Osborne plans lower public sector salaries outside of the south

StevieJ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The fact that the labour market is turning global still isn't registering.

We've got to loose our island mentality in order to compete going forward.

Ahh I get it, cut the wages in the north and move all the jobs there, I am not sure that is the intention but could be the outcome, or maybe it is the intention. Either way it is going to be slaughter for the coalition at the next election.

StevieJ

Koicarp wrote: »

Why would public sector workers want minimum wage reductions? .

Could you point me at where I write/infer/ that?

olly300

StevieJ wrote: »

Ahh I get it, cut the wages in the north and move all the jobs there, I am not sure that is the intention but could be the outcome, or maybe it is the intention. Either way it is going to be slaughter for the coalition at the next election.

There are enough private sector companies in areas commutable to London that moving some office based public sector jobs away from the South East would be a good idea.

However not all jobs can be moved. For example regardless of where you are in the country you still need state teachers, nurses and hospital doctors and you would have a hard time getting a private firm to provide those like they do with binmen, cleaners and porters.

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

Ahh I get it, cut the wages in the north and move all the jobs there, I am not sure that is the intention but could be the outcome, or maybe it is the intention. Either way it is going to be slaughter for the coalition at the next election.

As has been said often before what's the alternative? Irrespective of Government the books have to be balanced. Politics can only follow financial and economic trends at the moment. Not set the agenda.

I was speaking the other day to a Company based in Hong Kong. They are looking at transferring production from factories in China to Vietnam. As wages costs are putting pressure on production costs. ( in regards to very skilled and trained labour). The Chinese want a Western lifestyle and standard of living.

FBaby

Koicarp wrote: »

In the NHS there are already three levels of "london" weighting: http://www.rcn.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/372992/004106.pdf
I'm a band 7 nurse specialist in a poor ex mining town- covering nearly 300 square miles. My counterparts in the next "big city" sheffield- are paid band 8a, because living costs there are much higher than here. So it's already happening and has since I came into nursing 20 years ago.
You will also find many band 6 staff nurse posts in big cities, whilst in the towns that would be a sister's band.

This is not the case. Job bandings are matched to job descriptions regardless of the area. If your colleague in Sheffield is an 8a it will be because her job description and responsibilities are different to yours and she has been banded higher, even if you have the same title, not because of which Trust she works for.

This is exactly what is suggested to be changed because it is NOT happening yet.

Koicarp

StevieJ wrote: »

Could you point me at where I write/infer/ that?

Apologies, a mis-read in the heat of the moment.

For me this (along with pension cuts) is all about privatisation of services, and therefore tory ideology rather than mere cost cutting.
Rather than cut pay, they could have negotiated away our evening/weekend and bank holiday rates, opened up weekend services and therefore improve cost effectiveness. This would enable working people to access services at times which suit them rather than us- meaning their working time is not lost. It would also remove the frightening increase in hospital death rates at weekends.
Currently I'm fighting management, I want to provide a saturday morning clinic for working parents to bring their kids. I've offered to waive the weekend pay, but management refuse!

Thrugelmir

Koicarp wrote: »

Rather than cut pay, they could have negotiated away our evening/weekend and bank holiday rates, opened up weekend services and therefore improve cost effectiveness.

I think your Unions may have something to say about that.

Besides the fact that employment terms are contractual. So you can't impose change.

Koicarp

FBaby wrote: »

This is not the case. Job bandings are matched to job descriptions regardless of the area. If your colleague in Sheffield is an 8a it will be because her job description and responsibilities are different to yours and she has been banded higher, even if you have the same title, not because of which Trust she works for.

This is exactly what is suggested to be changed because it is NOT happening yet.

You are incorrect (we can go back and forth if you like), My job description is exactly the same as the colleague in sheffield- I know this is true because I "wrote" the job description by copying hers!
You are being incredibly naive if you really believe that job matching was the same across the country- I was on the job matching panels for my previous employer and some roles had their band decided long before we saw the job description or met a staff member.

simongregson

Emy1501 wrote: »

Teachers seem to be example that they using on the radio. Questions for me are

1) any evidence teachers in the private sector get paid less than in the public sectors.
2) working conditions. Teaching 16 children from mainly privileged backgrounds I suspect is a lot easier than teaching 30 kids from a rough housing estate.
3) if wages for the public are reduced does the private sector then reduce pay even more.
4) would it not be better to get rid of non jobs in the public sector than demotivate those who doing a good job.

Where I live private school advertise around £900 more per year anyway. They also have 15 days extra holiday, class size less and no disruptive pupils as they are under no obligation to accept them.

I don't live in the south east.

Teachers according to the BBC this week get around 80% of the pay of those in other sectors with the same qualifications.

Does this mean I get a pay rise to match the private sector then? I suspect not! They won't compare with private schools will they, just the average wage in an area. Morale is very low and many teachers are aiming to get out of the UK or state system as soon as they can (50% of staff according to my union's latest survey). Teacher training is again failing to recruit sufficient graduates...

olly300

simongregson wrote: »

Where I live private school advertise around £900 more per year anyway. They also have 15 days extra holiday, class size less and no disruptive pupils as they are under no obligation to accept them.

I don't live in the south east.

I don't know about the pay as I've not asked the private sector teachers I know but I agree with the difference in conditions.

(The state sector ones are very open about their pay and allowances. )

simongregson wrote: »

Teachers according to the BBC this week get around 80% of the pay of those in other sectors with the same qualifications.

Does this mean I get a pay rise to match the private sector then? I suspect not! They won't compare with private schools will they, just the average wage in an area. Morale is very low and many teachers are aiming to get out of the UK or state system as soon as they can (50% of staff according to my union's latest survey). Teacher training is again failing to recruit sufficient graduates...

Oddly that due to high unemployment they haven't had a problem getting new recruits, except in the predicted subject areas where there is a shortage of graduates anyway.

I am well aware they have a problem keeping people in the profession due to the number of ex-teachers I know.