It's Good to see Someone's Making Money in the UK

The_White_Horse

every solitary public sector worker should get a 25% pay cut instantly. then the tories should actually look at what some of these cretin earn (or steal from the public as they create nothing) and then slash them again.

this geezer in Kent is not needed at all. if for whatever reason he is kept on, then limit him to 40k. if he wants more, he can strike (no one will notice) and then he go and earn 250k in the private sector - except he wouldn't last a week.

vivatifosi

The_White_Horse wrote: »

every solitary public sector worker should get a 25% pay cut instantly.

Do you seriously believe that? Even those on really low wages - minimum wage or close to minimum - dinner ladies, those who care for the elderly, people who have to clean public toilets and do really gross tasks for little reward? Do you honestly think that's reasonable?

StevieJ

vivatifosi wrote: »

Do you seriously believe that? Even those on really low wages - minimum wage or close to minimum - dinner ladies, those who care for the elderly, people who have to clean public toilets and do really gross tasks for little reward? Do you honestly think that's reasonable?

Mr Ed just spouts horsesh1t

Procrastinator333

Another fleeting post before I have to dash again. The point that there are no strategic decisions - Say something like waste collection comes up for review. The councilors will likely make the decision in the end, but it will be up to the chief exec and whoever they deem appropriate to present a case for outsourcing vs non outsourcing and to present an evaluation of the different firms available for outsourcing.

Any body who can't see why this is both a complex and important question really should get back in their box.

Who would you want making such advise, someone on £50k a year who has only ever come across outsourcing before when they were made redundant from their last job. Or the person who has made similar decisions in the past and can base their advice upon experience of similar situations, previous outcomes and the lessons they learned along the way?

globalds

I don't recall many heads rolling due to those "well Informed" investments of council cash ..or even borrowed cash into Icelandic banks.

No risk for mistakes and bonuses for doing your job....

Procrastinator333

I don't think any got fired, bu as far as I know none of the senior level at a council got a bonus either.

The whole investing in Iceland banks is also not as clear cut as some make out. Quite a few of those, councils or otherwise, invested in long term icelandic bonds long before there was a hint of trouble. Untill only a few months prior to their fall, Icelandic banks had a AAA rating, no different to uk banks. If the ratings agency, economists and cityinvestors failed to callit, how do u expect the council fd who is lower paid than all of the above because public finance is easy to call it?

IMO, the only ones who should have got chopped are those who continued to put money in after a downgrade. That was just stupid. But asfar as I know, there were not many that did that..

Generali

The Finance Manager job at Lambeth Council pays under £60,000, I posted a link to the job last week - it is no longer being advertised. They clearly feel that it is possible to attract the necessary quality of candidate for under £80,000.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=2384555

Procrastinator333

There is a job listed as head of finance for borough of Broxbourne at £60k. But looking at the advert it requires 3 yes pqe and the role reports to the director of resources. I would be very surprised if the director resources isn't an accountant. This head of finance isn't actually at the top of the finance tree as they don't report to the council.

£60k for 3 years pqe in the public sector doesn't seem unreasonable. It is still less than the majority of the private sector.

If I am wrong in the above and this role is to be the most senior finance person in the council I personally would be quite worried as a council tax payer.

Please also don't think I'm defending all of the high salaries etc, I'm not. There is plenty of waste, but at the same time, imo, there will always be a need for quite a few high paying jobs. If high salaries aren't paid, the costs will be far higher in the long run.

If the council was run by a private company, it would be easy. No recruitment, let headcount fall by 10% through natural wastage, make the other 90% pick up the extra work. Then fill in a few holes where there have been disproportionate high staff losses. The repeat again.

Pennywise

You'll never get the "top" people from the private sector and into the public sector. It's no good paying £200k for a "top" accountant in a local council if the "top" accountant could get £500k in a ftse 100 company - they'd still take the £500k job. Let's face it, any professional who's at the top of their game will always go for the top paid private sector role - no-one is going to half their pay for the "feelgood" factor of working for the public sector are they?

The truth is that the majority of, say, accountants, won't be anywhere near the salary levels mentioned. Average pay for qualified accountants is more likely around £50-£75k p.a. across the board. True, the top few will earn hundreds of thousands, but a lot will be plodding along in small firms in all corners of the country, earning fairly low wages. There is a massive differential between the top and bottom earners in any profession in the private sector. It's only the top people who get the top jobs. There simply aren't enough top jobs for the average professional to get anywhere near.

Public sector pay should never be allowed to reach silly levels. I'd say £100k for top level is more then generous enough - 4 times average salary or 8 times minimum wage seems proportionate and sensible. By the same argument that the pro-tax rise lobby say that the rich should clear off abroad if they don't like paying more than 50% tax, I'd say that public sector bosses should clear off to the private sector (if it would have them) if they're not happy with earning £100k from the taxpayer.

carolt

Pennywise wrote: »

Let's face it, any professional who's at the top of their game will always go for the top paid private sector role - no-one is going to half their pay for the "feelgood" factor of working for the public sector are they?

Your post is very revealing.

I know many, many people who work in the public sector despite having been headhunted for far better paying jobs in the private sector - because the only reason they can get up in the morning is because they are 'public servants'. They are deeply proud of serving the public, and no amount of money could make up for the thought that all they were doing was making some big company's balance sheet a bit bigger.

The fact that you find it impossible to understand the public service ethos is very interesting in what it says about you.

Your post is fundamentally wrong though, in what it says about the motivations of those who work in the public sector.