[Closed] Over 9000 Public Sector workers earn more than the Prime Minister!!!!

None in the armed forces?

None in the armed forces?

Yep:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11333472

communism
its the only answer

It is indeed. Sadly the real life equation doesn't balance in the way that the theory does...

Arguably the PM and MP's dont earn enough! Look at just about any other country, and politicians pay is multiples of what it is over here.

Should the CEO (or whatever) of the NHS earn less than his equivalent in BUPA? A doctor in BUPA probably stands a good chance of out earning the PM!

Over 9000 Public Sector workers earn more than the Prime Minister

Not for much longer...! Wouldn't want to be in some do-nothing job in the public sector right now... they know who they are, and if they don't they soon will.

The thing this really misses though is the salaries of those in the private sector whose business (almost) purely comprises of public sector contracts.

Bet there's a whole lot more than 9000 there.

Instead of the usual whining, what's your solution Spongefail?

I'm not sure the PM's wage is a useful benchmark. It means s/he doesn't get paid enough, rather than others too much. The CEO of a council is an awful lot of responsibility not to mention working with big budgets, and they're targets for the media if anything goes wrong.

How many people does the leader of L'pool city council have working for them? And how much would a equivalent level private sector boss with the same number of employees earn?

If you paid less and got lower quality candidates because all the higher quality were attracted to the private sector then you'd probably moan about the quality of the job they were doing as well.

As for MP's - keep the salary low so they do it as a public service not for financial gain.

If you really want to whinge about other people earning more than you i'd recommend complaining about all the bankers bonuses paid to the staff working for banks that were bailed out by the public purse.

PM does get a couple of free houses, a limo, police guard "free" holidays, guarantee of earning loads after they're ousted in book deals, after dinner speaking etc. Not saying its right, just saying the money on the wage slip is half what the prime minister actual "gets".

The CEO of a council is an awful lot of responsibility not to mention working with big budgets, and they're targets for the media if anything goes wrong.

Pretty much like the PM's job I guess 😉

But I do agree, the PM's wage is not a useful benchmark

ski - Member
The CEO of a council is an awful lot of responsibility not to mention working with big budgets, and they're targets for the media if anything goes wrong.
Pretty much like the PM's job I guess

But I do agree, the PM's wage is not a useful benchmark

Indeed, the PM's wage should be proportionally higher. That said, i don't think you can put a monetary value on the role of a PM, particularly given the money they earn once they leave office.

So, the theory is pretty simple:

Chief Exec of council has several thousand employees, and a budget of at least several hundred million. It is not an elected post, it is an official one. In the private sector, there are a huge number of people earning way more than most chief execs.

The Prime Minister is an elected role. Money should not be the primary motivating force for anyone seeking elected office, though of copurse this was damaged through the expenses scandals. Indeed, MPs averaged a "salary" of c£250k pa when hammering the expenses pot.

there are lots of overpaid people in the public sector, justa s there are in the private sector. I suspect that fewer [b]roles[/b] are overpaid.

the BBC ought to consider comparing apples with apples. Useless twunts.

arguably mp's and pm's are jobs in the service of the public, and not careers- financial reward should not be the criteria for wanting the job.
It seems that ex-pm's earnings far outstrip what they made in service anyway, at least nowadays. That flat the the Blairs bought must seem like a distant memory now.

Actual career public service jobs are a different kettle of fish- they're permanent job roles, and have to compete with the private sector for suitable candidates.

Over 9000 Public Sector workers earn more than the Prime Minister!!!! and now theyre geting their contracts realigned to a realistic wage, or getting the redundancy envelope.

EASY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Prime Minister earns £142,500, OBVIOUSLY TO MUCH TO SCREW THE COUNTRY INTO RECESSION.

The solution is bloody simple!

Undo years of Labour profligacy.

Cut their pay!

Cut their pay? So that the NHS is outbid for decent managers by private companies? We all agree the NHS is not as well managed as it could be. Surely having the best possible managers in place will help and you need to pay them highly to attract the talent?

This is the argument used for bankers with their obscene salaries that are in the millions.

Well clearly working in the public sector is such a barrel of laughs and only set to become even more fun that these positions should be voluntary.

Or, why don't we just use the unemployed to fill these positions whilst they look for more permanent roles?

I heard MPs in scandanavia earn around £30k

Oh - and the NHS worker that earn that much -many of them will be doctors - medical consultants can earn that much. Basic salary plus merit bonuses. Dunno if it includes GPs - they earn around that much but have to pay for the salaries of other staff and to buy their premises out of their salaries

[i]Dunno if it includes GPs - they earn around that much but have to pay for the salaries of other staff and to buy their premises out of their salaries [/i]

A GP surgery is a business, and GP's act like any other business - paying Directors salary/expenses/dividends etc. They don't buy their premises out of 'salary', but from the businesses 'income'.

Yes spongebob lets not get cross as those lovable roques in the banking sector who get higher bonuses that that for sh1tting on us all from agreat height.

Cut their pay!

Panorama has turned into the Moving Mail.

Fact is you have to pay high quality people to do high quality jobs.

Yes, the PM earns a paltry £142k, but that is not the motivating factor for a PM (DC could have earned many times that in plenty of other industries, if he ever ran out of trust fund). History has shown that Ex PMs only really hit pay dirt when they leave the job and start consulting for major international firms (blair does a couple of million a year for 1 day a month consulting, plus £200k an hour for talks)

Maybe we should get all public sector workers to work for free, for the greater good - lets see the quality of people who turn up for the job then.

Panorama shmanorama

How many people does the leader of L'pool city council have working for them? And how much would a equivalent level private sector boss with the same number of employees earn?

If you paid less and got lower quality candidates because all the higher quality were attracted to the private sector then you'd probably moan about the quality of the job they were doing as well.

This is the argument that the public sector have been using for years however I don't really think it stacks up. For a start do the council leaders work harder becuase of the money - no. I believe studies have shown (just repeating this from something I've read/heard) that people don't generally work harder for more money. As for these very able council leaders getting jobs in the private sector maybe they should give it a go and try and get one.

This country has really got to reassess how much senior staff earn both in the private (which not much can be done about by the legislature) and public sectors are worth - how much do Doctors get paid for instance - I believe they've done very well under New Labour and have less responsibilities (home visits etc), my cousin's wife is the head of a hematology department in a large regional hospital in Italy and gets paid about €55000, GP's in this country can earn upwards of £100k. I only found this out after querying why the NHS is employing German doctors.

I've always been a bit of proselytizer for the NHS but [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00tq7x2/Iconoclasts_Series_3_Episode_3/ ]this really made me think - R4 Iconoclasts Edward Stourton chairs a live series in which guests set out their strong views on a subject. Journalist James Bartholomew argues that the NHS should be abolished.[/url]

Spongebrain in anti public sector rant shocker - again
if it yanks your chain so much why not actually do something about it instead of posting the same drivel on here week in and week out - because, and this is maybe a bit difficult a concept to grasp, this is a mountain bike forum that will change fek all in the real world.
Then again like most Daily Mail readers, a grip on reality isn't really your strong point, is it?

Panorma's intorduced by Jeremy Vine, isn't it? I bet he's paid more than the PM too.

jimbobrighton - Member

(DC could have earned many times that in plenty of other industries, if he ever ran out of trust fund).

You sure that he's got a trust fund? I just had a look and can't find any mention of it.

strange, as all those who would normally be telling us that top wages in the private sector are too high, appear to have turned volte face and are now saying that public sector wages are too low - and should be equivalent to private sector ones.

Plus, its against the Elfinesco - why do they need more money?

It's a much fairer system, and people can still have decent lifestyles. What's wrong with that?

http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/a-modern-day-robin-hood/page/2#post-1806701

Should the CEO (or whatever) of the NHS earn less than his equivalent in BUPA? A doctor in BUPA probably stands a good chance of out earning the PM!

dunno about Bupa but our former CEO retired last December with a $73,000,000 retirement bonus 😆

For a start do the council leaders work harder becuase of the money - no. I believe studies have shown (just repeating this from something I've read/heard) that people don't generally work harder for more money.

If this really was the case why on earth do banks/business hand out the bonuses they do ? A quick pat on the back for each employee and an email from the chairman telling them what a wonderful service they are providing for the public would be much cheaper, no ?

For a start do the council leaders work harder becuase of the money - no.

Not really the point is it... Would they work in the public sector at all if the pay wasn't equivalent to the private sector? No!

You've misinterpreted some studies, or misused the studies as evidence in this context. Such theorist on motivation as McGregor are readily disputed even when applied in the correct context.

Interesting

The Economic Elite have escalated their attack on U.S. workers over the past few years; however, this attack began to build intensity in the 1970s. In 1970, CEOs made $25 for every $1 the average worker made. Due to technological advancements, production and profit levels exploded from 1970 - 2000. With the lion's share of increased profits going to the CEO's, this pay ratio dramatically rose to $90 for CEOs to $1 for the average worker.

As ridiculous as that seems, an in-depth study in 2004 on the explosion of CEO pay revealed that, including stock options and other benefits, CEO pay is more accurately $500 to $1.

Due to this, the United States already had the highest inequality of wealth in the industrialized world prior to the financial crisis. Since the crisis, which has hit the average worker much harder than CEOs, the gap between the top one percent and the remaining 99% of the US population has grown to a record high. The economic top one percent of the population now owns over 70% of all financial assets, an all time record.

http://www.alternet.org/economy/145705/the_richest_1%25_have_captured_america%27s_wealth_--_what%27s_it_going_to_take_to_get_it_back

But hey, I'm sure they deserve it 😉

so what is the solution all public servants on minimum wage

or cap public salaries at 100k?

the GP thing is a bit misleading as there is a big shortage of them and im happy for my gp to earn more than my mp!

Would they work in the public sector at all if the pay wasn't equivalent to the private sector?

To be fair, In my experience there's a significant proportion who would, since there's no way on this planet that they'd ever get employment in the private sector!

additionally, given the NHS, police, fire service and several other sectors are state owned monopolies, I would question whether there would be an alternative open to them to pursue their chosen career in the private sector.

Are you also the sort of person who complains about the poor state of public services?

Some of these 'high' paying jobs are horrific, and those taking big pay cuts to do public sector jobs for 'philanthropic' reasons simply can't win.

You could get Richard Branson to Liverpool City Council and still it wouldn't improve much!

I would have to take a pretty sizeable pay cut to do the same job with a lot more stress in the Public Sector. No thanks.

for me the answer is a legal obligation for ratios of total remuneration between the highest and lowest paid in any organisation. 10 :1 ????

so if your lowest paid worker is £8 000 pa WTE then the best paid cannot be more than £80 000 total earnings WTE

If you read the article the biggest numbers of NHS workers over the PM level are GPs. Average salary of GPs is very close to the PM salary and the highest paid GP was "at least" £475K. It's labour's fault since they negotiated such a terrible deal with GPs years ago - in fact the GP negotiators couldn't beleive how generous the deal was.

Many other consultants have had private practice limited for years. Outside the NHS top IVF docs make the most.

since there's no way on this planet that they'd ever get employment in the private sector!

Which is precisely the problem they try to address by offering competitive salaries. You pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

Case closed, your honour.

To be fair, In my experience there's a significant proportion who would, since there's no way on this planet that they'd ever get employment in the private sector!

Remind me, how much of a payoff did St fred Godwin get for losing £28Bn, and how much were the directors of Northern Rock paid to drive it into bankruptcy?

And when all those ex public sector squaddies leave the army, where do they go and get jobs?

so if your lowest paid worker is £8 000 pa WTE then the best paid cannot be more than £80 000 total earnings

Abject stupidity.

for me the answer is a legal obligation for ratios of total remuneration between the highest and lowest paid in any organisation. 10 :1 ????

so if your lowest paid worker is £8 000 pa WTE then the best paid cannot be more than £80 000 total earnings WTE

So, 10 x minimum wage max? If you include under-18s, who are not entitled to mim wage, you might be seeing a rather big pay cut.

You'd also see a lot more top staff paid via dividends...

so if your lowest paid worker is £8 000 pa WTE then the best paid cannot be more than £80 000 total earnings

Abject stupidity.

Please elaborate