Public sector pay freeze/Inflation calculation

Pennywise

Tromking wrote: »

Not so with the NHS I’m afraid as the people leaving surpassed those joining last year.

So increase the number of training places so more new entrants can come through. Medical universities are turning away perfectly suitable applicants because they're over-subscribed. Also, the increase in part time working due to "family friendliness" - which inevitably requires more training places as you need to train 2 people to become part time doctors whereas you only need to train 1 person to be full time.

More people leaving than joining is inevitable, not just because of career changes, but also because of an ageing workforce due to retirement etc.

Also not helped by stupid tax policies such as the withdrawal of child benefit over £50k and the removal of personal allowance over £100k which encourage people to reduce their working hours - a particular problem with experienced dentists and doctors who go part time to avoid the whopping 62% marginal tax rate on their earnings over £100K!

Pennywise

GreatApe wrote: »

the pay range for salaried GPs £56,525 to £85,298. Sure some doctors earn double that but some earn half as much.....Even if we use £70,000 for the average UK doctor (I can't seem to find an average for UK doctors just lots of pay scales)

That's "salaried" so will usually be the younger ones not yet established in their career. Most GPs working in practice are partners (especially the older/experienced ones), so aren't included as they're not salaried - they take a profit share as they're self employed so their earnings aren't published (private firm accounts have no publication requirement). Average profit shares for full time equivalent partner GPs are more in the range £100-£200k.

westernpromise

Windofchange wrote: »

Except in today's dailymail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5310161/Ruling-doctor-convicted-boy-s-death-struck-off.html

"Senior doctor, 35, who was convicted of manslaughter over blunders that resulted in death of boy, six, can be struck off, High Court rules"

"One of her co-accused nurse Isabel Amaro was also found guilty and was later struck off the nursing register."

That's two from today's news alone. Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument though hey champ?

From your link:

But in June last year the Medical Practitioners Tribunal - MPT - decided not to strike off Dr. Bawa-Garba but to suspend her for 12 months

So the NHS - of course! - instinctively wanted to let the killer quack continue to kill people! Quelle surprise! And it took a court - not the NHS itself, but a court - to make this happen.

westernpromise

Tromking wrote: »

If it’s any solace to those who say that public sector workers can’t be sacked, in my area I think those being ‘let go’ outnumber retirements now. This primarily being down to very low quality applicants not being able to hack the pressures and then going sick. If you think as I do that our Government is engaged in the managed decline of our public services, this is an example of that.

That's good news if so. Although how anyone can be so second-rate as to unable to "hack the pressures" of the public sector just boggles the mind. Of course, it is quite well known that you can go sick for years on the public teat, so probably quite a lot of public sector employees are public sector employees exactly because they can do that.

Nick_C

westernpromise wrote: »

That's good news if so. Although how anyone can be so second-rate as to unable to "hack the pressures" of the public sector just boggles the mind. Of course, it is quite well known that you can go sick for years on the public teat, so probably quite a lot of public sector employees are public sector employees exactly because they can do that.

You really are talking utter codswallop. The public sector used to be bad. Fourty years ago. Perhaps that is when you retired from it. Your views of the public sector do not reflect the reality of what it is like today.

Andy_L

westernpromise wrote: »

From your link:

But in June last year the Medical Practitioners Tribunal - MPT - decided not to strike off Dr. Bawa-Garba but to suspend her for 12 months

So the NHS - of course! - instinctively wanted to let the killer quack continue to kill people! Quelle surprise! And it took a court - not the NHS itself, but a court - to make this happen.

The MPT isn't part of the NHS

Moby

Andy_L wrote: »

The MPT isn't part of the NHS

Accuracy and trolling are not good bedfellows are they.

westernpromise

BobQ wrote: »

It does not matter how many you are wrong as you said that those in the public sector never get dismissed. "approximately no one" is still wrong.

Saying the private sector dismisses more is also irrelevant without statistics. You produce none.

You have not produced a list of public sector job losses.

Nor have you. You just came up with an unsubstantiated assertion that the civil service - which, as bloated as it is, is still only an eighth of the public teat - dismisses 2,000 people a year, as though that's a really big deal.

If - for the sake of argument - we accept that's even true, it's scandalously low (and someone should, but will of course not, be sacked for it). It's half of a per cent. An ONS study in 2005 (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-trends--discontinued-/volume-113--no--6/job-separations-in-the-uk.pdf?format=contrast) found the average across all sectors at that time to be 1.2%. That includes the public sector. In 2005 the public sector was 5.7 million versus 22.5 million in the productive sector. If we take your 0.5% as typical of all the public sector (and if we can't, I don't know why you brought it up), that says that the private sector must be sacking people at something like three times the rate that occurs in the public sector in order for 1.2% to be the average across both.

That is an utter scandal and it suggests in fact that the difference, 1% of the public sector, ought to be sacked every year, and would be in the private sector, but aren't. That's around 6,000 doctors, police officers, schoolteachers, and tax inspectors who are so inept they should be sacked - but keep their job and their pension.

And of course that's cumulative. Every year 1% aren't sacked who should be, so that over a 40-year career "working" in the public sector, it's going to end up with 40% of its staff unfit for their jobs.

At this point, let us remind ourselves of my hideously embarrassing list of public sector calamities. For some reason, the public sector heroes of the thread seem very reluctant to engage with this list. Quelle surprise!

And here is a complete list of every regulator who lost his or her job after 2008 for not regulating the financial industry properly:

And here is a list of every public sector hospital employee who lost his or her job after 1,200 patients were found to have died in squalor at Stafford Hospital, of starvation, thirst, or a disease they didn't have when they went in:

Here's a list of every police officer who faced charges for shooting an electrician 7 times in the face on a Tube train and then lying about it:

Here's a list of every staff member at the Charities Commission who lost their job after Kid's Company collapsed or after Olive Cooke took her own life after received 3,000 mailings for money from charities:

Here's a list of all the public sector employees who lost their jobs at Alder Hey hospital after they harvested 2,000 organs from 850 babies without consent:

And here's a list of all the heart surgeons in Bristol who lost their jobs as a result of increased infant deaths from inept cardiac surgery:

There you go. Go ahead; have at it. Show me how fabulously accountable and at-risk those poor, underpaid public sector staff are. Where's your list of FSA staff sacked for being inept regulators? Here's another example. In 2014 an inept FCA briefing to the press caused the price of insurance company shares to crash. How many FCA staff were sacked after this?
https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/corporate/davis-inquiry-report.pdf

Police officers can shoot people and get away with it, nurses can let people starve to death in hospitals, and regulators can wreck the industries they regulate because getting on for half the staff are incompetent and should be sacked, and they aren't even sorry or ashamed of themselves because it's not in the culture.

westernpromise

Moby wrote: »

abuse of hard working public sector workers

Nobody abuses "hard working public sector workers" because, apart from the armed forces, there really aren't any.

Abusing a hard working public sector worker would be like abusing a unicorn.

westernpromise

Nick_C wrote: »

You really are talking utter codswallop. The public sector used to be bad. Fourty years ago. Perhaps that is when you retired from it. Your views of the public sector do not reflect the reality of what it is like today.

Funnily enough, as well as not sacking people for incompetence, the public sector also tolerates a great deal of phoney sickness: the incidence of absence die to sickness is 2.9% versus 1.7% for productive sector workers (https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/articles/sicknessabsenceinthelabourmarket/2016).

It's also noticeable that throwing sickies is highest in economically-backward regions of the country such as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and lowest in economically productive areas with London lowest of all. Again, quelle surprise.

I'm afraid that it's you who's delusional. You think the public sector's rigorously demanding and dynamic because you've no idea what real work looks like, and your idea of a long day is when you have to stay till five past five. The stats say otherwise. The public sector is cushy, underworked and unaccountable.