+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 108
General Chat Thread, Public sector pay rises capped at 1% in General; Originally Posted by sonofsanta It is getting increasingly depressing that every time George Osborne opens his mouth it's to downgrade ...
  1. #61

    SYSMAN_MK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    4,005
    Thank Post
    489
    Thanked 1,340 Times in 728 Posts
    Rep Power
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by sonofsanta View Post
    It is getting increasingly depressing that every time George Osborne opens his mouth it's to downgrade the economic outlook. And yet still he persists with the cut-backs line of thinking. And we take yet another real-terms pay-cut on whatever fronts he can manage. Sigh.

    On a related note, I did see Osborne described as "a ghost trapped inside a sausage" the other day, which is a brilliant image, and eerily accurate.

  2. 4 Thanks to SYSMAN_MK:

    LosOjos (30th November 2011), PICNIC (1st December 2011), sonofsanta (30th November 2011), stevenlong1985 (30th November 2011)

  3. #62
    HaleStorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Sheffield
    Posts
    1,032
    Thank Post
    89
    Thanked 164 Times in 144 Posts
    Rep Power
    93
    Damn you scumbag hat infecting the countrys economy moron

  4. #63

    elsiegee40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    11,066
    Thank Post
    1,792
    Thanked 2,184 Times in 1,617 Posts
    Rep Power
    773
    Quote Originally Posted by Flatpackhamster View Post
    Don't public sector workers get more money each year for long service?
    Up to a point.

    I feel sorry for public sector workers up to a point; they do have to realise that in the ouutside world nobody else is getting pay rises either.

    I went 2 years in my current role without a pay rise and had 1.5% last year. There is no pay rise at my independent school school this year. There won't be one as long the state sector isn't giving them. My husband hasn't had a pay rise in 4 years, despite being shipped overseas for lengthy periods of time. Get another job, I hear you say... it's not for want of trying. The one he has is paying our mortgage... he's putting up with it as most of us are. For the time being we have to get on with it.

    The bankers may have caused it, but punishing the bankers is only part of the way out of it. Now there is a world-wide mess, we all have to live with the consequences. There isn't a choice, unfortunately.

  5. Thanks to elsiegee40 from:

    Flatpackhamster (1st December 2011)

  6. #64

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    631
    Thank Post
    52
    Thanked 106 Times in 76 Posts
    Rep Power
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by j17sparky View Post
    Apart from the first couple of years building up the scale, no. Just another myth that people like to shout about when talking about how good the public sector get it.
    First 5 years from what I can see. Take teachers - starting salary £20,000, after 5 years, £29,000. That's a 50% rise in income for 'meeting targets'.

    Opps, didn't see that. Of course its a pay rise, but as said it is a reflection on experience, just like most other jobs. And as said, it only happens for a couple of years then you get a nice 4-6% reduction from then on.
    I can't think of any jobs I've ever done in the private sector with a 50% rise over 5 years in exactly the same job. Perhaps I was just unlucky?

    The public sector get it very good indeed. Higher salaries than the private sector on average, longer holidays on average, far more days off sick, lots more training and that big fat pension which, despite the modest trimming, remains a big fat pension which private sector workers can only dream of. It's about time that the over-indulged public sector had a salary reduction.

  7. #65


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,007
    Thank Post
    267
    Thanked 796 Times in 603 Posts
    Rep Power
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by elsiegee40 View Post
    Up to a point.

    I feel sorry for public sector workers up to a point; they do have to realise that in the ouutside world nobody else is getting pay rises either.
    What - no one? Quote from some union bod today was that in the last year the top 1% have increased their earnings by 30%. My experience of the private sector was that when a company said that the maximum pay rise might be (say) 3.4% - that only applied to the ... err ... 'plebs', after all, management had the really difficult job of keeping pay low (or lining their own pockets from the efforts of those actually doing the work).,
    The bankers may have caused it, but punishing the bankers is only part of the way out of it. Now there is a world-wide mess, we all have to live with the consequences. There isn't a choice, unfortunately.
    I agree and personally I believe we have to undergo some austerity measures and I'm personally OK with a pay freeze and then limited rises for the next 5 years. But I'm in a more fortunate position than many.

    However, I do resent the political situation we are in. I don't recall at the last election any party setting out their stall with a detailed package of the measures they would take. We do need to pay off our deficit - that much seems obvious, but there are choices we were not given; should we attempt to pay it off in 4 years, 8 years, 12 years? Where should the axe fall in public spending - health, education, military? I don't recall that the politicians gave us a choice in those things. All the parties indulged in a conspiracy of silence about the single biggest issue facing the country. So it seems the only way to express any preference is to take industrial action.

    And then there is the fairness. What I see is the politicians playing a divide and rule game. Have the public and private sector workers bitch and scratch at each other. Your pension is better than mine. Your pay and conditions are better etc. Hey look - they just gave the sponging unemployed 5% (good ploy to distract from the 30% increase the 1% have had, 'eh?, let's get people really upset over 5% of virtually naff all).

    Both public and private sector pensions are pretty rubbish unless you are a very high earner. Pay and conditions in both sectors can be appalling. There is maybe 5 billion to be clawed back in benefit fraud - about the amount the HM revenue wrote off when the head of that dept (an unelected official) decided to let Vodophone off their clever tax 'avoidance' schemes. Meanwhile tax avoidance by the rich (those pesky 1%ers again) costs the exchequer an estimated £35 billion! Senior management in the banks and private companies are raking in huge amounts in bonus payments, share options AND pay rises - often for failure. Where is the fairness? Where is the "we are all in this together"?

    In response to a similar rant, someone recently asked what I'd like to see in politicians. I think these days it's probably more lead than mere powder burns.

  8. Thanks to pcstru from:

    j17sparky (1st December 2011)

  9. #66

    elsiegee40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    11,066
    Thank Post
    1,792
    Thanked 2,184 Times in 1,617 Posts
    Rep Power
    773
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    What - no one? Quote from some union bod today was that in the last year the top 1% have increased their earnings by 30%. My experience of the private sector was that when a company said that the maximum pay rise might be (say) 3.4% - that only applied to the ... err ... 'plebs', after all, management had the really difficult job of keeping pay low (or lining their own pockets from the efforts of those actually doing the work).,
    Maybe my post was badly worded, but even among the better paid... even in the financial sector... pay rises are not common. My husband and his employer, a financial services big name, being a case in point for the last 4 years. Not looking for symmpathy; just stating facts.

  10. #67


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    However, I do resent the political situation we are in. I don't recall at the last election any party setting out their stall with a detailed package of the measures they would take. We do need to pay off our deficit - that much seems obvious, but there are choices we were not given; should we attempt to pay it off in 4 years, 8 years, 12 years? Where should the axe fall in public spending - health, education, military? I don't recall that the politicians gave us a choice in those things. All the parties indulged in a conspiracy of silence about the single biggest issue facing the country. So it seems the only way to express any preference is to take industrial action.
    Thats not strictly true; Labour said they would have continued borrowing so that the economy could grow following the recession, and the deficit would be paid off from the increased revenue gained from the growth. The conservatives opted to massively slash all budgets across the board in the hope that would pay off the deficit, they didn't realise (or care) that this would cause a slow in growth, increase in unemployment and a massive reduction in money available to pay off the deficit - as a result the public deficit is now higher than ever. To counter this the conservatives have opted to inves in infrastructure projects to increase growth, partly paid for from uk pensions funds.

  11. #68

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    410
    Thank Post
    73
    Thanked 75 Times in 58 Posts
    Rep Power
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by Martin View Post
    From Union barons behind strike that will cripple Britain enjoy gold-plated pensions

    Christine Blower, NUT - £103,003 salary
    Christine Keates, NASUWT - £98,531 salary
    Jonathan Baume, First Division Association - £92,145 salary
    Mark Serwotka, PCS - £88,675 salary
    Bob Crow, RMT general secretary - £84,006 salary
    Paul Kenny, GMB - £89,000 salary

    ...and that isn't even counting their MASSIVE (union provided) pension funds!!!

    Austerity rules?

    mb
    What a shame that the neg-reppers have to hide anonymously rather than discuss or disagree with the figures that i posted

    At least i gave a source (whether you like the paper or not) and didn't just pluck unqualified figures out of the air such as "some directors have had a 30% (or even 50%) pay rise", or "some people earn millions of pounds a year".

    FWIW, did anyone watch "Your Money and How They Spend It" tonight on BBC2?

    It appears that the top ONE PERCENT of earners contribute a massive 27% to the total tax take of the country, so whilst it might be trendy to slag them off - it would create a HUGE hole in the budget should they decide to leave for more favourable conditions!!!

    mb

  12. #69


    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,411
    Thank Post
    184
    Thanked 356 Times in 285 Posts
    Rep Power
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Flatpackhamster View Post
    First 5 years from what I can see. Take teachers - starting salary £20,000, after 5 years, £29,000. That's a 50% rise in income for 'meeting targets'.
    Since when did public sector = teachers? I work in the public sector, same as most of us on here, but very few of us are teachers and very few of us will have had a 50% pay increase after 5 years.

    Besides you are talking about NQTs vs experienced teachers. The same can be said about an apprentice/junior private sector worker moving up to the full [paid] role, which is also around a 50% (or even more) increase in wages.


    Higher salaries than the private sector on average,
    In which job? Not in IT, which incidentally this forum is for

    longer holidays on average,
    True, but a lot of public sector workers are forced to only take them during school holidays which is expensive.

    far more days off sick,
    What's that got to do with it? Besides I think you'll find that most councils are far more strict on absence than they were.

    lots more training
    If you browse this forum you will find that isn't true for a lot of us here.

    that big fat pension
    It's true it is good compared to most private but its part of the deal for low wages and relatively few rungs on the career ladder, remember management, doctors and teachers make up a pretty small percentage of the workforce.

    It's about time that the over-indulged public sector had a salary reduction.
    Have a look in your jobs paper, see what the actual wages are, I think you will be surprised. A good search term might be cleaner, or dinner nanny, lollypop lady perhaps, care worker... as I said public sector worker does not equal teacher.


    Again more misinformation/myths/propaganda which seems to be fooling so many people.
    Last edited by j17sparky; 1st December 2011 at 12:45 AM.

  13. 3 Thanks to j17sparky:

    10101010 (2nd December 2011), cheredenine (1st December 2011), SteveBentley (1st December 2011)

  14. #70

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    631
    Thank Post
    52
    Thanked 106 Times in 76 Posts
    Rep Power
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by j17sparky View Post
    Since when did public sector = teachers? I work in the public sector, same as most of us on here, but very few of us are teachers and very few of us will have had a 50% pay increase after 5 years.

    Besides you are talking about NQTs vs experienced teachers. The same can be said about an apprentice/junior private sector worker moving up to the full [paid] role, which is also around a 50% (or even more) increase in wages.
    It was an example. And no, I am talking about teachers. The job requirements for a teacher who's just started are identical to an experienced teacher. There is no difference in them apart from the amount of time they've been in the job.

    In which job? Not in IT, which incidentally this forum is for
    Overall. Even the Guardian is forced, through gritted teeth, to admit that the public sector does better, although it does its best to couch it in union BS. (Public-private pay gap widest in 10 years | Business | The Guardian)

    True, but a lot of public sector workers are forced to only take them during school holidays which is expensive.
    "My longer holidays are expensive to take!" Cry me a river. You don't have to go away.

    What's that got to do with it? Besides I think you'll find that most councils are far more strict on absence than they were.
    It means that there's chronic skivitis in the public sector. Come on, the public sector culture of long-term sick leave is indefensible.

    If you browse this forum you will find that isn't true for a lot of us here.

    It's true it is good compared to most private but its part of the deal for low wages and relatively few rungs on the career ladder, remember management, doctors and teachers make up a pretty small percentage of the workforce.
    I do wonder just how many people who claim that it's all gravy in the private sector have actually worked there. You don't have low wages! Your access to training is far better too, even if it's not the training you want.


    Have a look in your jobs paper, see what the actual wages are, I think you will be surprised. A good search term might be cleaner, or dinner nanny, lollypop lady perhaps, care worker... as I said public sector worker does not equal teacher.

    Again more misinformation/myths/propaganda which seems to be fooling so many people.
    Where's the propaganda? I've not made up anything.

  15. #71

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,683
    Thank Post
    516
    Thanked 2,452 Times in 1,898 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    832
    Quote Originally Posted by Flatpackhamster View Post
    First 5 years from what I can see. Take teachers - starting salary £20,000, after 5 years, £29,000. That's a 50% rise in income for 'meeting targets'.
    You've chosen a single subset of the public sector there. They are not the norm. Each scale has 4 grade points on it. If you start on the bottom grade point, you can go up 3 more points. That's it. Once you hit that top grade point, you're there for good unless you take on more responsibilities.

    I can't think of any jobs I've ever done in the private sector with a 50% rise over 5 years in exactly the same job. Perhaps I was just unlucky?
    That is true, but you're choosing a single profession out of hundreds of different public sector.

    The public sector get it very good indeed. Higher salaries than the private sector on average, longer holidays on average, far more days off sick, lots more training and that big fat pension which, despite the modest trimming, remains a big fat pension which private sector workers can only dream of. It's about time that the over-indulged public sector had a salary reduction.
    Again, stop painting 'the public sector' with the same brush. You're lumping in cleaners with police, school TAs with head teachers etc... It'd be like giving an average salary for cleaners worldwide and saying how good ours have got it compared to those in Thailand.

    The 'average wage' figure has been repeatedly shown to be a manipulation of statistics. If you compare the mean wage with the median and mode wages from now and from, say, 20 years ago, you'd see that they have increased, meaning that there are a lot less lower paid workers in direct employment in the public sector due to outsourcing. Most of the lowest paid jobs are now private, contracted in to do it instead of being directly ran by the public sector.

    Holidays? Maybe, but I'd need some evidence of that.

    Sick days? Seems an odd one to bring up. How does that have any relevance?

    Lots more training - now there's a laugh and a half! Not a chance.

    Big fat pension - stop reading the daily mail so much. The pension is good, yes, but it isn't 'big' or 'fat'. It is a livable wage for retirement. The vast majority of public sector workers don't end up with huge amounts of money in their pensions. It isn't the public sector's fault that private industry destroyed their own pension schemes and feel that everyone else should be dragged down to their level!

    I think its about time you do some actual research before making ridiculous claims that the public sector had a salary reduction.

  16. Thanks to localzuk from:

    10101010 (2nd December 2011)

  17. #72

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,683
    Thank Post
    516
    Thanked 2,452 Times in 1,898 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    832
    Quote Originally Posted by Flatpackhamster View Post
    It was an example. And no, I am talking about teachers. The job requirements for a teacher who's just started are identical to an experienced teacher. There is no difference in them apart from the amount of time they've been in the job.
    No, this is wrong. An NQT has not built up a library of work. They've not gained real-term experience doing the job. If you've ever worked with NQTs, they basically spend their first few years locked in their classrooms, doing massive amounts more work than the more experienced teachers - as those have already set up that foundation to work from.

    Overall. Even the Guardian is forced, through gritted teeth, to admit that the public sector does better, although it does its best to couch it in union BS. (Public-private pay gap widest in 10 years | Business | The Guardian)
    And even the guardian is a newspaper with an inability to do their work properly...

    "My longer holidays are expensive to take!" Cry me a river. You don't have to go away.
    Ok, first point - if you're referring to longer holidays and looking at education, don't think about teachers, think about everyone else. If someone in a school doesn't work holidays, that means they are pro-rata and don't get paid for those holidays. They're on the standard 5 weeks holiday pay like everyone else (pro-rata too). So, sure they get more time off, but unpaid time off is not a good thing.

    If you're referring to the rest of the public sector, I'd like some evidence that holidays are longer. And I don't mean a few days here and there, I mean any significant differences.

    It means that there's chronic skivitis in the public sector. Come on, the public sector culture of long-term sick leave is indefensible.
    Again... evidence. Stop spewing nonsense and back up your pretty ridiculous claims.

    I do wonder just how many people who claim that it's all gravy in the private sector have actually worked there. You don't have low wages! Your access to training is far better too, even if it's not the training you want.
    If I look on a personal level, sure, my access to training in this school is excellent. My last place? No. For the vast majority of school IT staff? No. Just look around these forums, as was said. Our wages ARE low compared to the private sector. System Administrator jobs go for an easy £30k+ if you look at most job sites. There are network managers on here earning less than £20k whilst looking after 600+ users, 200+ computers etc, whilst having to strategic planning, etc... That is low pay.

    Where's the propaganda? I've not made up anything.
    Nearly everything you've said is propaganda, taken directly from the likes of the Daily Mail. Evidence would be great for most of it.

  18. #73

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,093
    Thank Post
    592
    Thanked 1,953 Times in 1,351 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    814
    Quote Originally Posted by Flatpackhamster View Post
    far more days off sick
    When you're working in education, this make sense.

    The students bring in every disease known to man, which you're going to get. You need more sick days because you're going to get sick more.

  19. #74

    broc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,046
    Thank Post
    104
    Thanked 401 Times in 265 Posts
    Rep Power
    150
    One of the reasons the private sector vs public sector pay gap has widened in recent years is because a large number of low paid public sector workers have 'transferred' to the private sector as a result of PFI & TUPE arrangements, lowering the average private sector wage at the same time as raising the average public sector wage.

  20. #75


    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,411
    Thank Post
    184
    Thanked 356 Times in 285 Posts
    Rep Power
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Flatpackhamster View Post
    Overall. Even the Guardian is forced, through gritted teeth, to admit that the public sector does better, although it does its best to couch it in union BS. (Public-private pay gap widest in 10 years | Business | The Guardian)

    You even manage to change the message of your source to suit your argument.

    ONS statistician Jamie Jenkins said the public sector employs more older workers, and has more highly skilled jobs. Nearly 40% of those working in the public sector have a degree or higher education qualification compared with less than a quarter in the private sector. If those employees are compared, public sector staff earned 5.7% less than those in the private sector.
    So degree level people don't deserve to earn more than unskilled workers? Yet they actually earn less than those of equal level in the private sector. Comparing like for like actually "proves" you are incorrect [by your own source]

    Another factor that has skewed pay in favour of the public sector has been the outsourcing to the private sector over the last decade of the lowest paid jobs, such as hospital cleaning staff and school caterers.
    So a big reason why public does better overall is because they got rid of low paid job which the private sector took on.

    The ONS figures reveal that the gap between the lowest and highest earners is greater in the private sector, with the top 5% paid 5.6 times more than the bottom 5%, compared with 4.6 times in the public sector.
    So in other words the public sector has a much fairer system with fewer low paid and fewer high paid workers.



    Quote Originally Posted by Flatpackhamster View Post
    I do wonder just how many people who claim that it's all gravy in the private sector have actually worked there. You don't have low wages! Your access to training is far better too, even if it's not the training you want.
    Had at least 20 jobs in the private sector thanks, this is my first job in the public sector. It is also my first job where I have been expected to work overtime for free or at single time, the first to take holidays at only certain times, the first where cost of living rises have been so few and far between, the first where there is only 1 or 2 rungs on the ladder...

    My first job was a paper boy, and then at McDs. We are allowed to use them aren't we as they are private sector jobs.
    Last edited by j17sparky; 1st December 2011 at 09:31 AM.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Public sector pay gap increases
    By TechMonkey in forum General Chat
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10th May 2011, 03:49 PM
  2. Pay Rise
    By Samson in forum General Chat
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 22nd June 2007, 02:04 PM
  3. Public Windows Vista Newsgroups Online at Microsoft
    By tosca925 in forum Windows Vista
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 2nd February 2006, 07:38 AM
  4. Deal on public sector pensions
    By russdev in forum General Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 18th October 2005, 09:18 PM

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
  •