Public Sector Pay Restraint Ending?

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

You don't read anything I put up here anyway so I'm certainly not going to waste an hour digging up statistics for you to ignore. You go find them - the data is there. It's Friday night and I'm off to the pub with some of my dumb medical colleagues. Might dig this up later - it'll provide us all with a laugh.

Whilst I'm gone, what is my "beat" during working hours? I've got a shirtgage of male dins to attend to. Let me know if you need that English teacher's details. Tootle Pip.

I don't understand why you are annoyed with me. All I have said is what are nursing levels like now vs 1/3/5 years ago that something like that would be a better indicator than some nurses leaving or there being x number of nursing vacancies. Vacancies and retention rates are an indicator of churn not shortage. In the same way empty homes are an indicator of churn not an indicator of excess of homes.

I like nurses I think they do a very important and often difficult job. The problem is we can't have an economy based on my (or your) likes and dislikes of various professions. If it were up to me I'd pay footballers and reality TV stars £2k a month max and nurses £5k a month min. But I know setting wages and price floors and ceilings to my liking would not maximise economic output and wellbeing. So I accept that the market is better at this and let it get on with it.

economic

GreatApe wrote: »

I don't understand why you are annoyed with me. All I have said is what are nursing levels like now vs 1/3/5 years ago that something like that would be a better indicator than some nurses leaving or there being x number of nursing vacancies. Vacancies and retention rates are an indicator of churn not shortage. In the same way empty homes are an indicator of churn not an indicator of excess of homes.

I like nurses I think they do a very important and often difficult job. The problem is we can't have an economy based on my (or your) likes and dislikes of various professions. If it were up to me I'd pay footballers and reality TV stars £2k a month max and nurses £5k a month min. But I know setting wages and price floors and ceilings to my liking would not maximise economic output and wellbeing. So I accept that the market is better at this and let it get on with it.

exactly - supply and demand. what ive said all along.

GreatApe

BobQ wrote: »

Yes when your house is on fire you can decide IF you need a fire brigade or whether to let it burn. Of course if you decide the latter your neighbour can decide if they want a fire brigade. Or you could just ask for quotes.

Then you can decide if you want pay for the private prison, if not enough do we can let the murderers and burglars out. Then you can decide if you want a private policeman to investigate the burglars activities. Maybe choose the weekday service and hope that you do not get a burglar at weekends.

How do you envisage protecting our border?

Youll save a fortune. It seems to me that some people hate the public sector so much that they really will cut off their nose to spite your faces.

Do explain why this idea is not as silly as it sounds.

Prisons could work under private ownership.

Obviously the armed forces police and courts need to be public administered.

Fire services depends on the value. Ideally as electronics and other aspects of buildings get safer we could shrink the fire services. I don't see why that could not be done privately. You wouldn't have each person buy fire insurance. You would just have a rolling contract where the council pays a company to do what the fire brigades currently do. Although I would prefer fire fighting to be state run like the police.

BobQ

GreatApe wrote: »

Prisons could work under private ownership.

They already do.

Obviously the armed forces police and courts need to be public administered.

Why? I agree but the premise that we do not need a public sector would mean that "obviously" is not obvious.

Fire services depends on the value. Ideally as electronics and other aspects of buildings get safer we could shrink the fire services. I don't see why that could not be done privately. You wouldn't have each person buy fire insurance. You would just have a rolling contract where the council pays a company to do what the fire brigades currently do. Although I would prefer fire fighting to be state run like the police.

You think we could not have contracts to provide a police service or an army? A natural extension of private security?

So where does obvious start and finish? As I asked Misdemeaner how would it work? One contract per LA, competed how often? What about houses on the border of a LA? Who would train the fireman? To what standards? Who would deal with the difficult fires in tall buildings? After all these LAs seem incapable of building safe highrises or installing adequate fire prevention mechanisms.

I can imagine that LAs would drive down costs by selecting Low Bid Fire Services, the one with the exclusion clauses that say they will only fight fires under 10m within 5 m of a oublic road etc They do have form for this.

GreatApe

BobQ wrote: »

They already do.

Why? I agree but the premise that we do not need a public sector would mean that "obviously" is not obvious.

You think we could not have contracts to provide a police service or an army? A natural extension of private security?

So where does obvious start and finish? As I asked Misdemeaner how would it work? One contract per LA, competed how often? What about houses on the border of a LA? Who would train the fireman? To what standards? Who would deal with the difficult fires in tall buildings? After all these LAs seem incapable of building safe highrises or installing adequate fire prevention mechanisms.

I can imagine that LAs would drive down costs by selecting Low Bid Fire Services, the one with the exclusion clauses that say they will only fight fires under 10m within 5 m of a oublic road etc They do have form for this.

After all local authorities cannot seem to

I suppose the police and NHS could be private
Personally i would prefer that they were public sectors. With the police my concern would be oversight and corruption and the risk of coups etc it sounds ridiculous even saying it but it has happened in other countries.

Fire I'm in the middle maybe a trial for a few areas if it works well then sure but I would reserve judgment until a few areas did proper trials for 3-5 years

scd3scd4

economic wrote: »

agree. afterall we are all paying bagofwinds salary!

I thought that was your job?


We notice you have dropped the 100k. lol

scd3scd4

economic wrote: »

exactly - supply and demand. what ive said all along.

Yes you keep saying the same rot, we explain it to you..............then you go and drink your Diamond White and forget all again.

Tromking

ilovehouses wrote: »

A policeman is only a person who has been given certain powers by the state. Who really cares whether he/ she is employed directly by the state.

Lol!
Only about 90%+ of the population would care about a privatised police service.
You chaps are deluded.
Privatisation and the resultant benchmarking of our public prisons to that private sector model has been fantastic at saving money, but an unmitigated disaster when it comes delivering a service to the public and the client.

scd3scd4

ilovehouses wrote: »

Maybe but there's the possibility we've been brainwashed by politicians to think not only do they need to tender for services but they should win the tender too. It reduces efficiency and oversight.

A policeman is only a person who has been given certain powers by the state. Who really cares whether he/ she is employed directly by the state.

Of course......there is no need to worry about big business running the Armed Services and Police where profit is the only real motive! What could ever go wrong...................

Windofchange

economic wrote: »

exactly - supply and demand. what ive said all along.

Stopping in for lunch after an epic game of rugby and I see that he still doesn't get it.

There
is
a
shortage
of
40,00
nurses

There
is
a
1%
pay cap

How
does
supply
and
demand
come
into
setting
salary?

Of out again to see the killers in hyde park - that gives you a whole 24 hours to still not get it and post some more nonsense on here. Have at it.