Council Jobs to Go -10% Staff Saving Needed

darich

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Pensions - if you pay in £50pw then your basic LA salary is £40,000+.
For that you'll accrue approx £700pa pension.

Over say 10 years that's a £7000pa pension.

To get that with a private pension you would have needed a £100,000+ pension fund (that's right £100,000+ !)

Over 10 years that's contributions of £10,000pa which compares with your actual contributions of £2.600pa. Pretty good deal. uh? And who helps to contribute to your other £7,400pa - no prizes for guessing!

Are you for real?? my salary is nowhere near 40k. I'm well below that!!
I never once claimed the pension wasn't " a good deal" I know it is. But it's something i have to pay a lot of money for.
I wouldn't know about other pensions but i do doubt very much that my salary would have to more than triple in the private sector to get the same pension.

---

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

As for IDIOTS like me who have no idea what LA work is like - my partner has been a senior manager in LA for 25years (and some of the stories I get of waste are unbelievable - endless meetings. many of which are a waste of time - plethora of consultants endlessly changing things for the worse etc etc).

In fact, most people I meet these days work seem to in public sector - there's hardly anyone left in manufacturing businesses anymore (probably because our pay and conditions are even crappier than you perceive your's to be !)

That's your partner's local authority. Did it ever occur to you that your senior manager partner may have something to do with the "stories of waste" and "endless meetings". It's also whatever slant your partner wishes to put on the authority. Maybe your partner's attitude that it's a nightmare is because it IS a night mare and not the free ride you think it is. You've also never worked there so can't talk with an authority. In fact since you've never worked in local authority you can't even express a valaid opinion.

I also never said my pay and conditions were "crappy" I was pointing out that local council staff get stick, abuse, poor conditions, and in some cases fewer benefits than those in the private sector.

Pennywise

darich wrote: »

I was pointing out that local council staff get stick, abuse, poor conditions

Not much difference to the private sector then.

darich

Pennywise wrote: »

Not much difference to the private sector then.

And that is exactly the point i was making to some of the less well informed posters oin this thread!

Davesnave

beingjdc wrote: »

Happy Llanwcr.

That one beat me.....and Google!

But I had 'Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda' on a card today.
Don't forget that bi-lingualism is a decided advantage if you work for Welsh Councils, and absolutely essential in many of their schools.

shell1000

I work in the public sector and find all the flippant comments really annoying..

Cutting staff does not necessarily mean value for money... it means more consultants who can push ill experienced graduates on a council and charge extortionate rates.

I used to work for a city Council where approximately 7 people do my job, and no thats not an indication that there is more work, but that I work for a tory council now whilst the previous one is labour.

I could improve areas of work, tighten policy up and get the Council lots more money if only I had the time and resources to do it.

Some of us work long hours and really put ourselves out. Others don't. The only difference is if you are incompetent in a Council its hard to get staff members out compared to in private companies. Just spare a thought for the Council staff members that are constantly having to cover for other staff members shortcomings, especially in teams with very few staff...

greenwheels007

Hate to pick you all up on a minor point but the headline said reduction in staff costs!
Now, of course. you don't believe everything you see in the media do you.
I have worked for various public sector employers for 20+ years and it is great. There will be a few panics and 'efficiency savings' in the next few years but those in or near core services will be fine. At a time of social crisis (it won't be long folks!) the good old Local Authorities keep the universe ticking along. The government will take a cautious look at their budgets but we (oops they!) will be left alone apart from a few superficial measures. Freezing recruitment and offering redundancy is not the same as sacking people, but with the right media spin it will make everyone believe that the LA's are feeling the pain too.
Was in the LA in the last recession and there was absolutley loads of slack left in the system.
Having said that they pay is poor and a lot of front line staff take a load of abuse day in day out. But, as they say, every dog has its day. 5 years ago a lot of people turned their noses up at some obscure council job for £20K a year, now those jobs are suddenly very popular.
If you are in the LA club then sit tight, it will be fine, if you're not then try and get in and you won't look back.
Boring isn't always a bad option.
And, if you are applying for a job, get as close to the core service provision as you can - Police, Health, Social Services, Education. Will be boom business when the wheel finally comes off in February!

Poppy9

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Pensions - if you pay in £50pw then your basic LA salary is £40,000+. For that you'll accrue approx £700pa pension.

Over say 10 years that's a £7000pa pension.

To get that with a private pension you would have needed a £100,000+ pension fund (that's right £100,000+ !)

Over 10 years that's contributions of £10,000pa which compares with your actual contributions of £2.600pa. Pretty good deal. uh? And who helps to contribute to your other £7,400pa - no prizes for guessing!

Here is what my pension works out at currently:

I've worked for the LA for 26 years, paying into my pension since I was 18. However I only have 20 years pensionable service todate as I've been part-time for 14 years! If I went back tomorrow full time I would be 64 before I had 40 years service in.

At 64 with 40 years service under current conditions (and current level of pay) I would have a pension of £17.5k and a lump sum £22500.

Under the old rules I would have had £15k pension and £45k lump sump but the rules changed from 1.4.08 (I am on a senior officer grade)

Old_Slaphead

darich wrote: »

Are you for real?? my salary is nowhere near 40k. I'm well below that!!

You claimed that you paid almost £50pw for your pension.

LGPS contributions are between 5 and 8% of gross salary (dependant upon salary level).

Assuming your's was say 6% that would equate to a salary of £43,333pa.

Either that or your original statement was incorrect.


Your employer contributes the equivalent of between 15-20% of your salary into your pension scheme. Similar final salary schemes are virtually obsolete in the private sector (apparently less than 10% of private companies now offer them and most of those will scrapped within the next year) ergo to achieve a similar remuneration package, an equivalent private sector salary would need to be circa 20% higher.

It's a well known fact that has been widely publicised lately that public sector salaries are, ON AVERAGE, higher than private sector ones even before the benefit of an excellent (and very expensive) pension scheme is added in.

That is not to say, of course, that every single job is higher paid on the public vs private comparison - just the average.

olly300

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

It's a well known fact that has been widely publicised lately that public sector salaries are, ON AVERAGE, higher than private sector ones even before the benefit of an excellent (and very expensive) pension scheme is added in.

That is not to say, of course, that every single job is higher paid on the public vs private comparison - just the average.

Time and time again it's been pointed out the average is distorted due to lots of jobs not actually existing in the public sector and vice versa.

For example in my local area parking attendants who the council use to enforce parking control, and bin men are in the private sector there is no public sector equivalent to do a comparison of wages off.

Even when there are jobs you can do a comparison off like teachers and administrators you need to check their duties and qualifications are the same. I know classroom teachers who have gone from the state to the private sector because they earn more money likewise I know some admin jobs that get more in the public sector than in the private sector.

Old_Slaphead

Poppy9 wrote: »

Here is what my pension works out at currently:

At 64 with 40 years service under current conditions (and current level of pay) I would have a pension of £17.5k and a lump sum £22500.

Here's a few numbers to show how much this scheme costs.

Continuing inflation at 3% for next 20 years means your pension will be £32,000pa. (+ lump sum say £40,000)

To get an equivalent private pension for that I'd need a pension fund of approx £540,000. That's also the amount the LGPS needs to set aside less the actual contributions you have made (given the effects of inflation, any promotions etc that will be much less than 25% of that total)

That would mean contributions of £10,000+a over 40 years + hopefully a littlerowth (though not with the current Government where we've seen stockmarket FALL by 10% over last 11 years!!).

A little simplistic, yes, but it does show how virtually unaffordable public sector schemes will be in a few years.