Public Sector Pay Restraint Ending?

Thrugelmir

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

People who claim that we shouldn't get a pay rise because of the poor private sector want a race to the bottom, the government should be a beacon of excellence instead they claim that people deserve a living wage but pay a large proportion of their workforce much less.

The poor private sector generates the tax revenue to pay public sector wages. The public sector has to look itself as well. Not simply demand.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The poor private sector generates the tax revenue to pay public sector wages. The public sector has to look itself as well. Not simply demand.

What an insight. The public sector protects children from abuse, saves lives, sorts out disputes, educates our children, houses our poor. They deserve a pay rise the country can afford it.

Tromking

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

What an insight. The public sector protects children from abuse, saves lives, sorts out disputes, educates our children, houses our poor. They deserve a pay rise the country can afford it.

Well said.
Thrugelmir has a penchant for trite stand alone sentences about the public service, but never engages in proper discussion about the issues.
He/she is probably arguing from a position of ignorance, hence the reluctance to engage.

fatbeetle

Tromking wrote: »

Well said.
Thrugelmir has a penchant for trite stand alone sentences about the public service, but never engages in proper discussion about the issues.
He/she is probably arguing from a position of ignorance, hence the reluctance to engage.

I assume the hysterical irony of your post eludes you.

Tromking

fatbeetle wrote: »

I assume the hysterical irony of your post eludes you.

You can assume what you like.
Any ideas on how we solve the remuneration/staff retention conundrum re. our frontline public services in these straightened times?
Just announced I see that in the first three months of this year the NHS had 86K vacancies in admin and clinical roles, including 25K nursing vacancies.
As former Tory minister Stephen Dorrell said a couple of weeks back, NHS delivery is not sustainable with our current approach.
I ask again, any ideas?

kabayiri

Tromking wrote: »

Well said.
Thrugelmir has a penchant for trite stand alone sentences about the public service, but never engages in proper discussion about the issues.
He/she is probably arguing from a position of ignorance, hence the reluctance to engage.

I don't recall hearing major concern from the PS workers about tens of thousands of IT jobs being lost from the banking sector through the 90s and beyond.

So this idea of race to the bottom is just an invention, to feel better when you demand money from others.

When we are borrowing £60 BILLION a year more, every call for additional expenditure must be justified. That's not a morality call...it's just basic sustainability backed by maths.

Tromking

kabayiri wrote: »

I don't recall hearing major concern from the PS workers about tens of thousands of IT jobs being lost from the banking sector through the 90s and beyond.

So this idea of race to the bottom is just an invention, to feel better when you demand money from others.

When we are borrowing £60 BILLION a year more, every call for additional expenditure must be justified. That's not a morality call...it's just basic sustainability backed by maths.

What about the basic sustainability of providing healthcare to a burgeoning UK population?
You can talk about IT jobs, Government however has a responsibility to balance reducing the deficit and at the same keeping public services performing to a decent first world level. Many of them aren't. What's your solution, other than talking about job losses in the 90's when this about staff retention and 86K vacancies in the NHS alone.

kabayiri

Tromking wrote: »

What about the basic sustainability of providing healthcare to a burgeoning UK population?
You can talk about IT jobs, Government however has a responsibility to balance reducing the deficit and at the same keeping public services performing to a decent first world level. Many of them aren't. What's your solution, other than talking about job losses in the 90's when this about staff retention and 86K vacancies in the NHS alone.

You wouldn't like my solution because it involves part privatising the NHS, and at the same time scaling back what it covers.

Let's not pretend the current NHS is sustainable, especially not when we have the growing population numbers, and the obvious emerging demands.

We don't deserve first world level services if we don't improve our earning power. That must mean productivity before volume cheap labour.

Tromking

kabayiri wrote: »

You wouldn't like my solution because it involves part privatising the NHS, and at the same time scaling back what it covers.

Let's not pretend the current NHS is sustainable, especially not when we have the growing population numbers, and the obvious emerging demands.

We don't deserve first world level services if we don't improve our earning power. That must mean productivity before volume cheap labour.

So within the remit of what would be politically acceptable to the vast majority of the population and every single major political party in the UK, you offer no solution.
Nice one.

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

He/she is probably arguing from a position of ignorance, hence the reluctance to engage.

I've no time for ignorant people. Not enough hours in the day to be concerned with them. :santa2: