+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 71 of 71
General Chat Thread, How much will I be paid for this consultancy work? in General; prepay does cover inhalers, as my ex was on them, along with various other pills, although she did have to ...
  1. #61

    nephilim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Dunstable
    Posts
    11,665
    Thank Post
    1,614
    Thanked 1,866 Times in 1,384 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    400
    prepay does cover inhalers, as my ex was on them, along with various other pills, although she did have to go through hoops to get her repeat prescriptions for them!

  2. #62

    creese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    -28 31' 48.89", +28 25' 37.42" ... if only.
    Posts
    3,194
    Thank Post
    174
    Thanked 371 Times in 301 Posts
    Rep Power
    173
    Quote Originally Posted by nephilim View Post
    prepay does cover inhalers, as my ex was on them, along with various other pills, although she did have to go through hoops to get her repeat prescriptions for them!
    That's disgusting. Do they thing they are used for fun?

  3. #63


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,105
    Thank Post
    256
    Thanked 450 Times in 251 Posts
    Rep Power
    141
    The point of education is it SHOULD be equal for all public schools. If a school is a bad one, sure move someone in who will be a better manager. But no need to pay them silly money.

    A school with a falling grades and poor discipline would benefit more from a head earning 50k and competant, and 20k to put towards improving other aspects, than a 70k head that is probably just as good as the one earning 50k. 20k is 2 more TA's the school could have.

  4. #64

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,160
    Thank Post
    98
    Thanked 318 Times in 260 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by Rydra View Post
    The point of education is it SHOULD be equal for all public schools. If a school is a bad one, sure move someone in who will be a better manager. But no need to pay them silly money.

    A school with a falling grades and poor discipline would benefit more from a head earning 50k and competant, and 20k to put towards improving other aspects, than a 70k head that is probably just as good as the one earning 50k. 20k is 2 more TA's the school could have.
    By that logic, the manager of a small shop (say a Tescos Metro) should earn the same as the manager of a larger one (larger Tescos, say Extra). Jobs are not equal across all schools - a more challenging school needs more incentive to attract people, otherwise they'll all go for the easier jobs. They may not all get those jobs, but the better ones will, so you end up with a lower quality of staff at schools where a higher quality of staff is needed.

    Would you expect a network manager of a school with a small network (say 30 PCs) to earn the same as a network manager at a school with 400 PCs and a few dozen laptops?

  5. Thanks to jamesb from:

    enjay (28th June 2010)

  6. #65
    enjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    4,485
    Thank Post
    282
    Thanked 196 Times in 167 Posts
    Rep Power
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by creese View Post
    Does the prepay card cover these? I got one last year as up until a couple of months ago I was taking up to 12 tablets and about 6 or 7 different drugs.
    It does, but I don't think it is quite cost-effective in her case, as she only takes a few puffs each day. The prepay cards do at least make prescriptions cheaper, but I still don't see why she should pay at all.

  7. #66


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,105
    Thank Post
    256
    Thanked 450 Times in 251 Posts
    Rep Power
    141
    The size and type of the school will always have an affect on things. But the quality of the school, or the staff member should not.

    By the above arguement, if a person applies as a technician with 4 MS certs, 3 Cisco and a doctorate in computing, they should be paid twice as much as the other technician in the school who's straight out of college, and been there 5 years. They both have the same job spec, the same responsibilities, but because the other one is "better" you should pay him more?
    If the new technician takes on MORE responsibilities, or does a higher grade of work, then they are suitable for more pay.

    There should not be a higher or lower quality of staff. We all teach the same things, or manage the same computers one way or another. Our ability to do the job we're paid for shouldn't affect the salary, only how long you hold the job for.

    If things aren't working under your management you shouldn't be paid for it. You shouldn't have people paid more simply because they aren't incompetant at the job they were paid to do.

    The key word here, is shouldn't. We are unfortunately in a place where this shouldn't doesn't hold for all cases.

  8. #67

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,160
    Thank Post
    98
    Thanked 318 Times in 260 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by Rydra View Post
    The size and type of the school will always have an affect on things. But the quality of the school, or the staff member should not.
    The quality of the staff member should definitely have an effect on things. If I'm better at my job, I should get paid more than someone who is poor at the same job.

    By the above arguement, if a person applies as a technician with 4 MS certs, 3 Cisco and a doctorate in computing, they should be paid twice as much as the other technician in the school who's straight out of college, and been there 5 years. They both have the same job spec, the same responsibilities, but because the other one is "better" you should pay him more?
    If one of them is friendly, efficient, hard-working, knowledgeable and interesting in increasing their skills to better their work and the other isn't then yes you should pay them more. Whether that's the one with qualifications or the one with experience is a different matter.

    If the new technician takes on MORE responsibilities, or does a higher grade of work, then they are suitable for more pay.
    Yep. Equally if they are simply better at the job they are doing.

    There should not be a higher or lower quality of staff. We all teach the same things, or manage the same computers one way or another. Our ability to do the job we're paid for shouldn't affect the salary, only how long you hold the job for.
    So what you're saying is, if I work hard, do the job well and work harder still to do it better then I should not be rewarded more substantially than someone who simply breezes by doing the minimum that they have to? Wasn't that the philosophy they tried in the USSR?

    If things aren't working under your management you shouldn't be paid for it. You shouldn't have people paid more simply because they aren't incompetant at the job they were paid to do.
    I agree. Someone should not be rewarded for simply doing their job. If, on the other hand, they do it exceptionally well and go above and beyond what they are expected to do then they should be rewarded for that.

    There are more options than simply incompetent and competent.

    The key word here, is shouldn't. We are unfortunately in a place where this shouldn't doesn't hold for all cases.
    Thank goodness. I, personally, am rather glad that if I work harder I'm rewarded for it by more than a sense of self-satisfaction and well-being. It gives me a reason to try and get better still at the job I'm doing. You're saying that this shouldn't be the case?

  9. #68
    theeldergeek
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by jamesb View Post
    The quality of the staff member should definitely have an effect on things. If I'm better at my job, I should get paid more than someone who is poor at the same job.
    Don't you let a Union man hear you say that or anyone who would care to shout 'equal rights' loud enough for management to hear.

    If you are "better" at your job than the next employee, then the employer needs to either investigate why the other employee may not be performing so well.

    An employer will be expecting 100% from you for the remuneration on offer. If you choose to do the job at 110%, that's your look out. It could result in a promotion and rise in pay scale, but it certainly doesn't mean you should automatically get paid more for doing the same job as someone else only better. If you do get a pay rise/promotion, your job is likely to change to reflect this, e.g. more responsibility, supervisory duties etc.

    The only exception I can immediately think where you will earn more than a colleague doing the same job, is commission based sales, but the base salaries are generally all the same.

    Personal reward is a lot different to gainful reward.

    Look up "Single Status pay award" on Google.
    Last edited by theeldergeek; 28th June 2010 at 06:23 PM.

  10. Thanks to theeldergeek from:

    Rydra (29th June 2010)

  11. #69

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,921
    Thank Post
    1,332
    Thanked 1,773 Times in 1,100 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    593
    Another exception for doing the same job but getting different wages are where it is linked to the same scale, but due to years of service one person is on a higher point that the other. However, the idea is that there is an upper point on the scale and eventually they will be on the same wage.

  12. #70

    SpuffMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,224
    Thank Post
    54
    Thanked 276 Times in 184 Posts
    Rep Power
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook View Post
    Bonuses have been around for a heck of a long time, but one of the things which has happened over the years is that supposedly salaries did not go up as much as some companies or sectors could do it, and instead the difference was made up in 'bonuses' ... frequently with a variety of targets included in there ... some pretty easy to achieve, others not so.
    I suspect problems were exacerbated with the disconnection between shareholders and management. When shareholders actually viewed themselves as the "owners" of a firm, they kept a close eye on whether management were taking "liberties" with company funds. When shares became just a trading chip, there was no one in the structure to say a firm "No" and firms started to be run for the sole benefit of upper management - not a viable long term situation imho

  13. #71

    nephilim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Dunstable
    Posts
    11,665
    Thank Post
    1,614
    Thanked 1,866 Times in 1,384 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    400
    here here spuffmonkey. When shareholders were limited to a handful of people, bonuses were done for the right reason, excellent performance, above and beyond what was expected, now they are handed out just for doing the job right (or nearly right)

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Similar Threads

  1. network infastructure consultancy
    By projector1 in forum Recommended Suppliers
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 27th November 2009, 09:10 AM
  2. Consultancy / Tech Support
    By apoth0r in forum East Midlands Broadband Consortium (EMBC)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 3rd September 2009, 09:08 PM
  3. Help me set up new network - Paid work!
    By reggiep in forum General Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10th March 2009, 09:33 AM
  4. Consultancy - Appropriate Fee?
    By LeonieCol in forum General Chat
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 24th October 2008, 08:10 AM
  5. Education ICT Consultancy
    By AaronHudson in forum Educational IT Jobs
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 4th September 2008, 11:38 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •