The Sunday Times today says most public sector workers are getting pay increases

DirtyDick

The_White_Horse wrote: »

having them on JSA would be far cheaper than what they are currently paid.

not unthinking at all. in fact, quite the opposite. i take it you're a public sector employee. do you ever think where the money comes from to pay you? i mean really?

once, a public sector moron told me he pays tax too. ahahahahahahaa!!!

So you're a thinking !!!! instead of an unthinking !!!!. Bravo.

It would be cheaper, but they'd not be doing anything at all. So not really a considered answer.

How do you actually "make" money for the UK, in any more real a sense than a public sector worker? Do you sell products, commodities or ideas on the foreign markets?

Do you "make" it, or merely move it around the economy, similar to most anyone else, whether the purchase comes from a private or public sector worker?

ILW

My point was that many jobs are basically the same year on year and experience alone does not make the employee any more productive than they were a few months after they started. Why pay extra if there is no value added?

The_White_Horse

DirtyDick wrote: »

So you're a thinking !!!! instead of an unthinking !!!!. Bravo.

It would be cheaper, but they'd not be doing anything at all. So not really a considered answer.

How do you actually "make" money for the UK, in any more real a sense than a public sector worker? Do you sell products, commodities or ideas on the foreign markets?

Do you "make" it, or merely move it around the economy, similar to most anyone else, whether the purchase comes from a private or public sector worker?

the point is, my salary is paid by a private company and is therefore of no consequence to you. your salary is paid by my tax (not yours) and therefore i do have an interest. better to pay some one 12k on JSA than a moronic street scene inclusion officer 38k plus gold plated pension.

not everyone in the public sector are nurses, teachers and police. that is the favourite line. I bet not even 7 or 8 % of the public sector are those jobs.

The_White_Horse

ILW wrote: »

My point was that many jobs are basically the same year on year and experience alone does not make the employee any more productive than they were a few months after they started. Why pay extra if there is no value added?

because they are public sector and they will strike if they don't get what they want.

DirtyDick

ILW wrote: »

My point was that many jobs are basically the same year on year and experience alone does not make the employee any more productive than they were a few months after they started. Why pay extra if there is no value added?

I'm not suggesting it should be across the board - why should it be for a bin man, or the office boy? - but for certain skilled jobs, whether police, teaching, naval officer, civil engineer, etc., you actually get people doing these jobs cheaply for quite a period of their service while they go through increments based on time and increased performance/expectations (and, traditionally, pension benefits).

DirtyDick

The_White_Horse wrote: »

the point is, my salary is paid by a private company and is therefore of no consequence to you. your salary is paid by my tax (not yours) and therefore i do have an interest. better to pay some one 12k on JSA than a moronic street scene inclusion officer 38k plus gold plated pension.

not everyone in the public sector are nurses, teachers and police. that is the favourite line. I bet not even 7 or 8 % of the public sector are those jobs.

As a taxpayer, I too have an interest in keeping my taxes as low as possible. The public sector (including Crown servants) is not a homogenous bloc, any more than if I ranted against "the private sector" being reckless in laying people off onto JSA to increase profits instead of taking the hit.

I wouldn't like to bet on that figure of 7-8%. I am sure there is wastage and there is an element of complacency in certain elements, but that's an argument unrelated to certain public sector workers gaining increments bringing their wages up to an acceptable average vis-a-vis their experience and professionalism.

Most of the banks' employees - even the top ones - are "public sector" now anyway given they've taken "our" money to prop them up.

DirtyDick

The_White_Horse wrote: »

because they are public sector and they will strike if they don't get what they want.

Not saying I agree with strikes in these circumstances, but it'd only be noticed if the important public sector workers went on strike - so those ones do perform an important function in society. Hence why it's the public sector - it works to maintain public amenities.

People notice if schools shut, bins remain unemptied and hospitals only take emergencies. Not so much if Boots shuts for a day or Sky engineers go on a walk out.

dawyldthing

ILW wrote: »

Or alternatively, have sensibly written contracts which say that if someone leaves within a certain period, they have to repay their training costs. Very common in the private sector.

I guess you are a fighter pilot, if not that 5mill is a waste of money.

i have this in mine as if i leave within 6 months i'll have to pay some of my training costs back

The_White_Horse

DirtyDick wrote: »

Not saying I agree with strikes in these circumstances, but it'd only be noticed if the important public sector workers went on strike - so those ones do perform an important function in society. Hence why it's the public sector - it works to maintain public amenities.

People notice if schools shut, bins remain unemptied and hospitals only take emergencies. Not so much if Boots shuts for a day or Sky engineers go on a walk out.

they may notice, but it doesn't justify why the binman should get a pay rise just for doing his job for an extra 12 months!!!!! perhaps a small inflationary pay increase (in the good times) but that is all. or will i notice that after 12 months he will be tipping those bins faster with more professionalism. don't make me laugh. same job = same pay.

The_White_Horse

dawyldthing wrote: »

i have this in mine as if i leave within 6 months i'll have to pay some of my training costs back

some? why not all? typical public sector lax attitude to public funds.