Council Jobs to Go -10% Staff Saving Needed

olly300

macaque wrote: »

olly



Calm down, no one is denying this. If government was giving less to local councils, there would be more money for impoverished pensioners.

I live in a metropolitan area. There is only the local council and the Greater London Authority. If the government didn't give anything to local councils we wouldn't have any street lighting, refusal collection, street cleaning, education services.......

macaque wrote: »

I'm sorry but it is true. Independant schools are renowned for their ability to transform mixed ability children into decent well educated people. The bottom line is that parents make much better supervisors of schools than LAs. Schools also perform much better when liberated from the shackles of state control. As for expelling children, I'm afraid that is an essential part of any formula for success. Why should well behaved children suffer because the ignorant LAs block expulsions. Policies like this make good discipline impossible. When a child is expelled in the private sector, the school usually makes sure the child gets into another school. The shock of one expulsion is almost always enough to solve the problem.

The state sector tries to do this with expelled pupils as well. However there is the issue that there is not always enough school places in that borough so if a pupil is expelled they are likely to have no where to go unless their parents actively look for a place elsewhere.

Oh and talk to any teacher working in any sector. The real difference between an easy to teach and a hard to teach child is the child's parents.

macaque wrote: »

I agree that a hibrid arrangements between the state and the private sector are often a disaster. A news item a couple of years ago reported that the cost of state education has now exceeded some independant day schools. The problem is that not enough of this money reaches the schools. Clearly the answer is some form of voucher system.

Good for them.

I am not surprised.

This is not true. There are spectacular examples of successful schools in difficult areas. The key is to give good headmasters/mistresses proper control. What chance do we have if the school cannot expel bad children or sack bad teachers.

How do you know this is not true?

BTW Head teachers can get rid of bad teachers they just don't sack them so they resort to other measures if they don't leave when it's suggested to them that they resign.

All schools in my borough could and did expel pupils. There was a special "referral" unit set up for them if they were under 16. (Another school in the borough tended not to take you on if you were expelled due to the lack of school places.) If they were expelled in the year that they were 16 but were not allowed to officially leave school they were sent to one of the colleges.

macaque wrote: »

The shortfall that Councils are suffering is due to extravagant salaries, frivolous projects and gold plated pensions. By imposing excessive charges for services, they create an inefficient and distorted economy.

Tory controlled councils well know for wasting money. :rolleyes:

macaque wrote: »

Exploiting a monopoly position to extract more money from the public is disgraceful.

Every business does it. Some are not monopolies so can't get away with overcharging their customers.

The council is getting money by charging for non-essential services. For example it is not essential in cities with good public transport that you own a car if you are able bodied therefore a council can make money by charging parking fees.

macaque wrote: »

Oh come on. Thats just silly.

You may think it's silly but that's the truth. Go over to the green fingered board and read the discussions on composting.

macaque wrote: »

The composting discussion is a complete red herring. The real problem is that Local authorities have failed to address the problem for decades. Recycling facilities in this country are decades behind other continental countries and local authories are still landfilling materials which have been separated for landfill. It is so pathetic you could not make it up.

Yep we all know that but a lot of it is central government's fault.

macaque wrote: »

Its a gravy train and we all know it.

It's not a gravy train if you are a temp or an outsourced employee. And there are lots of them in some councils so the council helping the council keep it's pension and sick pay down.

macaque wrote: »

At no time have not suggested that no need for some regulation. The problem is that there is too much duplication across agencies and the regulators go after the wrong targets.

These are all issues local council environmental health services have dealt with.

The last 2 where issues in a borough where I use to live.

The second issue was with a well-know retailer where a large percentage of consumers money is spent every year. In theory due to their size the a larger central government agency should be dealing with them but in practise nearly everything falls into the hands of your local environmental health department who you complain we don't need. We actually need them more than the central government quangos as they do the real work.

macaque wrote: »

Thats not fair. I have not only read the opposing arguements but responded to them in detail.

But you have concluded that all local councils are ripping people off.

You haven't taken account of the fact that local authority arrangements in England are different. For example if you live in metropolitan area you tend just to have your local council with no parish, district or county council layer.

macaque wrote: »

Quite true but in those cases we do have a choice on who we use.

Not in the case of water or other utilities.

Poppy9

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

:rotfl: LA grafters - you're having a laff. The fact that it's almost impossible to get a job in LA (around 50 applicants for each job) shows what a cushy number it is.

I do think your view of LA workers is soured by your experience with your partner. Don't tar us all with the same brush.

Generali

Poppy9 wrote: »

It would be sex discrimination if annual leave didn't accrue during maternity leave so it's standard practice.

You do not accrue leave if you are on long term sick though.

At Goldman Sachs you accrued holiday while on maternity leave. I don't know about other banks.

macaque_2

olly300

I live in a metropolitan area. There is only the local council and the Greater London Authority. If the government didn't give anything to local councils we wouldn't have any street lighting, refusal collection, street cleaning, education services.......

The issue is how LAs spend public money, not which pot it comes from.

The state sector tries to do this with expelled pupils as well. However there is the issue that there is not always enough school places in that borough so if a pupil is expelled they are likely to have no where to go unless their parents actively look for a place elsewhere.

This is a problem of LAs not doing their jobs properly. Having insufficient places in a borough is a false economy.

Oh and talk to any teacher working in any sector. The real difference between an easy to teach and a hard to teach child is the child's parents.

I have to agree with this but this is why the power of expulsion must be exercised.

How do you know this is not true?

It is not true because there have been plenty of examples of successful schools in difficult areas.

BTW Head teachers can get rid of bad teachers they just don't sack them so they resort to other measures if they don't leave when it's suggested to them that they resign.

They would sack them if they could do so without interference from LAs and unions.

All schools in my borough could and did expel pupils. There was a special "referral" unit set up for them if they were under 16. (Another school in the borough tended not to take you on if you were expelled due to the lack of school places.) If they were expelled in the year that they were 16 but were not allowed to officially leave school they were sent to one of the colleges.

If there are so few spare places that the schools cannot make rational disciplinary decisions, the LA are failing in their duty.

Tory controlled councils well know for wasting money.

LAs of all political persuasions waste money.

Every business does it. Some are not monopolies so can't get away with overcharging their customers.

I agree with this. I think the railways are a particularly disgraceful example.

The council is getting money by charging for non-essential services. For example it is not essential in cities with good public transport that you own a car if you are able bodied therefore a council can make money by charging parking fees.

Reasonable charges are fine but LAs make far too many charges for their services. A town near me doubled their parking charges this year and extended the time 8:00 pm. The people who suffer for this are the shop keepers.

You may think it's silly but that's the truth. Go over to the green fingered board and read the discussions on composting.

I appreciate that composting is useful but it is a complete red herring. The real problem is that LAs have failed to create an infrastructure to handle all the recovered metal plastic and paper. They are decades behind countries like Germany.

Yep we all know that but a lot of it is central government's fault.

I agree with that. My concerns about poor administration is not restricted to LAs.

It's not a gravy train if you are a temp or an outsourced employee. And there are lots of them in some councils so the council helping the council keep it's pension and sick pay down.

LAs do exploit people and at the same time often pay far too much for some outsourced services. This comes down to poor management and poor use of public funds.

These are all issues local council environmental health services have dealt with. The last 2 where issues in a borough where I use to live.
The second issue was with a well-know retailer where a large percentage of consumers money is spent every year. In theory due to their size the a larger central government agency should be dealing with them but in practise nearly everything falls into the hands of your local environmental health department who you complain we don't need. We actually need them more than the central government quangos as they do the real work.

Labour promised us 'joined up government'. After 10 years, the fuedalism and empire building amongst different government departments is as bad as ever.

But you have concluded that all local councils are ripping people off.

Councils are ripping people off. You need look no further than public sector pension arrangements.

You haven't taken account of the fact that local authority arrangements in England are different. For example if you live in metropolitan area you tend just to have your local council with no parish, district or county council layer.

By what can the voters do about this?

Not in the case of water or other utilities.

I agree with you.

Poppy9

Generali wrote: »

At Goldman Sachs you accrued holiday while on maternity leave. I don't know about other banks.

Looks like it's a statutory right

nickmason

Poppy9 wrote: »

Looks like it's a statutory right

I'm fairly certain it is. Similarly you accrue holiday while sick.

Incidentally, it's also a right that if you are sick while on holiday, you can claim that you were sick, and so not on holiday. Real example:

Man goes on fortnight skiing holiday. Breaks his arm halfway through. Returns to UK and explains that the second week he was "off-sick", and so gets one week of holiday back.

No, this was not a local authority employee - it was a management consultant.

(Admittedly there is typically a huge disincentive against this sort of behaviour in terms of career potential; he did this in the knowledge he would be handing in his notice as soon as he came back to work).

matthewcb

Question: given the increase in LA staff numbers over the last 11 years, has the service improved at a comparable level?

nickmason

macaque wrote: »

Reasonable charges are fine but LAs make far too many charges for their services. A town near me doubled their parking charges this year and extended the time 8:00 pm. The people who suffer for this are the shop keepers.

Again, speaking about North Dorset, by way of example. (Can we agree, btw, that some councils good, some bad - both of us only have partial sight of the whole?)

It is possible that we will increase parking charges. If so, it is likely to be as close to ring-fencing as possible for money to fund our local CAB, which will close without our funding.
We are entirely aware that shop keepers will suffer. Frankly if that calculation wasn't in our minds then parking charges would have gone up a lot a lot earlier. The question is always of balance - of how much cost for how much gain. Given that there is very little other money that can be used, it seems a difficult but correct choice.

And again, the elephant in the room when talking about shopkeepers is business rates - but that is outside of local control (it is collected centrally via local councils and then distributed on a per capita basis). If it were local, then we would have a much better mechanism of assisting local businesses.

macaque wrote: »

By what can the voters do about this?

Get involved to make sure the real issues are debated and voted on, and with probity and clarity - see my post in the "masters of the people" thread.
To borrow from my day-job "it's better to light one small candle than to curse the darkness".

macaque_2

nickmason

Again, speaking about North Dorset, by way of example. (Can we agree, btw, that some councils good, some bad - both of us only have partial sight of the whole?)

To one extent or another, the spending in all local councils is out of control. They have gone on a wild spending binge over the past 10 years and it is undermining the economy.

It is possible that we will increase parking charges. If so, it is likely to be as close to ring-fencing as possible for money to fund our local CAB, which will close without our funding.

Taxing amenities like public car parks to fund council services is wrong. It damages business and distorts the economy. You even acknowledge that shop keepers will suffer.

Get involved to make sure the real issues are debated and voted on, and with probity and clarity - see my post in the "masters of the people" thread. To borrow from my day-job "it's better to light one small candle than to curse the darkness".

Getting involved might OK for getting a new zebra crossings but there is absolutely nothing that an idividual can do about the big issues. The vested interests of local councils are so strong that even governments dare not challenge them (as we have seen with education).

Like many I feel that we are currently very poorly governed. The power of the central government and public sector employees has gone too far. Over the past 10 years, democracy and civil rights have been undermined as never before. Like many others I am thinking about shifting my business abroad.

Old_Slaphead

Poppy9 wrote: »

I do think your view of LA workers is soured by your experience with your partner. Don't tar us all with the same brush.

Only joshin' about ALL LA work (I'm sure there are lots of efficient & hardworking staff) - it just that...examples from last few weeks -

a) I tried several times to contact rates authority on Friday - phone kept ringing - no response. Eventually resorted to mail.
b) road works have added 30 mins to my and many others journey in to work for last 2 weeks. No sign of any workers at all. Seem to be renovating bits of the pavements which I assume it's a council job. Why don't they do like in US and work overnight on maintenabce for main roads?
c) 18 months ago, LA 'invested' in road calming measures round our way. Now they are removing them all. Presumably the 2006/7 sleeping policeman budget was u/spent?
d) bin service has gone downhill. No gardening waste collected anymore (unless you pay extra) - sure that's ecofriendly with dozens of householders now queueing at refuse tips with car engines chugging away.
e) public sector absence through sickness has been consistantly higher (+50%) than private sector for years'n'years. Why?