Council Pay Freeze

dopester

The_White_Horse wrote: »

Sack 50% and get rid of their pensions

Bring it on. I'm not as harsh in my viewpoint as you are, but I see a clear need for improved efficiencies, and expect many changes including privatisation as in the forecast below.

One positive development that is likely is the privatisation of government services. With or without the support of government employees, a major area of growth will be the privatisation of functions now performed badly by governments.

Unprecedented numbers of government employees will be fired. Civil service pay will be cut one or more times.

In the depression of the 1930s, it was an advantage to be a federal employee or a well-connected government contractor. Federal employees were always paid. Their incomes rose in real terms because of deflation. Efforts to keep wage rates high led to uniformly high rates of pay for the employees of government contractors, who were some of the more grateful political contributors of the 1930s.

This time the advantages of federal employment may disappear, as they largely disappeared in England after the depression of the 1930s. Governments under severe financial distress in the coming slump will be unable to maintain the relative purchasing power of their senior employees. It is unlikely that the federal government employees in the United States will go unpaid, as some state and local employees will, but they will almost certainly lose real spending power.

This drop in pay will be yet another factor that will contribute to widespread privatisation of government services. Able government employees will come to favour privatisation over the objection of their unions. They will have a clear interest in shrinking the public sectors to eliminate services that could be performed by the market. The smaller the public sector, the easier it would be to bring its pay up to the market level. Several years of slump and pay cuts will make the public sector less antagonistic to the one reform that would result in their being paid more.

Thrugelmir

lemonjelly wrote: »

I think that public sector workers are an easy target, especially for many in the private sector.

There are good & bad in all forms of employment. Private sector has many layabout wasters. In the same way, I'm sure there are lead swingers in the public sector.

In downturns, private sector people feel the pressure, see cuts made by their solely profit orientated business', & then start to shout about the fact their taxes should be cut, & therefore public sector employees should bear the brunt and be made redundant. Many stereotypes then tend to be trotted out.

Thing is, whilst I'll accept there is waste/inefficiencies in public spending, the vast majority of roles are there to serve a purpose, and that purpose is not the creation of wealth. I've said it before, they provide essential services, usually to the vulnerable. Those services will see increased demand the longer this downturn goes on. Simple example, the increased numbers of people using jobcentres.

Personally, I feel a great majority of public sector employees are undervalued (not neccessarily underpaid). There appears to be a general acknowledgement that though the pay may be less than in public sector, some of the T&C's offset this.

I'd also recommend the OP consider issues other than just pay. You spend 48 weeks a year at work. Surely it is about more than how much you get at the end of the week/month. Get some satisfaction out of your work. Enjoy the security you have (compared to many others right now). Enjoy time with friends and families, and be happy for the fact that you can afford it, as you are in gainful employment. Take advantage of the training opportunities which come your way, better yourself, and an improved role (with improved remuneration) may become accessable to you.

ETA: at the same time, be realistic about the likelihood of recieving massive pay increases at the current time.

What has to be considered though. Is that between 1997 and 2007. Half of all new jobs created where in the public sector. Around 500,000.

With the state of the public finances and reduced taxation income. Julys taxation income was truly shocking. We cannot afford the public sector as it currently stands.

A way has to be found by cutting costs. If not by jobs then by pay.

StevieJ

dopester wrote: »

Bring it on. I'm not as harsh in my viewpoint as you are, but I see a clear need for improved efficiencies, and expect many changes including privatisation as in the forecast below.

You mean like PFI as brought in by the Tories maybe they will have another brain wave when they get in.

izzybusy23

The_White_Horse wrote: »

50% of public sector workers should be sacked. You should get no pay rise, as your job probably isn't even needed. you are just another cost to the country. instead of getting 64 dole a week for nothing, most council employees get 500 a week for doing nothing.

Oh god, not again.. why do you keep trotting out the same statement everytime a Public Sector thread pops up? I am a government worker and I only wish I got paid £500 a week!! Our council is going through yet another restructure due to the Governments Building Our Future initiatives... so that means 200 - 500 job cuts. Council workers ARE NOT in safe employment!!

izzybusy23

The_White_Horse wrote: »

exactly, don't like the public sector pay? get a job in the real world - the fact is you probably couldn't cut the mustard.

I hate public sector employees. useless, overpaid, and greedy.

That statement smacks of jealousy... get a public sector job then if you want all the benefits of being overpaid, greedy and with big fat wedge pensions.. :rolleyes:

izzybusy23

Thrugelmir wrote: »

A way has to be found by cutting costs. If not by jobs then by pay.

When they announced job cuts in our council, somebody did a quick calculation that by asking every employee to cut their hours back by just 2 hours a week, that would be enough to save the council the money they need to recoup.. but I guess they will just plow on with the redudancies and shell out loads of money on redundancy payments instead.... :rolleyes:

bendix

Perhaps he trots it out because it's a genuine reflection of his views?

Just a thought.

bendix

Boober wrote: »

For me, it is better to own than rent. My monthly mortgage payments (capital & interest) are a third of what I'd pay if I were to rent a similar flat.

Just for ONCE it would be nice to have a thread on this bloody forum which doesnt talk about houses, or - in this case - get sidetracked into talking about houses. How many different ways are there to say the same bloody things over and over and over again?

kriss_boy

The equivalent job in the private sector for a roads company would be around 25K.

So to have to wait 11 years to get 22K is a bit annoying. I can work my way up via promotion but that too will take a fair bit of time. Its more annoying that my degree wasnt deemed relevant although I disagree.

The terms and conditions are the only reason I will remain with the council, that and the economy right now.

I can assure some of you we are not all overpaid layabouts! The council seem quite generous to manual staff but in general Id say the rest of us are paid below average for our jobs.

Put it this way, If I had left school with no qualifications and become a grass cutter Id be on a lot more money, with a better pension and more money in the bank. Sure having been to uni Im likely to earn more than a grass cutter in time but throughout the entirity of a career Im not convinced overall you are better off not just leaving school immediately if you want to work for the council.

ILW

kriss_boy wrote: »

The equivalent job in the private sector for a roads company would be around 25K.

So to have to wait 11 years to get 22K is a bit annoying. I can work my way up via promotion but that too will take a fair bit of time. Its more annoying that my degree wasnt deemed relevant although I disagree.
.

So go and work for them and stop moaning about how hard done by you are.