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

StevieJ

ILW wrote: »

There is no reason to pay a "loyalty bonus" to an admin officer when there are tens of thousands of people out of work who are perfectly capable of doing the job and would take it tomorrow if offered.

Just out of interest what super important job do you do?

shortchanged_2

The_White_Horse wrote: »

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

I know, it's a ridiculous situation really where public sector workers are actually paying for themselves!!

shortchanged_2

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.

Has it not occured to you that public sector workers are contributing to your salary. Funny concept this but most private businesses require people to use their services or buy their products etc and some of these people will be public sector workers who are directly or indirectly paying your wage.

oldvicar

Although there may have been a bit of 'bloat' in parts of the public sector, we should remember that a lot of this has come about by trying to do things in a quasi private sector way - performance related pay, bonuses, short term contracts, and the like for individuals; and internal markets for public sector organisations where a lot of their workforce are engaged in such totally unproductive activites such as Sales (to generate income from other bits of the public sector) and accounting (billing for services rendered etc).

But the main reason that the public sector wage bill is far too high is down to the wasteful things our wasteful politicians ask the public sector to do. And the way they have done it (under previous governments) with extremely wasteful target-driven approaches with unintended consequences.

The biggest savings to the taxpayer will not come from squeezing a percentage from public sector employees pay, but from asking the question 'do we really need and can we afford this public sector service at all'? We can all think of examples of public sector jobs we regard as unneccessary.

On the whole it is not public sector employees who are to blame. There are plenty of opportunities for those in the private sector who claim that those in the public sector are overpaid, overpensioned, underworked, etc, and who think they can do better, to see if they could hack it in those jobs. In fact in many recruitments it seems that public sector employers actually overvalue the expertise and experiences those previously employed in different sectors claim to have.

I do worry that some areas of the public sector are playing games seemingly by trying to implement the government's cuts in the most damaging way they can, but thats another story.

chucknorris

ILW wrote: »

I cannot understand why anybody should get a payrise just for being in a job for another year.

I think it is meant to simplify the process of assessment and deciding what pay rise someone receives. For example when I started working as a graduate quantity surveyor in the private sector a senior partner of the practice would decide on my pay increases as obviously over time I became more experienced (and chartered).

I started working in the public sector last year as a university lecturer and I have learned a lot about lecturing in that year, so I am worth a lot more than last year. In the public sector (at least in lecturing) however there doesn’t seem to be a process of specific individual assessment as it is averaged out and paid on year’s experience. At certain points in time you reach a cap and can only progress onto another salary scale by being promoted, that of course is not automatic and is assessed.

OptionARMAGEDDON

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.

Aircrew, not FJ. Those contracts are illegal. RYR tried to enforce something similar (known as a flying training bond) the courts told them to go swivel. Rather than repay costs, we are held to typically 6 years on initial qualification. After three they are getting reasonable, after ANOTHER three they are just about getting to the point where they can give back in terms of instruction, just in time for them to leave and go to the airlines if you nark them off enough with a pitiful incidentals allowance taken away and threats of 20% pay cuts if you are forced into a desk job against your will. Airline pilots typically get to fly transport aircraft as a captain in no less than 10 years. We typically do it in three.

Once you have done your 6 years (starting to get really useful and lots of experience), they are now holding people who have stated the intent to leave for 12 months with significant allowance cuts, but they cant hide what the crews know. The airline industry is about to boom, has a big experience gap and they cant stop people leaving when they can make up their lost allowances in 6 months of working in the private sector. They can make it back in 3 months worth of allowances for some Middle eastern airlines. We have had a large number of people take their employment option at 12 years (remember, it can take4-5 years to train), many more turn down extentions on contract (typically at 38 years old) the forces currently rely upon. We are not far from the point where a large chunk of out experience is going to walk (read poached by the airlines with bespoke poaching packages being put together) and if pay keeps on being undermined as it is, we are going to have to start getting the bean counters flying aircraft. I dont honestly think they are cut out for it. Most struggle with basic life functions such as breathing in and out. We are not all wasters in the public sector. I personally love to serve with similar minded mukkas and have no intention of bailing, but I have also seen some who have sacrificed much to be told again and again, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. Should we blame them for leaving to greener fields? Hell no. you reap what you sow.

The problem you have is this: those that know they are tallentless will not be the ones that opt to walk and take their expensive experience to the global private sector. We have a phrase in the mil to cover this phenomenon - "sh*t floats".

The_White_Horse

shortchanged wrote: »

Has it not occured to you that public sector workers are contributing to your salary. Funny concept this but most private businesses require people to use their services or buy their products etc and some of these people will be public sector workers who are directly or indirectly paying your wage.

but the money they are spending comes from me in the first place.

public sector tax is meaningless. the only real tax is that generated by the private sector.

if there was no private sector, how long would the public sector last from their own tax payments??? actually with these govt's in charge probably ages as they would just continually borrow the costs forever.

The_White_Horse

a friend of mine is an IT contractor at a govt dept. He is now in his 8th year and has just bought himself a brand new aston martin. that is the public sector for you. this guy should be on a yearly salary of 35k. instead, god only knows what they are paying him. and he admits that he doesn't even do much. whilst technically he is "private sector" anyone person or company who derives their income solely from the public sector is public sector in my eyes. the govt needs to look into this MASSIVE waste. this is one person. it must be going on with at least tens of thousands.

sickening. if the govt had to account for this spending, do you think it would continue in this manner??? of course not. they get rewarded for the big spend with a bigger budget next year.

kabayiri

The_White_Horse wrote: »

a friend of mine is an IT contractor at a govt dept. He is now in his 8th year and has just bought himself a brand new aston martin. that is the public sector for you. this guy should be on a yearly salary of 35k. instead, god only knows what they are paying him. and he admits that he doesn't even do much. whilst technically he is "private sector" anyone person or company who derives their income solely from the public sector is public sector in my eyes. the govt needs to look into this MASSIVE waste. this is one person. it must be going on with at least tens of thousands.
...

The further outsourcing of government and council function is likely to follow the IT outsourcing model adopted in the mid 90s, first with EDS.

People are just TUPEd across to the private company. It's not some wholesale new way of working either, with new miracle efficiencies.

Your mate earns big but can be dispensed with at the drop of a hat. At least he is a flexible cost.

One of these big IT providers had a standard rate for their staff. Over 6 years ago this was £550 a day ! Many of these staff would be paid the £35K you mention but they cost us, the taxpayer, nearly £3K a week.

Is that value for money? Not even close in my book.

I wouldn't be surprised if the drive to privatisation of the PS doesnt deliver any notable cost savings at all, at least not in the short term.

As mentioned above, if we really want to save money in the PS, we have to shrink back the role it performs. As a country we can't afford the size of the public service we have.

Graham_Devon

Cleaver wrote: »

Yes it was, the Department of Health decided to go with Agenda for Change and the payscales. I'm sure private sector companies were involved in its creation, but only under instruction from the NHS itself. Why would a private company get to say how the NHS pays its staff?

I'm saying it wasn't a public sector decision in that it wasn't drempt up by the public sector.

It was private companies who created this plan and were draughted in by the government to create it.

It's ok blaming public sector workers, but it was a private sector proposal.