725,000 public sector jobs face axe, economist warns

kabayiri

The outgoing chief exec of East Riding Yorkshire council (eryc) recently had 350K of money to 'top up' her pension so she could retire early.

This money was found out of 380K notional savings.

Why wasn't this money put back into the public pot?

It's examples of greed like this which illustrate everything that is wrong. I don't think it's your typical front line staffer on 20K or less...they are just the ones who will 'kop fer it' sadly.

Thrugelmir

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

We have a deficit because tax revenues fell off during the recession. We reflate the economy, we get the tax revenue back. Yes, we need to cut the structural deficit and tax revenues won't recover all the way. But the bulk of the deficit will disappear in the same way it appeared - economic activity. Threaten the recovery and we really are screwed.

No, the recession permanently diminished tax revenues. Even on AD's forecasts tax revenues only recover to 2007 levels by 2012.

Growth isn't enough. Even if it was. Which sector of the UK economy is likely to see a rapid growth phase in the next 5 years?

Andy_L

Thrugelmir wrote: »

A Royal Marine Commando starts at around £15,700 PA.

I have a friend with 2 sons in the Marines both in Afganistan currently on active duty with the Americans.

I call that cheap labour.

AlThough that's a ~2 year old number for someone in basic training rather than a fully trained, deployable marine

Thrugelmir

Andy_L wrote: »

AlThough that's a ~2 year old number for someone in basic training rather than a fully trained, deployable marine

Training has been cut due to defence cuts. Winter undetaken training in Norway last winter. Desert was due in Arizona this summer, but wasn't. Instead posted abroad..

tesuhoha

The_White_Horse wrote: »

people are utterly sick of the attitude of public sector workers. at least 50% of them do not do anything worthwhile. they think they are owed a living, owed a massive pension, owed job security, owed a pay increase.

you are all owed NOTHING. you are hired help and when we don't need your help, get out.

I HATE THE PUBLIC SECTOR.

you need to be a specific type of person to work in the public sector. it is hard to move from one area to another - not impossible.

once a teacher was moaning at me about his pay. I said why don't you get paid according to your results. if all your kids get "A" grades you get paid more than if they all get "D" grades etc. he laughed in my face and wouldn't accept it. i told him that is what happens in the real world, you get judges (and paid) according to results and if your results aren't up to it, you're out.

that is what is wrong with the public sector.

Yes, thats right, the real world, where failing bankers get paid million pound bonuses and if their results arent up to it they're out, with a golden handshake.

tesuhoha

marklv wrote: »

If this happens, which I very much doubt, it will ruin the economy totally. Putting over half a million more people on the dole isn't going to achieve anything or even save much money. I think a five year recruitment freeze and compulsory early retitrements for the over 55s would largely solve the problem without a jobs massacre. Massive job cuts will not really save that much as redundancy payouts and benefit payments will be hugely expensive, so what's the point? I'm sure that a cost-benefit analysis would confirm this. Better to reduce numbers steadily and slowly through natural wastage.

This is a perfectly good suggestion unless you are 55 and on the minimum wage which a lot of public sector workers are. Waiting for the next payslip by the end of the week. So what do you do at that age unable to qualify for a pension? Go onto benefits of course. Any more good suggestions.

Gorgeous_George

I'm sure that there are many public sector jobs that could be cut without damaging front line services. However, over 700,000 might be stretching it a bit!

So, cuts to services are coming but it won't mean that there will be a similar cut in costs. Council tax won't be cheaper if they can 50% of local govrnment public servants. I'd wager that council taxes will still rise.

All those redundancies to fund, years of unemployment benefits and then many will be re-employed when they reaise that some of the services were essential.

There will be a huge knock-on effect to the private sector. Be careful what you wish for.

The money needs to be found - or does it? Who do we owe it to? Can we bomb them?

GG

tesuhoha

So those of you who hate public sector workers would sack teaching assistants, nursery nurses, school cleaners? Do you think they don't deserve the wages they are paid? I was a teaching assistant and I can tell you its not a pleasant job and the money is not all that. What if you have a special needs child? Would you be okay if there was no longer a teaching assistant in their classroom? Because at the moment they are getting support but if all these cuts go ahead then the support will be cut. It will be the lower paid people who will suffer the most from this.

Rochdale_Pioneers

Thrugelmir wrote: »

No, the recession permanently diminished tax revenues. Even on AD's forecasts tax revenues only recover to 2007 levels by 2012.

Growth isn't enough. Even if it was. Which sector of the UK economy is likely to see a rapid growth phase in the next 5 years?

And I said that tax revenues coming back will cover the bulk - not all - off the deficit. You're right, we'll never see again the tax take from the city on the scale it was, so cuts are needed.

But if we can "cut" £20bn in just a few months through growth, and another £60bn is on offer through more growth, isn't a programme of cutting £6bn that threatens the grown somewhat stupid? The Tories keep quoting the Canadians as their example, but their cuts were in growth not downturn. They transferred the jobs effectively from public to private sector. We won't because the private sector is still fragile. And adding more people to the dole pile leads to even more, and there goes your growth and your £60bn.

So fine, lets cut the slack out of public services - I won't complain. But not until the economy is strong enough for alternative employment to be there. Planning for a sustained 3m on the dole as we are now is NOT how you restore growth and tax revenues.

simongregson

The_White_Horse wrote: »

once a teacher was moaning at me about his pay. I said why don't you get paid according to your results. if all your kids get "A" grades you get paid more than if they all get "D" grades etc. he laughed in my face and wouldn't accept it. i told him that is what happens in the real world, you get judges (and paid) according to results and if your results aren't up to it, you're out.

that is what is wrong with the public sector.

If everyone could get an A grade then there would be no point in having exams.

The reality is that a teacher is one of many factors that can affect childrens' achievement. Someone may have a fantastic teacher, but still not do as well as they could due to illness/family problems/lack of revision at home/parents took them on holiday during exams etc. etc. Equally some children have poor teachers but still do well in exams, due to other positive influences on their lives such as parents suporting them to do homework, purchasing revision guides, money spent on tuition etc.

So it is really a difficult area to assess. There is actually performance related pay for teachers to an extent, based on their classes as a whole making above average progress. I'll leave the more sensible here to imagine what teaching teenagers would be like if they thought they could get your pay cut if they did less work and messed about more!!