Would you pass someone a glass of water

Spirit_2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Isn't the news today from the spending review evidence enough?

If not, NHS workers (and many in the public sector bar councillors, MPs etc) were on a pay freeze for 3 years and then have had 1% cost of living increases since.

That's forcing pay down relative to inflation.

It's forcing that pay down to save costs. Whether that is right or wrong is another matter, but it's evidence of pay being forced down relatively compared to where it was and compared to what you went in believing you would earn further down the line.

Pay ranges were not inflated but many public sector staff would have continued to have automatic increments. Those staff who were at the top of their pay scales were really the only ones subject to a freeze. This policy was at a time when many staff in the private sector were losing jobs, pay rates were not increasing and soem firms had pay cuts.

There was a major public sector pay inflation under the last labour government and as was said "they spent all the money".

The spending review news puzzles me - the pay round for a number of public sector services has already made a connection between increments and peformance from this year on. I still expect however that most staff will get them. The public sector does not have the systems in place to manage differentiating on achievement of objectives fairly (for the umpteen thousand employed) on an individual basis, and it beggars belief that any (for example) hospital Chief Exec is going to brag that they saved a fortune on increments as their staff did not progress because lots staff were of poor quality. There will be some where increments are withheld and they are in a performance improvement/management process...but not enough to make a dent in the Chancellors savings goals.

BobQ

grizzly1911 wrote: »

I am not sure where you find staff pay held down for 3 - 6 years on a website particularly if it is trying to attract staff.

How many NHS direct employed porters/domestics are there these days? Many are now "outsourced" and I doubt new recruits would get much in the way of pension provision.

I would quite like to think offering a slightly higher rate of pay for new basic recruits would attract and allow selection of some more promising candidates.

The anti-public sector agenda and associated pay restraint and pension contribution increases is bound to have an impact. Some of those who wanted to become a nurse will inevitably look for more rewarding careers.

I suppose one advantage of making nursing less rewarding is that they may recruit those who are more willing to provide basic care and less focussed on the academic side of nursing. We are not there yet but I can see a future in which we create a less skilled nursing grade below the graduate entry grade who are paid even less.

CLAPTON

GDP is broadly static

working age population is increasing

GDP per (potential ) worker is therefore falling

so who should get more, whose income should be unchanged and who should get less?

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

GDP is broadly static

working age population is increasing

GDP per (potential ) worker is therefore falling

so who should get more, whose income should be unchanged and who should get less?

Abolish the NHS

Population will decrease

Demand will fall

Everybody will get less

TruckerT

Dunroamin

BobQ wrote: »

The anti-public sector agenda and associated pay restraint and pension contribution increases is bound to have an impact. Some of those who wanted to become a nurse will inevitably look for more rewarding careers.

I suppose one advantage of making nursing less rewarding is that they may recruit those who are more willing to provide basic care and less focussed on the academic side of nursing. We are not there yet but I can see a future in which we create a less skilled nursing grade below the graduate entry grade who are paid even less.

I know, we could call them State Enrolled Nurses rather than State Registered Nurses.;);)

grizzly1911

Spirit wrote: »

Pay ranges were not inflated but many public sector staff would have continued to have automatic increments. Those staff who were at the top of their pay scales were really the only ones subject to a freeze. This policy was at a time when many staff in the private sector were losing jobs, pay rates were not increasing and soem firms had pay cuts.

There was a major public sector pay inflation under the last labour government and as was said "they spent all the money".

The spending review news puzzles me - the pay round for a number of public sector services has already made a connection between increments and peformance from this year on. I still expect however that most staff will get them. The public sector does not have the systems in place to manage differentiating on achievement of objectives fairly (for the umpteen thousand employed) on an individual basis, and it beggars belief that any (for example) hospital Chief Exec is going to brag that they saved a fortune on increments as their staff did not progress because lots staff were of poor quality. There will be some where increments are withheld and they are in a performance improvement/management process...but not enough to make a dent in the Chancellors savings goals.

I t may not make much of a difference to saving money in the short term but PRP will contain the pot and those perceived to be better performers, for whatever reasons, will benefit whilst those perceived to be poorer performers will lose.

I say perceived as the contracts will no doubt end up being so wooly it will depend on whether your face fits. The newcomers to the profession will more likely get the increases (to retain and motivate) and the long term higher paid staff are more likely to be whittled away.

It will no doubt help bring down pensionable pay as an element of the pay becomes a bonus that doesn't attract pension "contribution" from the employer.

There may have been a ballooning of money paid to the public sector that doesn't necessarily mean that the majority of dedicated front line staff providing the service saw much of it individually.

elantan

Conrad wrote: »

An example of NHS H&S culture diverting staff away from core needs;

Woman in my office MIL has dementia.

In hospital bed next to her an elderly woman weighing about 6 stone needed to go to toilet.

Out came a massive crane and then followed a 20 minute awkward procedure trying to get her into it and to the loo.

That's 20 minutes on one patient needing the loo on a busy ward with many calls on nursing time.

Is society so delicate that we cannot risk a couple of nurses go either side of the patient holding her under her armpits, like we used to in 'the bad' old days?

that is an incredibly dangerous manouvre both for the patient and the staff. You would be complaining if they didnt use the equipment and the woman suffered two dislocated shoulders or if the staff had had to be off sick for months ... surely you must see this ?

http://www.worksafebc.com/publications/health_and_safety/by_topic/assets/pdf/handling_patients_bk97.pdf

seven-day-weekend

All these arguments I'm sure are perfectly valid....

...but actually how much time/training/money/filling in notes does it take to give someone a glass of water?

grizzly1911

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

All these arguments I'm sure are perfectly valid....

...but actually how much time/training/money/filling in notes does it take to give someone a glass of water?

Another question is how many could actually take in the water ?

Moby

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

All these arguments I'm sure are perfectly valid....

...but actually how much time/training/money/filling in notes does it take to give someone a glass of water?

Its all about the prevailing culture and values that people are encouraged to follow. The value of 'Public service' now no longer matters and is continually denigrated by the rhetoric of govmt. The govmt encourages you to place a financial value on everything you do...... so accepting that 'handing over a glass of water' is alluding to the values of human compassion.... you can see that those values have been eroded by the prevailing cost driven agenda.