Public Sector wages rising despite pay "freeze"

Really2

Percy1983 wrote: »

I am not going to enter too much into this as I am sure there is some industries on either side but I would guess the overall avergae for public sector is less (I know it is in the profession I work in).



You are talking about the private sector.



As you can see its rather different in the public sector and exactly as I describe.

As I say I have moved up the scale and quite rightly too, it does both me people should think I should lose a good few thousand pounds over the next few years as I started working where i do at the wrong time.

So are you of the opinion the people who start of the bottom of the scale are not experienced/qualified/productive enough to do the job but get employed anyway (like the TUC see it, PS the TUC are not your employers, how do your employers see it?)

Odd way to recruit if you ask me.

PS I am not talking of the private sector at all, pay tiers in the public sector are based on points for qualifications, experience etc. So how are my comments related to the private sector???

Alysia

heathcote123 wrote: »

Advertising is free in the job centre, and if you ask them nicely they put it in the local paper too.

Local papers charge thousands for their adverts. And doctors, nurses, technicians, physios and other people that work for the NHS don't use job centres.

heathcote123 wrote: »

You'd think the NHS could have a 'job site' for all their vacancies, and make it there exclusive means of advertising. I mean, it's not like prospective workers haven't heard of the nhs?

They have. I can't apparently quote links, but just Google 'NHS jobs'.

It's very rare for the NHS to use external advertising these days. Hence why publications like the Health Service Journal and the Nursing Times used to have 40 pages of adverts and are now lucky to have 4. Only specialist or very senior jobs in the NHS will be advertised, the rest will be done for free through that website.

heathcote123 wrote: »

Anyway, re the time, I do it myself. I'd estimate it takes a couple of days in total to go from placing ad to employing someone.

Let's say you're employing a Ward Manager in the NHS. You're saying you could write the advert, advertise, gather applications, shortlist, put together a panel with senior nurses, interview, check references, do a CRB check, check NMC registration and offer the post in a couple of days?

I used to work in recruitment and we had a number of NHS clients, but most NHS organisations now do everything in house using the NHS Jobs website. That still doesn't mean that it's quick or cheap process though. Industry standard (i.e. outside of the NHS) shows that the average job costs around £4,000 to recruit to and around 12 weeks goes by between someone leaving and getting someone else in, even with notice periods. The NHS will have a number of other hurdles to jump through for clinical posts, so it may take longer and be more costly.

Obviously internet forums are different, as it's quite easy to find a quality candidate in two hours and for free when you're doing it hypothetically from your keyboard.

Alysia

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Why do all these people give their time for less than its worth when they could walk into a private job for more money?

Because money is just one of dozens of different factors that motivate people to work.

Percy1983

Really2 wrote: »

So that would mean those on lower grade are not experienced/qualified/productive enough so have to be trained, helped and are unproductive?

So in reality you are paying someone less and training them and getting them up to speed. They are not at the same level as those on higher grades. Thus they are likely to cost the same or more.;)

In reality, I can't agree with the TUC stance, jobs have a minimum job spec, obviously that is for the bottom of the tier. If you dont meet that you should not be employed.
So in reality, jobs are aimed a tier 1, but better candidates could get a higher tier.

I think the main key here is is the experience, I can confirm I am more effective now than I was on my first day, yes I had enough experience in my field but none at that actual desk. (yes there is a difference).

It does fit with what I say about there not being a massive jump either, the difference from top to bottom when I started in my current job was £1433. Now I do feel maybe the start was a little lower than it should have been and it should have got to the top quicker (2 years maybe) but the overall thing when accepting the job was I will move up that scale and the final salary will be something I will be happy with within a set time period.

If those goals posts moved for me and many others there would have been big trouble with strikes.

It makes perfect sense, you save money ont he first few years and have a method of justifying it which is generally expected.

Going with the pay scale example I have been using all you are suggesting is they shouldn't start at £17.5k but go straight to the £19k, to be honest I would have preferred that.

ukcarper

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Why do all these people give their time for less than its worth when they could walk into a private job for more money? Well done for being so public spirited.

Perhaps they prefer the pension available and terms and conditions.

Really2

Percy1983 wrote: »

You are talking about the private sector.



As you can see its rather different in the public sector and exactly as I describe.

Really?
http://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/jobs/workingateastsussexcountycouncil/salaries/default.htm

Salary scales
You can download our current salary scale tables at the foot of this page. These have been agreed nationally by the relevant pay organisations, or locally by the Council.

The scales are arranged in incremental points and new employees usually start at the lowest point of the scale. If performance is satisfactory, employees normally receive an increment (rise) on 1 April each year until they reach the highest point in the scale.

So rises in scales are not done just because you have done a years work but are award if your points have gone up enough. EG by more qualified, experience.

My wife has never received yearly increases in scale just based on a years service AFAIK it as always been based on points, that may have happened due to points earned.
AFAIK there is no rule which says you go up a scale each year of service to the maximum?

You do stay at the same level because you have done something wrong like you stated before??

what if the top level requires a degree to get the points required?

Mallotum_X

ukcarper wrote: »

Perhaps they prefer the pension available and terms and conditions.

Ah, maybe its not so bad after all then...

Percy1983

ukcarper wrote: »

Perhaps they prefer the pension available and terms and conditions.

This is true, I get less money but:

Flexi time.
Good pension (Not as good as it has been for those before me)
Free travel of public transport
32 days holiday (increase with service to 37)

Really2

Percy1983 wrote: »

I think the main key here is is the experience, I can confirm I am more effective now than I was on my first day, yes I had enough experience in my field but none at that actual desk. (yes there is a difference).well they should have employed some one at the top o the scale then, or your pay reflected your status, thus blowing out the water the TUC comment.

It does fit with what I say about there not being a massive jump either, the difference from top to bottom when I started in my current job was £1433. Now I do feel maybe the start was a little lower than it should have been and it should have got to the top quicker (2 years maybe) but the overall thing when accepting the job was I will move up that scale and the final salary will be something I will be happy with within a set time period. Are you saying you went for a lower paid job, or did you need a job?

If those goals posts moved for me and many others there would have been big trouble with strikes.A luxury the private sector don't really have.

It makes perfect sense, you save money ont he first few years and have a method of justifying it which is generally expected.What by employing some one less efficient and under qualified, My wife is LD and she goes on shed loads of training courses, don't make out lower scales are cheaper by just looking at wage cost.

Going with the pay scale example I have been using all you are suggesting is they shouldn't start at £17.5k but go straight to the £19k, to be honest I would have preferred that. Not me, tuc

How about starting at £17.5K and no increments + wage rises?

Really2

Percy1983 wrote: »

This is true, I get less money but:

Flexi time.
Good pension (Not as good as it has been for those before me)
Free travel of public transport
32 days holiday (increase with service to 37)

To ask, what job do you do in what area of the country. I think i remember you said you were in accounts so that is at least something that can be qualified against the private sector.