725,000 public sector jobs face axe, economist warns

Wookster

marklv wrote: »

So what? Have you not heard of flexitime?

Again, you reinforce my point.

People like you don't survive in the private sector. You are scared, and for good reason!

ILW

marklv wrote: »

So what? Have you not heard of flexitime?

In the private sector that means being around when the client wants to speak to you, not when it suits the employee, otherwise client goes elsewhere and said employee gets the sack.

ILW

nearlynew wrote: »

Isn't it funny that the same people who knock the public sector and their generous working conditions are against people in the private sector (BA staff for example) striking to preserve their generous working conditions.

If the private sector employees had more balls, maybe they wouldn't have let their bosses strip away their final salary pensions.

Don't get me wrong, I believe in small government and a much reduced public service but people have a right to try and preserve their "perks" whether in the private or public sector.

Yes, just like the miners etc.
Now extinct like the dinosaurs.

getyourgun

I think a great comprise is perhaps is to ask staff if they would like to work part time. If everyone worked less hours we would do the same work more efficently? In the UK we work long hours and are famously inefficent. I would rather do the same work in less hours and have extra free time. This could save my company money and give them flexibility. I could do more hours when needed. I could use the time to start a buisness or just enjoy. Its not just the cival service who are need to become more efficent.

Also people forget that some parts of the government make money, we need to increase these revenues( and not from selling them).

ILW

So if you work say 50% less hours, will you settle for 50% less salary and adjust your lifestyle accordingly?

lostinrates

marklv wrote: »

Your argument is weak. You are talking about yourself as an individual, and this is wrong in this context as you cannot purchase public services individually - it is simply not possible and I don't know of any country in the world which operates this way. Cans of Coke and tins of spaghetti are packaged products, so you are comparing apples with oranges here.

education (school choice, but more key, higher and further education choice), choice of GP and choice of NHS dentist are examples where you are choosing (and in some cases ''purchasing the services of'' public sector services.). In politically stable coucils arguably you have a decision to buy in that area or not.

getyourgun

Some jobs by there nature can be flexible others can't be. As long as the work gets done then its ok to work however. Also its important to think if the work actually needs to be done. I have seen work in public and private sector that was either completly pointless or had already been done by someone else but communication was so poor.

In the private sector you often end up with one or two big players who actually secretly work together.

getyourgun

50% is a big jump but if you could afford why not? Most people would not notice 10%-20% and imagen the saving. Also imagen all the new buisness start ups and tax revenue?

getyourgun

This is all false chose

nearlynew

Quote:
Originally Posted by ILW
So if you work say 50% less hours, will you settle for 50% less salary and adjust your lifestyle accordingly?


That was the situation when you could buy a decent house, pay all your bills ad support a family on one salary

It is the high cost of living and high levels of debt which prevents this happening now.

Remember.............


......................inflation is theft