Leader: Public sector must accept reform is inevitable

FOR decades, public sector pension terms and conditions have been defended on the grounds that pay was lower than in the private sector and that a generous pension was fair compensation.

But this has not been true for some time. Public sector wages are, on average, higher than in the private sector. Meanwhile, life expectancy continues to improve, making the case for a change in the retirement age and/or higher pension contributions overwhelming. Yet unions representing 750,000 public sector workers have voted to strike on 30 June. And the National Association of Head Teachers in England has said it would call a ballot on industrial action on the issue.

Unions have every right to fight for their members' interests in negotiations with the government. But allegations that the talks have been "scuppered", combined with threats of industrial action, does suggest sabre-rattling. No satisfactory response has been given to the question as to how the changing longevity of today's working population is to be funded, or why the pension age should not be amended, or why the taxpayer in the private sector should be asked to work longer and pay more so that public sector workers can retire earlier and receive more themselves.

The unions should concentrate on negotiations to secure the best terms for vulnerable low-paid workers that the current squeeze on government debt and borrowing can permit. The public sector cannot reasonably be expected to remain forever immune from changes that should have been undertaken long ago.