Shameless labour

Sir_Humphrey

Jennifer_Jane wrote: »

I understand that the Coalition would like 'back office' staff and managers rather than the front line people to go. But I do wonder when this all starts to kick off, how many managers lose their jobs or take pay cuts ('No public service manager to earn more than the PM').

With the scale of the cuts they had planned, that was never going to be achievable, and they always knew it.

ILW

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Voluntary organisation is Newspeak for Charity which of course do have employees as well as volunteers.

Never heard that before. how can it be a voluntary organisation if it has paid employees? Seems rather misleading to me.

Sir_Humphrey

ILW wrote: »

Never heard that before. how can it be a voluntary organisation if it has paid employees? Seems rather misleading to me.

I suggest you go and read up what charities actually do and how they work. It ought to be obvious that many of them would need full time staff (maybe only a handful) to organise the volunteers and that means paying people. These organisations run with money, not magic pixie dust.

Remember that these are the bodies that are supposed to be delivering the "Big Society" [sic].

lemonjelly

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

I suggest you go and read up what charities actually do.

Remember that these are the bodies that are supposed to be delivering the "Big Society" [sic].

Quite.

ILW wrote: »

Never heard that before. how can it be a voluntary organisation if it has paid employees? Seems rather misleading to me.

I'd encourage you take Sir Humphrey's advice. Have you never been exposed to work charities do & how they operate?

tomterm8

ILW wrote: »

Never heard that before. how can it be a voluntary organisation if it has paid employees? Seems rather misleading to me.

Almost all charities have paid employees.

ILW

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

I suggest you go and read up what charities actually do and how they work. It ought to be obvious that many of them would need full time staff (maybe only a handful) to organise the volunteers and that means paying people.

Remember that these are the bodies that are supposed to be delivering the "Big Society" [sic].

I know what charitable status means, but inferring that all charites are voluntary organisations is just so far off the mark, it is ridiculous.

lemonjelly

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Remember that these are the bodies that are supposed to be delivering the "Big Society" [sic].

On the positive side, given the amount already unemployed, & the amount to be made unemployed over the next 2 and a half months, the "Big Society" TM will have a wealth of a pool to choose from!

tomterm8

ILW wrote: »

I know what charitable status means, but inferring that all charites are voluntary organisations is just so far off the mark, it is ridiculous.

Oh, I get you. A voluntary association or organisation is the charity equivalent of a partnership. A group of people (the trustees) get together, and form an unincorporated body. The trustees assume liability for the association. It can have either paid or non employees. The volunteers here are the trustees, who agree to take on the liabilities of the charity, AND not the people who actually do the work.

ILW

The idea that all charities a run and staffed by selfless volunteers is wrong in many cases.
A prime example being Eton and Harrow and most private schools have charitable status.
Additionally many of the larger charities pay their executives extremely large salaries.
It is true that there are many fully voluntary charites who do great work, but assuming that because an organisation is a charity it is altruistic is very naive.

Flyboy152

ILW wrote: »

I believe there have been virtually no sackings. Mainly natural wastage and not refilling positions.

Our local County and District Councils have already let two thousand posts go and was recently praised by the Prime Minister for acting so promptly. Something the chair of the council was very proud of.