the rules may be tighten in terms of early retirement, level of contribution, etc. When the entire society feels financial crunch, it is not justifiable for the public sector to hold on to their lucrative benefits without a dent.

In a strong sense, I wish Mooncake's arguments about the advantages of working in the private sector would all stand. It is unfortunate for the nation if many of its talents become bureaucrats largely because of its total compensation and retirement benefits.

While I understand many of you feel that the Civil Servant Superannuation is too costly and a drain on taxpayers' money, one should realize there are always other compensating factors.

Civil Service pension is not managed the same way as in the private sector. There is no money set aside. In other words, all the contributions go into the government's coffers. The payouts are directly from that year's operating budget. The government is not worried about getting under since they are collecting taxes every year Financial collapse does not happen. (I should say it seldom happens. Witness what is happening in Europe.)

The one thing they are worried about is the increasing life span of Canadians. They are paying out more and more pensions each year which adds to the yearly operating budget. Defined benefit plan would eliminate that concern.

Notice though, for many years the federal government employees were underpaid in many categories including engineers, executives and so on. The compensating factor was their pension and other benefits. But people tend to have amnesia. They forget in not too distance past, professionals in private sector consistently make more money than those in public sector. Actually to this date, an ADM (assistant deputy minister) makes only $170,000 and they are the top mandarins in Civil Service. So in order to compensate, every year they work they have 2 years of pensionable service.

Defined Benefit works well in a predictable and stable economy in private companies, especially blue chips. However, as we know, even Nortel goes under. So in overall scheme, it is actually better for employees to have a defined contribution plan.

I do not want to argue the point that civil servants are privileged in terms of pension. Maybe they are, but they went through some bad periods too, underpaid and quite a big chunk of their paycheck goes to Superannuation.

I always say though: While your pay is lower compared to the private sector, you have peace of mind because your pension is guaranteed by the government.

The choice is yours, private or public sector employment. Each has its attractions.

For those though who enter into civil service, PLEASE buy back as much pension as possible even though it may seem too expensive. When you are close to retirement you will understand. Plus the fact that if the government decides to switch over to defined benefit plan, that portion you contribute will surely be grandfathered.

 

[mooncake]

Notice though, for many years the federal government employees were underpaid in many categories including engineers, executives and so on. The compensating factor was their pension and other benefits. But people tend to have amnesia. They forget in not too distance past, professionals in private sector consistently make more money than those in public sector. Actually to this date, an ADM (assistant deputy minister) makes only $170,000 and they are the top mandarins in Civil Service. So in order to compensate, every year they work they have 2 years of pensionable service.

I disagree that government employees are underpaid, although I agree the pay scales are lower than private sector counterparts. They could be underpaid by their title, but not their contribution or qualification. I've been working as permenent as well as consultant with gov agencies, I figured government employees (CS department) were well over paid considering most of who have neither ability nor willingness to do any "real" work. Most if not all major projects are built and maintained by consultants.

CS3 as senior developer who makes below 90K is low, but 90% of CS3 are not capable to get a senior developer position in private sector, if not 100%.

 

[闲得慌]

鉴于现在癌症发病率这么高，加拿大的医疗系统的效率这么低下，等着拿政府退休金的最大风险是你能活多久。

 

[9981]

While I understand many of you feel that the Civil Servant Superannuation is too costly and a drain on taxpayers' money, one should realize there are always other compensating factors.

Civil Service pension is not managed the same way as in the private sector. There is no money set aside. In other words, all the contributions go into the government's coffers. The payouts are directly from that year's operating budget. The government is not worried about getting under since they are collecting taxes every year Financial collapse does not happen. (I should say it seldom happens. Witness what is happening in Europe.)

The one thing they are worried about is the increasing life span of Canadians. They are paying out more and more pensions each year which adds to the yearly operating budget. Defined benefit plan would eliminate that concern.

Notice though, for many years the federal government employees were underpaid in many categories including engineers, executives and so on. The compensating factor was their pension and other benefits. But people tend to have amnesia. They forget in not too distance past, professionals in private sector consistently make more money than those in public sector. Actually to this date, an ADM (assistant deputy minister) makes only $170,000 and they are the top mandarins in Civil Service. So in order to compensate, every year they work they have 2 years of pensionable service.

Defined Benefit works well in a predictable and stable economy in private companies, especially blue chips. However, as we know, even Nortel goes under. So in overall scheme, it is actually better for employees to have a defined contribution plan.

I do not want to argue the point that civil servants are privileged in terms of pension. Maybe they are, but they went through some bad periods too, underpaid and quite a big chunk of their paycheck goes to Superannuation.

I always say though: While your pay is lower compared to the private sector, you have peace of mind because your pension is guaranteed by the government.

The choice is yours, private or public sector employment. Each has its attractions.

For those though who enter into civil service, PLEASE buy back as much pension as possible even though it may seem too expensive. When you are close to retirement you will understand. Plus the fact that if the government decides to switch over to defined benefit plan, that portion you contribute will surely be grandfathered.

荞麦兄分析得很全面很理性。

我觉得， 只要你坚持不懈地追求， 做政府工不是那么遥不可及的事情。 劳资市场会平衡政府工和私企的回报的 （包括收入， 个人兴趣和发展空间）。此一时彼一时而已。

 

[ccc]

鉴于现在癌症发病率这么高，加拿大的医疗系统的效率这么低下，等着拿政府退休金的最大风险是你能活多久。

你是找拍啊！

 

[闲得慌]

你是找拍啊！

是啊！ 我今天突然觉得加拿大卫生部不那么令人讨厌了

 

[super123]

还是没看懂这个pension,脑子太笨

 

[ccc]

还是没看懂这个pension,脑子太笨

如果是我，我肯定不会去烦恼。

在政府干的，那都是人精，政府pension不好，早就哭叫了。

 

[MGXX]

烦恼有用吗？

将来的福利不是自己控制的了的。
自己唯一能做主的就是留下还是离开。就我周围的朋友来说，无论男女没人愿意辞去政府工作的。

 

[不舒服]

鉴于现在癌症发病率这么高，加拿大的医疗系统的效率这么低下，等着拿政府退休金的最大风险是你能活多久。

消闲童鞋真有点“咸”。有给大家拿国抹黑之嫌。

 

[不舒服]

如果是我，我肯定不会去烦恼。

在政府干的，那都是人精，政府pension不好，早就哭叫了。

村头之意是政府工都是刁钻之人？

 

[不舒服]

将来的福利不是自己控制的了的。
自己唯一能做主的就是留下还是离开。就我周围的朋友来说，无论男女没人愿意辞去政府工作的。

应该说：基本或绝大部分，而不可能“没有”这么绝对。

其实，很多公司，如被弄死掉的NOTEL，的退休福利是类似的，也是雇员和雇主一起供，比例也差不多。如果放RRSP里至35年，按GIC年息，平均8万的年薪，退休时能达100万左右。按这算法，那些刁钻工（村长语）也没赚到那去（更不用说那些英年早逝的童鞋了），是不？

 

[闲得慌]

应该说：基本或绝大部分，而不可能“没有”这么绝对。

其实，很多公司，如被弄死掉的NOTEL，的退休福利是类似的，也是雇员和雇主一起供，比例也差不多。如果放RRSP里至35年，按GIC年息，平均8万的年薪，退休时能达100万左右。按这算法，那些刁钻工（村长语）也没赚到那去（更不用说那些英年早逝的童鞋了），是不？

同意。如果有这些钱投资，比如从开始就买栋投资房。房子本身会增值，房子还能出租，年年收租金，不用等到退休那一天。即使英年早逝了，房子还能让后代继承，不受损失。那些刁钻工（村长语？）是会算计，但是就是没把自己的寿命算进去。劝大家有空，读一读《红楼梦》第一回。

陋室空堂，当年笏满床；衰草枯杨，曾为歌舞场。蛛丝儿结满雕梁，绿纱今又糊在蓬窗上。说什么脂正浓、粉正香，如何两鬓又成霜？昨日黄土垅头送白骨，今宵红绡帐底卧鸳鸯。金满箱，银满箱，转眼乞丐人皆谤。正叹他人命不长，哪知自己归来丧！训有方，保不定日后做强梁；择膏粱，谁承望流落在烟花巷！因嫌纱帽小，致使锁枷扛；昨怜破袄寒，今嫌紫蟒长。乱烘烘你方唱罢我登场，反认他乡是故乡。甚荒唐，到头来都是为他人做嫁衣裳。

 

[不舒服]

同意。如果有这些钱投资，比如从开始就买栋投资房。房子本身会增值，房子还能出租，年年收租金，不用等到退休那一天。即使英年早逝了，房子还能让后代继承，不受损失。那些刁钻工（村长语）是会算计，但是就是没把自己的寿命算进去。劝大家有空，读一读《红楼梦》第一回。

陋室空堂，当年笏满床；衰草枯杨，曾为歌舞场。蛛丝儿结满雕梁，绿纱今又糊在蓬窗上。说什么脂正浓、粉正香，如何两鬓又成霜？昨日黄土垅头送白骨，今宵红绡帐底卧鸳鸯。金满箱，银满箱，转眼乞丐人皆谤。正叹他人命不长，哪知自己归来丧！训有方，保不定日后做强梁；择膏粱，谁承望流落在烟花巷！因嫌纱帽小，致使锁枷扛；昨怜破袄寒，今嫌紫蟒长。乱烘烘你方唱罢我登场，反认他乡是故乡。甚荒唐，到头来都是为他人做嫁衣裳。

世人都说神仙好，唯有金钱忘不了。。。。。。

善哉。