What happened to rewarding hard workers- Autumn Statement

gadgetmind

Think that if you want, if it makes it you happy, and it gives you comfort.

grizzly1911

gadgetmind wrote: »

Think that if you want, if it makes it you happy, and it gives you comfort.

In your field you may well be right.

kabayiri wrote: »

Some people are just smart at convincing others that they are worth more money

In many other fields this is just as likely.

gadgetmind

Employers in the private sector generally don't pay any more than they have to, at least not unless there is a union strangle hold.

So if someone is well paid, it's because you can't get those skills for less.

Someone can try and convince me they are worth more, but it's all down to how they deliver at the end of the day, which is fairly easy for us to measure,

J_i_m

gadgetmind wrote: »

No, not really, as we all have the same mass of grey matter between our ears.

I doubt that very much.

Not only is it so very probably scientifically false but the metaphorical reasoning behind it is also woefully wrong.

Success and status isn't purely down to merit and work ethic as society and civilisation as we know it simply doesn't work like that.

No, other factors including personal capacity, opportunity and social politics also play a part. Indeed the later two in particluar often play a much larger role than so called effort.

grizzly1911

gadgetmind wrote: »

Employers in the private sector generally don't pay any more than they have to, at least not unless there is a union strangle hold.

So if someone is well paid, it's because you can't get those skills for less.

Someone can try and convince me they are worth more, but it's all down to how they deliver at the end of the day, which is fairly easy for us to measure,

As I say in your field you are no doubt right.

That isn't a broad measure of the private sector.

Loughton_Monkey

grizzly1911 wrote: »

As I say in your field you are no doubt right.

That isn't a broad measure of the private sector.

I tend to think that in the Private Sector, salaries tend to migrate to their "correct" level.

OK, in any bunch of 10 people in a company, there will always be one of them who is overpaid by any objective measure. But generally there will be a balancing individual who is underpaid. Over time, competitive industry and commerce does tend to promote and pay on 'ability'.

As a result, you will find that average salaries, at most levels, will be 'similar' across all large competitors (e.g. in Supermarkets). They may differ in a predictable way with, say, Waitrose staff earning more than Aldi Staff....

At 'board and bonus' level, though, I am realistic enough to believe that some form of hanky-panky, backscratching, politics, greed, old school tie, old boy network could well be at play!

In the public sector, though, which works in an entirely different way, I'm not so sure. Some anomolies are very visible [school teachers in public sector earn more than private...]. Others can only really be anecdotal, but I truly believe they are generally overpaid, and will continue to believe this until I see a substantial 'voluntary' defection of public staff and management successfully gaining similar jobs in an equivalent private sector job. Currently, I believe that middle/junior management 'career moves' from public to private sector are as rare as hen's teeth!

Doctors, nurses, firemen, armed forces etc. are too specialist for me to form any opinions. I tend to rely on the fact that 'in round figures' current pay scales tend to attract enough staff, so generally are probably about 'right'.

I often sneakingly think, though, that when Cameron refers to "hard working families", deep down he means "Those in the private sector, and not those overpaid lazy goons in the town hall......"

When Miliband says it, I think he means those public sector workers who are having to pay a % or two extra for their gold plated pensions.

When Balls says it, I don't think he has anything in mind - because he hasn't got much of a mind anyway....

J_i_m

I can tell you that the public sector is as prone to policitcal malarkey as any other. There is a horrendous amount of back-handers, "who you know instead of what you know" and blantant infringements of the equality and diversity policies going on where ever you look.

I would warn against turning the "hard working" debate into a public v private sector feud. You'd simply illustrate a whole load of double standards on both sides.

ThumbRemote

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

In the public sector, though, which works in an entirely different way, I'm not so sure. Some anomolies are very visible [school teachers in public sector earn more than private...].

No they don't. In fact it can be the other way round, private schools offer more money to attract the best teachers.

gadgetmind

J_i_m wrote: »

Success and status isn't purely down to merit and work ethic as society and civilisation as we know it simply doesn't work like that.

I can't really relate to words like "status" and "merit", but when it comes to success, work ethic and using your smarts are by far the most important factors.

No, other factors including personal capacity, opportunity and social politics also play a part. Indeed the later two in particluar often play a much larger role than so called effort.

Opportunities are something you have to create for yourself. If you wait for one to bump into you, you could be waiting for a right long time.

As for "social politics", I'd actually have to know what that was before I could comment!

J_i_m

It seems though that you assume that everyone starts off on equal footing with the same attributes and capacities or as you put it "smarts". And that their success in life is directly related to "how hard they work".

They don't and it isn't.

Everyone is born different with different capabilities and to different environments.

Opportunity isn't directly correlated with effort or "smarts". Some people are born with learning difficulties or differences and thus start off in life at a natural disadvantage. Whilst they are usually as "smart" as the next person and in some cases smarter their opportunities are limited through no fault of their own either through a condition they have no control over or by the general ignorant prejudice of society.

Some people are born into 3rd world poverty where the same facility and opportunity simply isn't available to them no matter how worthy they be.

Furthermore.. people are selfish and society is rife with prejudice and discrimination (as it always has been). There are plenty of examples of where merit or "smarts" are not the deciding factors in someone being offered a job or securing career advancement. Social factors play a huge role whether you want to acknowledge that or not.

People who are successful may indeed work very hard to achieve it, but that doesn't mean that someone who is less successful hasn't worked equally as hard or even harder for their lot.

I would argue that successful people are very prone to forgetting how privileged they really are and this leads to very distorted ideas on value and entitlement.