Call To Cut 1 Milllion Public Sector Jobs

Mr.Brown_4

Forgive me if I cover points already made. Just not up to reading much.

This frontline cliche is getting me thinking. Frontline is nurses helping patients. With a back line of middle managers, consultants, contractors, advisers, etc.

Frontline is a copper walking down a road and helping poeple. With an army of managers, consulatnts, contractors and more managers behind him / her.

I'm not so sure frontline is where cuts are required. I think just behind the frontline and all the way up to the top, especially the top, is where they should be looking very carefully.

lostinrates

Mr.Brown wrote: »

This frontline cliche is getting me thinking. Frontline is...

I can only think of it as as the flea stuff....and it doesn't work very well anyway (any more)

The_White_Horse

the thing i never understand is people saying that they will be more of an expense on benefits. how can someone on benefits paid by the taxpayer, be more of a cost to the taxpayer than someone on 30-40k paid by the taxpayer????

Mr.Brown_4

The_White_Horse wrote: »

the thing i never understand is people saying that they will be more of an expense on benefits. how can someone on benefits paid by the taxpayer, be more of a cost to the taxpayer than someone on 30-40k paid by the taxpayer????

The 30 to 40k will be taxed at say 35% including NI. The recipient of the money will spend that money on services, products, that will also be taxed. The remaining money will reenter the system and be earnt and taxed. So it is quite possible to see how creating jobs is better financially than paying benefit.

I was idly thinking (it's what I do), the other day and wondering if the entire country could be public service rather than any other kind of work. A never ending cycle of tax and benefit.

dave4545454

The_White_Horse wrote: »

the thing i never understand is people saying that they will be more of an expense on benefits. how can someone on benefits paid by the taxpayer, be more of a cost to the taxpayer than someone on 30-40k paid by the taxpayer????

absolutely. we already got at least more than half the MPs than we need. if they got made redundant (and let's face it, no-one is gonna employ a cheating lying MP), they wouldn't even get any benefits cos they are already millionaires. so it would save the country millions. the same goes for all these pointless quangoes and the pen pusher civil servants who do sweet FA all day but still rake in a huge salary.

none of them are goin to cost the taxpayer more when made redundant cos they are already far too loaded and will not qualify for benefits.

ILW

Mr.Brown wrote: »

The 30 to 40k will be taxed at say 35% including NI. The recipient of the money will spend that money on services, products, that will also be taxed. The remaining money will reenter the system and be earnt and taxed. So it is quite possible to see how creating jobs is better financially than paying benefit.

I was idly thinking (it's what I do), the other day and wondering if the entire country could be public service rather than any other kind of work. A never ending cycle of tax and benefit.

Where would the money come from, unless taxed at 100%

ILW

thescouselander wrote: »

Yes but in order to attract good people with the correct skills the public sector must offer a package in line with conditions in the wider market.

For instance, as a Chartered Engineer working in the public sector I reckon my salary is at least 20% lower than the industry rate. I am prepared to accept this because of other arrangements including pension and redundancy protection etc. If these go I shall be off to sell my services in the private sector as will many others in my position. If the department cant get a replacement from inside they could always get a manpower substitute from the private sector. The only problem is that a like for like replacement costs about £1000 per day which is well in excess of what they are paying me now (unfortunately). So the taxpayer pays either way.

I heard there were thousands of engineering grads who could not find a job.

dave4545454

ILW wrote: »

I heard there were thousands of engineering grads who could not find a job.

many thousands. i've got a manufacturing engineering degree in a country where the government has killed off manufacturing. no chance of ever finding a job in that area

thescouselander

ILW wrote: »

I heard there were thousands of engineering grads who could not find a job.

Thats probably true but an engineering grad is not the same as a Chartered Engineer by a long way. To be Chartered you need both the education and the experience. Grads are ok but they need a good bit of development before the become truly useful. I think you will find there is a shortage of experienced engineers in many areas.

Old_Slaphead

thescouselander wrote: »

Yes but in order to attract good people with the correct skills the public sector must offer a package in line with conditions in the wider market.

Given the increase in average remunerations of public 'servants' viz-a-viz private sector employees over the last 10 years then clearly the packages being offered are in many instances well in excess of the the equivalent private offering.