300,000 jobs in public sector face the axe

izzybusy23

dealsearcher wrote: »

Are you sure? Under Labour maybe, but under this new government? I think you may find things will change. Maybe not immediately, but ...

Ahhh well, I can only go by whats on the entitledto website at this current time.. when I put the scenario in of losing my job, it shows I will get full rent paid (minus £25 due to LHA), full council tax benefit, income support and child tax credits... which brings me up to net wage I get now.. crazy I know.

But like I said, I would rather be in work, hence the reason for trying to find another job before the cull, which I believe will happen in September.

kabayiri

thescouselander wrote: »

This is true. If a contractor was brought in to replace me like for like with the same qualifications etc it would cost the government over £1000 per day - unfortunately for me I dont get paid anything like that as a civil servant.

Maybe it's the terms of the contract though...

I'm a contractor. I can honestly say that my daily rate never was anywhere close to the figure you quote....perhaps for those in London maybe.

Since the recession started my daily rate has come down by 40%. Plus the main current client kept me waiting for weeks until a new contract was arranged....a period of time over which I received not one penny.

Quite right too. If I am not in work for a day, I don't deserve payment. I also accept that times are tougher now, and you have to fight for what you can get.

Permanent colleagues at the main client site all thought I was on to a 'good number' until they realised what income I had over the last 18 months compared to what they had.

Contractors are useful, especially in times of turbulence and change. The sad truth is any contractor knows that many government bodies don't control their contract rates like the private sector. Perhaps its an attitude thing.

izzybusy23

Harry_Powell wrote: »

Do you really believe that all 300,000 people will be better off living on benefits as you claim you will be?

I know the benefit system is rather generous, but I didn't realise it paid the equivalent of a £28k salary and final salary pension. I might give up work now and go on the dole!!!

"The percentage difference between the median level of full-time earnings in the public sector (£539 per week) and the private sector (£465 per week) widened over the year to April 2009, following annual increases of 3.1 per cent and 1.0 per cent respectively."

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=285

Of course not! I will be though.. as stated, I am a single parent (not by choice may I add; split up with husband 3 months ago), a 5 year old child living in a private rental. I would have the whole shebang paid, I've done a scenario of entitledto and thats what its shown. But like I said, I have no intentions of sitting on income support; I have worked since I was 17 (apart from a few redunancies here and there) and can't even imagine life on benefits. Its not for me.. I posted to show a real situation in that I am a council worker facing redundancy, but I will be no worse off as they will pay me back in benefits. Crazy!! PS: I am not on £28k.. quite a bit lower actually

chucky

Harry_Powell wrote: »

Come on chucky, don't be so naive. The sales pitch for outsourcing is that costs will be reduced and services are increased, but we all know the real reason and the real value of outsourcing, and that's to get rid of public sector staff without a union struggle. Divide and conquer - it's the TUPE way.

These deals work because a few years after outsourcing, a 'get out' clause in the contract is activated and the outsource company is told to re-bid for the work and needs to reduce costs or the outsourcer will go with a competitor. The outsourcing company then gets rid of the deadwood and hey-presto, a cheaper service with less staff and no union hangovers - because it's better to have some union members in work, than to lose the contract and have all of them out of work. What a scam.

that is sort of my point - taking these jobs or getting rid of the jobs out of the Public sector doesn't mean it's the best solution. both financially or socially.

thescouselander

kabayiri wrote: »

Maybe it's the terms of the contract though...

I'm a contractor. I can honestly say that my daily rate never was anywhere close to the figure you quote....perhaps for those in London maybe.

Since the recession started my daily rate has come down by 40%. Plus the main current client kept me waiting for weeks until a new contract was arranged....a period of time over which I received not one penny.

Quite right too. If I am not in work for a day, I don't deserve payment. I also accept that times are tougher now, and you have to fight for what you can get.

Permanent colleagues at the main client site all thought I was on to a 'good number' until they realised what income I had over the last 18 months compared to what they had.

Contractors are useful, especially in times of turbulence and change. The sad truth is any contractor knows that many government bodies don't control their contract rates like the private sector. Perhaps its an attitude thing.

I guess its all down to what area you work in but in my field £150 per hour isn't unrealistic for a contractor (outside of London). Of course as a contractor you have various expences to take car of and there is no guarantee of work all year round so that has to be taken into account.

StevieJ

kabayiri wrote: »

Yes.

The outsourcing companies, like Capita, were licking their lips at the prospect of change, just check the press reporting a few weeks back.

Politically these companies provide politicians with a 'solution' ; shift jobs out to the these outsourced companies, and then let those companies squeeze the jobs down over a period of time. It's happened before.


I don't say any of this with any satisfaction, by the way. It's just harsh reality.

I think the Tories had the same faith in these private industries when they introduced PFI, look how much that will now be costing the exchequer many years into the future :eek:

kabayiri

Ooops, egg on face time ...
- seems like expectations of work going to Capita may be premature !

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2010/05/24/capita_shares/

kabayiri

StevieJ wrote: »

I think the Tories had the same faith in these private industries when they introduced PFI, look how much that will now be costing the exchequer many years into the future :eek:

I'm amazed how anyone can defend PFI.

The worst case I can think of? Geoff Hoon was told replacing the air tanker fleet would cost £1bn in 2000. They baulked at the cost and adopted a PFI solution instead.

Current projection of cost for the PFI air tanker solution? £13bn ....a bargain in anyone's book !

How many thousands of jobs could be saved if mistakes on this level were not committed?

StevieJ

izzybusy23 wrote: »

Ahhh well, I can only go by whats on the entitledto website at this current time.. when I put the scenario in of losing my job, it shows I will get full rent paid (minus £25 due to LHA), full council tax benefit, income support and child tax credits... which brings me up to net wage I get now.. crazy I know.

But like I said, I would rather be in work, hence the reason for trying to find another job before the cull, which I believe will happen in September.

But do you not think that people in that situation may be hit by a double (triple) whammy of losing job, pension/redundncy terms changed and benefits cut, after all we have been warned that the changes are going to hurt by Clegg and Laws, and Cable drawing this description from his co-cutter
Cable is "the deficit hawk's pin-up", Laws says"
and these are the good guys :eek:

Harry_Powell

izzybusy23 wrote: »

Of course not! I will be though.. as stated, I am a single parent (not by choice may I add; split up with husband 3 months ago), a 5 year old child living in a private rental. I would have the whole shebang paid, I've done a scenario of entitledto and thats what its shown. But like I said, I have no intentions of sitting on income support; I have worked since I was 17 (apart from a few redunancies here and there) and can't even imagine life on benefits. Its not for me.. I posted to show a real situation in that I am a council worker facing redundancy, but I will be no worse off as they will pay me back in benefits. Crazy!! PS: I am not on £28k.. quite a bit lower actually

Why have kids and then have them raised by other people? If you're now a single parent family with an absent father, surely it's more important, not less for you to be at home with your child? Another generation of latchkey kids from broken homes is created.

TBH, I find it difficult to believe that anyone would choose to be at work, for less money that they would get by staying at home, and to pay other people to take care of their children while they did so. It seems a little dubious to me.