Public Sector wages rising despite pay "freeze"

Old_Slaphead

StevieJ wrote: »

Just one point, flexi-time shouldn't be a perk, it should be a mutual benefit i.e. to smooth out the workflows, especially beneficial in accountancy. BTW that is a high number of holidays, why do you get so many? does it include bank holidays?

Maybe not but most people count flexi as a perk.

My OH gets 40 days hols (incl stats) in LG.

twirlypinky

Really2 wrote: »

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.

I work in public sector finance. I do not get flexi time. I work 45 hours a week and get paid for 37.5. I earn considerably less than equally qualified people outside the public sector.

However, i stayed in the job for the pension (which is soon going to change and cost me more) the annual leave (which i'm waiting for some bright spark to cost up as a huge saving) and the job secrutity (which considering i'm about to be put at redundancy risk is now looking dodgy).

I now fell worse off than anyone!!

Old_Slaphead

twirlypinky wrote: »

I work in public sector finance. I do not get flexi time. I work 45 hours a week and get paid for 37.5. I earn considerably less than equally qualified people outside the public sector.

Doesn't always work that way though.

A friend is part qualified accountant in Local Govt here in darkest industrial East Midlands. She's grade SO1 - around £29000. With benefits (pension, flexi, extra hols etc) that must be worth £35,000+ for a flat 37 hour week.

A part qual would really struggle to get anything near that in private sector in this part of the world. With the lure of lots of unpaid overtime and probably zip pension, £25,000 would be a reasonable expectation.

Andy_L

vivatifosi wrote: »

I just wanted to point out that it isn't all gravy in the public sector. People need to distinguish between civil servants (central government) and local government officers, and indeed between different councils.

You also need to differentiate between different bits of the Civil Service as they can have widely differing pay scales.

J_i_m

Oh dear tabloidlist (if that's even a word!) **** stirring.

I happen to be in the public sector working with the NHS. Yes I'm on a pay scale with yearly increments until I've reached the top of my band. I currently have two increments to go, and then that's it, no more money unless I gain promotion. As far as I'm aware my increments will be met as per contract.

The last actual "pay-rise", which is applied throughout the bands was actually 7.99% and this was applied gradually over 3 years, so effectively when you consider inflation and cost of living going up, it wasn't much of a rise.

The actual bands are now frozen, so technically there are no "pay rises" at least for the next two years, maybe longer. As far as I'm aware this doesn't apply to increments, and that would be difficult to enforce anyway. Any number of equal opportunity cases could be taken to employment tribunal if they did.

In my trust incomes are actually decreasing. Overtime is being cut and overtime-rates are being tidly circumnavigated with overtime only being offerd to staff via a bank agency. They are also "reviewing" certain enhancements which is likely to mean people having to re-apply for their jobs and agree to new less favourable terms.

Much of this is being conviently ignored by the tabloidlist view of "OMG public sector pay rises grrrrrr!" Well my income is not going up, I'm actually earning between £400 to 600 a month less, and it could yet get worse... some pay rise eh?

And also this notion that public sector workers do not contribute towards society or the tax pool. What nonsence! Firstly and foremostly our labour is to the benift of the public which includes private sector workers, so thanks for making us feel valued there. But where do so called priavate sector workers get their money from? Consumers? Aren't public sector workers also consumers? Therefore public sector workers and tax money is also indirectly funding private sector workers just as much as some of them think that they're indirectly funding the public sector.

What we've proved here that, it really doesn't matter if you work in the public or private sectors, you're still contributing both financially and physically to society. If you're going to sit on a high horse whilst borrowing it's blinkers and think that only private sector workers fund society, then it won't take very long to pull that logic apart.

To conclude then, the tabloidlist perception that public sector workers are enjoying comfortable pay-rises is mis-guided at best, and damnright ignorant at worst.

J_i_m

Percy1983 wrote: »

So an increment is done on 1st of april? sounds yearly to me.

No. Pay-rise occurs on 1st April since that is the start of the financial year. There will be no pay-rise this coming April, nor the next, hence the "Freeze".

Increments occur on yearly anaversies since your starting date. For instance, I started work with my employer on 3rd October, therefore my yearly increment occurs on the 3rd October every year until I reach the top spine-point of my band. From that point on, there is no salary increase.

Percy1983

Interesting, our increments do go on the 1st of April every year as long as you worked 6 months in the year before.

rochja

Pay points and national Government: A civil servant's annual pay rise consists of two elements.1. A predefined increase of a certain number of points to compensate for inflation. 3 traditionally where 1 = 1% 0f gross pay. However, this figure is not generally reviewed and the increase is given even in the face of high inflation. Also, the start and end points of pay bands for a job are reviewed so that for a number of years low income jobs improved overall pay for new starters without changing the spine point that long servers were on. Their only reward was the prospect of one day finally reaching the new end point. Thus people with short service have faired relatively better than their long serving counterparts. This was a feature of pay settlements in the early part of last decade. 2. A performance based boost up the scale which has generally, but not always been locked in for future years. This has always involved participation in a flawed annual review system which could be the subject of an entirely different discussion. There is no evidence that private and public pay levels have diverged or moved together greatly over the years and it is a long held and generally accepted principle that public sector workers have been paid less than their private sector counterparts as a reflection of the relative security of their jobs and final salary pension scheme paying out at age 60. These green eyed monster discussions of who has had it too good and for how long are prevalent now because both sectors are being squeezed until they squeak. There is not a secure job in the land, we are all working longer, and for the first time in decades standards of living are dropping. I am responding to this thread only because the only way to survive the crisis is to pull together and ask what you can do for your country [other than shoot all the politicians]

Generali

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Maybe not but most people count flexi as a perk.

My OH gets 40 days hols (incl stats) in LG.

Add on to that 10 sick days a year on average (link) and that's working a 4 day week!!!

Percy1983

Generali wrote: »

Add on to that 10 sick days a year on average (link) and that's working a 4 day week!!!

I would say that you would have to be a fool to take that many days sick these days. I have seen many restuctures recently and guess who goes.