[Closed] Public servant pay freeze....

Surely Lanestra and the good Doctor know each other and are doing this to keep their internet fans entertained....

No, that was the only thread Lanesra. Out of interest I thought I would ask RudeBoy, as he's met you both. Without hesitation he reckoned that Dolittle could have you. He also said something about you 'twitching' a lot, I couldn't quite figure out what he was on about, but I guess you probably know. And that was all, I didn't even tell him what the thread was about.

btw, do you know what Dolittle looks like ?

Lanesra is obviously not a child. He got up from bed for a post beer crusty prostrate wee wee, posted post beer, and is now lying alone tossing and turning and tortured by revenge fantasies about big men being bigger than he is.

What's my name?

btw, do you know what Dolittle looks like ?

Phillip Schofield apparently.

Phillip ****ing Schofield 😯

I've wanted to give that face a slap ever since I first saw it on Children's BBC 😕

I've wanted to give that face a slap ever since I first saw it on Children's BBC

Face-ist scum.

**** it, I missed a proper trick on this thread didn't I!

**** it, I missed a proper trick on this thread didn't I!

Ah well.

He has found out my name and published it here before and then asked for a face to face. I was too scared to continue that thread. I believe that was around the time when you became one of the focuses of his fantasies. My relief is somewhat tinged with regret and if I might be brave enough to say, jealousy.

Are you serious? If so, I really wouldn't worry. The poor fellow is a mess. And if I'm to be honest, I started it with him/her and keep it going because I'm cruel.

Dr Dolittle - I know what Lanesra looks like ....... RudeBoy emailed me a pic of him 😀
I was so gobsmacked, I emailed RudeBoy back to confirm that it was [i]really[/i] him 😯

EDIT : I had given a brief description but decided to delete it, as it was simply too cruel and unkind to our "internet warrior". And no, I won't post the pic, despite Lanesra's obvious relish in posting other people's personal details.

BTW, I [i]genuinely[/i] hope that Lanesra doesn't get banned again. I can't understand how anyone can [i]actually[/i] get offended by anything he posts - I certainly can't, no matter how much out of order he is. The geezer's got issues - and letting off steam on STW probably does him good (and no one any harm imo) Although seeking proper help would obviously be even better for him.

Ernie - I have to disagree with you there - he is the only person on here I would like to see banned for life. considering Rudeboy was banned for far less offensive posting than Lanesras racist bigotry and threats.

Others annoy me greatly and I am sure I annoy others greatly - however no one else is as unpleasant as lanesra and he never posts anything positive - its all political sniping and racist posturing

Don't let him get to you, the world is full of idiots and people who, in a different society would have been put in plastic bag and thrown in the river along with all the other unwanted pets.

Crikey talk about vicous pack mentality! not sure whats been said here or who's out of order but really calm down - its only a discussion! 😆 imho throwing personal insults makes you look a "prime plonker" This country has long tradition of freedom of speech if you dont agree make your point and move on.

This country has long tradition of freedom of speech

Rudeboy was banned for far less offensive posting

Well that's hardly relevant is it, because RudeBoy never did anything which warranted being banned imo. So, "Lanesra is worst than someone who never did anything bad" is a hardly a very convincing argument.

But I mean it, I don't understand how anyone can be "upset" by anything as trivial Lanesra's posts. Yeah ok, racist stuff like "all gypsies need to be gassed" isn't tolerable, and such posts should be deleted and the poster banned at least temporarily for that. But not for being "unpleasant" or "political sniping" as you put it.

I've got no problem with the likes of Lanesra and AdamG. In fact I find their bigotry highly amusing, it's as if we have our very own Alf Garnet, Basil Fawlty, and Rigsby here. And I certainly feel confident enough in my beliefs not to feel threatened by them. I don't know how some of you who get "upset" by them manage to survive in the real world.

Having said that, I'm totally opposed to allowing any sort of public platform for the BNP though. But that's a completely different kettle of fish altogether, imo. Because allowing the BNP to spread their filthy racist lies in the community, causes untold disharmony, fear, violence, and suffering. These couple of dipsticks making prats of themselves on this forum however, is harmless and has great entertainment value. Common sense and all that. imo.

[i]TBH, most public servants (apart from Nurses) are no more capable than the average person working in McDonalds.[/i]

Cheers for that.

Anyway back on topic, we've just been offered 0.4% after we asked for 5%. We've had significantly below cost of living increases for the last 4 years because the company couldn't support more (which we understood). That excuse is now wearing slightly thin.

TBH, most public servants (apart from Nurses) are no more capable than the average person working in McDonalds.

Totally disagree. There are some seriously special-looking folk working in the public sector, work-shy, political animals and wierd-cackling, badly dressed women of all ages- same as the private sector, the only difference is the percentage of these types is higher in a public sector workplace.

Saying that- I bet there are loads of people who really care about what they are doing within councils etc and they'll be just as frustrated as the rest of us. Its the other-type that give the public sector a bad image.

Of course, no one in their right mind would expect a payrise this year- every day we are being told very publicly in the press etc that the country's finances need prudence. Anyone still wanting a payrise is either unpatriotic or cares completely about themselves. Sorry. Its true. I havent had a payrise in two years- if I threaten to down tools my boss would sack me for being unreasonable/gross misconduct.

Well, I'm on year three of 0% payrises. Next year ain't looking brilliant either.

Going back to the original post - it ain't just the public sector that are getting picked on. BG 'borrowed' billions from my pension fund amongst others to pay for his little schemes. And I used to work in the public sector too - pensions were often 'fiddled' - seen so many people working part time, then funnily enough work full-time for the last year of service - their pension is then based on a percentage of their last years salary.

I am starting to get sick of still blaming the Tories after 13 years of NuLabour rule - they've had plenty of time (and money) to get everything sorted, or at least in place to sort things. FFS GB was even denying they'd need cuts in spending until a couple of weeks ago. Just had his head buried in the sand for years now.

And don't get me started on all comments about these Tory rich kids looking after their own rich mates. I'll not ask how many rich Labour donors there are who seem to do well out of their contributions, the number of Labour MPs who'll now go (after the next election) into nicely paid jobs in the city. Nice to see Mandleson at the Labour conference getting in touch with the hardworking public whilst wearing his £40,000 Philipe Patek watch...

Speaking of banning posters, why was DoLittle banned?

Anyway I thought it was senior staff only, been on night so missed the news this week could be wrong.

Anyway I thought it was senior staff only,

Labour: Pay freeze for senior staff only
Conservatives: Pay freeze for anyone in the public sector paid more than 18k a year.

Joe

Osborne also added front line forces to that 18k threshold, does that mean if your currently in Afghan/Iraq or elsewhere you will get a rise but if your a stores jockey at RAF somewhere-on-the-wold not really ever going to be in a warzone you won't?

In next 6 or 7 years, NHS Highland will run out of midwives as the bulk of their midwives are now approaching retirement age and not enough new ones are coming in to replace them. NHS Tayside faces the same problem with radiographers. At least half the Scottish Trusts face nursing shortages in the next 10 years.
The government (of whichever colour) will deal with this by reducing the pay in real terms of both the front line staff dealing with patients, and the management who are supposed to deal with the problem, as well as telling any potential entrants to the service that their long term career prospects are stuffed.
Genius.
How about, just for a laugh, telling us that raising the age at which pensions get paid in order to save some money whilst neglecting to point out that every person who is forced to stay in work is denying a young person a job, so the same numer of people are being paid not to work.
Inspirational.

Ah cheers Joe oh well ok with Labour than and loose out with Conservatives.

would suggest to any of the whingers of any political hue to try running a small business with all the red tape and hidden regulations, perhaps it is better to just do the 9-5 without the aggravation!

Why is it as a public sector worker I have to listen to twunts who get paid more than I do moan about my pension and holidays? If you want it get get a public sector job, if you dont shut the **** up. My pay rises look slim for the next 10 years, I'm not happy about that but never mind, shit happens. Of course what worries me is them changing pensions before I retire now that I would be annoyed about.

BitterBaldingFatty - Member

Speaking of banning posters, why was DoLittle banned?

How do you know he's been banned ?

Are you his other login ?

Why is it as a public sector worker I have to listen to twunts who get paid more than I do moan about my pension and holidays? If you want it get get a public sector job, if you dont shut the **** up."

because we pay your wages, remember that you are there to serve us, you have a vested interest beyond ours that's clear, - but be clear that we are paying for you, all of us - hard working people with families and their own circumstances working hard to pay your pensions, bs jobs, training courses for the latest "idea", quangos and projects. Even Blair spoke of "bearing the scars on his back" from trying to modernise the PS, it a behemoth monster.
BTW the reason they get paid more is because in economic terms they probably contribute more.
If it helps you to see yourself as martyrs for society continue but the reality is that for many involved the driving force is self interest not altruism. The public sector has always been a hiding place for underperformers, but the elephantisis we have seen under new labour of tax and the PS is slowly making people see the PS for what it really has become a huge giant leach.

 

BTW the reason they get paid more is because in economic terms they probably contribute more

Depends if you take the simpletons view or not, I'd suggest that teachers and nurses for example contribute hugely to the economy if you look beyond simple first step wealth creation.

Are you his other login

Is he bitter and balding and fatty? You've seen him after all. Maybe Lanesra did get him? Maybe they've sailed off together in a pea green boat...??

well you would say that for the reasons stated. Perhaps they do contribute hugely to the economy - if we weren't legally compelled to employ so many PS workers we could let the public decide what they are worth, not public sector employees but private companies competing on service and value to deliver the services required.

Thats sounds like a "privatise the lot of them" suggestion

Well no I'd say that you still need a public sector, where services are not delivered by an unmanagable dysfunctional organisation as is, but a slimline organisation focussed on value for money and delivery through utilising private sector providers.

[i]remember that you are there to serve us[/i]

Hhahahaha! Good one.

Is he bitter and balding and fatty? You've seen him after all. Maybe Lanesra did get him?

No, I've never seen Dolittle.

He claims to look like Phillip Schofield, which is something I would definitely never want to admit to. So I guess that might have been a windup then.

Did Lanesra did get him ? Well if RudeBoy's claim that Dolittle is a bit on the tasty side and capable of looking after himself, then judging by the photo I've seen of Lanesra, I'd say no chance at all.

hmm, not too sure about that, I'm not sure I want health care, teaching, fire service or policing* being provided by someone whose eye is essentially focused on the bottom line (duty to shareholders and all that**) and got the contract by being the lowest bidder. See the crumminess of contracted out school catering and waste collection.

I wasn’t scared, but I was up there looking around, and suddenly I realized I was sitting on top of a rocket built by the lowest bidder. - John Glenn

*Or Planning come to that.
** Quite rightly, the point of private enterprise is making a profit for the shareholders/owners.

fair point, but clearly if the public body chose suppliers purely on the basis of the cheapest price the objectives of service delivery are going to be unacceptably compromised - the key element is competition on delivery and value for money.

ernie_lynch - Member
BitterBaldingFatty - Member
Speaking of banning posters, why was DoLittle banned?

How do you know he's been banned ?

Are you his other login ?

Ha ha very funny. Because I know him. He emailled this morning and said hes been banned here for a year for starting a fight, but he was only joking and having a laugh. Why has he been banned then? ❓

I work for the NHS and I contribute from my wages to my pension, why should other public sectors not have to pay for their pensions, DWP etc? If it is a choice between free pension pay freeze or pay pension pay rise I know what one I would go for! Many people will say I'm better paid and yes I probably am and that's why. But I studied and ran up debt to get a good job and I'm still paying for it.

fair point, but clearly if the public body chose suppliers purely on the basis of the cheapest price the objectives of service delivery are going to be unacceptably compromised - the key element is competition on delivery and value for money.

What happens in practice, is that the public body outsources a service (the classic example is IT of some kind or another). They now have no people in house who are experts in this service. This means they have no idea of how to manage contractors, or of what quality the work being done for them is. Instead of choosing contractors based on their ability to do the job, they choose them based on their ability to schmooze and play golf, and end up employing some bunch of shysters for massive cost* (like EDS or other similar consulting companies). There's very little evidence that this saves anyone money, although sometimes it does allow creative accounting that pushes the money spent onto the next government.

If competition to provide public services was such a great idea, it would have worked in any of the many examples where it exists already, like building stuff (the public get conned by building companies), large IT projects (the public get conned by contractors), IT for schools (the schools get conned by various large companies who sell them aging kit for vast amounts of money), university catering (terrible food at very high cost), and any of the many many other places where supposedly competitive contracting out is already used.

Joe

*I've been on the IT supplier end of this, and the poor old government really don't have a clue (but they certainly do like a game of golf with the salespeople).

BTW the reason they get paid more is because in economic terms they probably contribute more.

I work in the NHS and deal with the private sector, and they are fekkin useless. There's a huge turnover of staff and whenever I try and deal with them i am always dealing with someone else who is "new to the post and just finding their feet". Why is this? It's because in the interests of "value for money" the contractor pays their staff less than the NHS, so they get demotivated and are off at the first sign of a better job. Yet this sdoesn't save the NHS any money because they pay the clinical staff NHS rates and take a slice of profit themselves. the private sector is supposedly geared toward the provision of a service and that service is provided with whatever the budget allows. You vote for the budget, so it's your choice. The private sector on the other hand exists for profit and every penny saved is more profit so everything is built down to a price.
And as for the private sector being a model of probity and diligence - just how much did we (the taxpayer) bail out Norther Rock, Bank of Scotland and Royal Bank of Scotland for?

Joe the problems you've highlighted are very real and exactly what has largely happened when the PS try to engage with the Private sector, the risk of an unsuccesful arrangement is large, if you walk into the commercial world without a clue then it's highly likely you will be taken advantage of, and the fact that they've pretty much failed so far is because they really didn't have a commercial clue and still don't. They don't have the right calibre senior management, they're hamstrung by unions,leftwing ideology & bureachracy. This needs to be resolved if the PS is to fully modernise, maximise efficiency. The failure so far should not preclude greater effort towards what seems to me to be morally imperative, that the money used in the PS is used for maximum benefit regardless of the size of the budget.

neglecting to point out that every person who is forced to stay in work is denying a young person a job, so the same numer of people are being paid not to work.

Hitler used that logic to claim that Jews kept Aryan Germans out of work. It was nonsense then, and it's nonsense now. It's not a zero sum game.

Besides, you seem to have forgotten what you said immediately before:

In next 6 or 7 years, NHS Highland will run out of midwives as the bulk of their midwives are now approaching retirement age and not enough new ones are coming in to replace them.

If that is the case, keeping them on for a few extra years makes sense, doesn't it?