[Closed] Public servant pay freeze....

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).

Interesting you should mention this. I used to work for an IT company that provided computer systems for the public sector (NHS and Local Government).

Given that public sector types aren't supposed to accept corporate hospitality, it was a mystery why the company I worked for paid for a box at [a very well known football ground] every year to entertain clients. Complete mystery who these clients were.

Oh and on the NHS side, the people we had to deal with had no knowledge whatsoever of computers. A lot of them were overpromoted medical records types who would have known a lot about filing 20 years previously but really had next to no IT expertise.

This is why government contracts put out to tender fail / go overbudget, etc. It's not that suppliers try to rip anyone off, it's that the people buying the stuff have no clue what they want half the time.

Chubby yes for every story of "I worked with a public/private sector person they were fekkin useless" theres another saying the opposite, but your right the PS does have a bad habit of employing useless expensive consultants, as I say walk into the commercial world without a clue and yes you will probably be taken advantage of.
Different point about the banks and yes they made a fundamental error in buying instruments they did not understand, had I been on the board and said no to the instruments I would have been fired for underperforming compared to competitors, regulation needs to be done properly and is important and I'm not saying that the private sector is perfect, certainly not! However done properly managed competition tends to bring positive benefits.
Convenient though it may be for Gordon to walk away from any responsibility at all for practically bankrupting the country lets not forget that he would call the city most weeks to see how much tax he could expect to collect for him to spend, he also enabled the activity by changing the tripartite agreement and I believe the PS body of the FSA which was supposed to regulate the whole thing failed miserably and now openly admits to not understanding what it was supposed to be regulating.

The public sector needs an overhaul - I know, I work in it!

After a good early career in the private sector, I was made redundant after a takeover and after a bit of drifting I went into a large government dept at a junior management grade. I was on the same salary I'd been on when I hit that level in the private sector, 10 years before. And before you all start, new entrants don't get quite the same cushy pension and severance rights any more.

After 18 months, I was back in a redundancy pot - the agency I was in was streamlining, and they decided to close our office. The best performing office in the country. Solely because another agency wanted the site and the staff, they stuffed all our staff and all the cost of training them in the previous two years and "saved" worse performing staff in other offices in more marginal seats - possibly.

Then I got a transfer to another agency. That has now also been streamlined after a change in legislation, so we have merged with another agency, who are, by their staff own reckoning 30% overstaffed.

And before you all bang the "shrink the public sector jobs" drum, they need to be careful how it is done - our numbers were halved after the legislation was streamlined. A good thing. Except that the new benefit system that "saved" these salaries is costing you - the hard working tax payer - an extra £4 billion more than the old system. As we told them it would at the Green Paper stage.....

Except I [b]do[/b] work with private sector healthcare and they [b]are[/b] useless.
The staff are inept and don't stay any length of time. We also had to sack the private contractor subcontracted to clean the operating theatres because they were not performing. Hygiene in the theatre envoironment is important, and cannot be justified on cost alone. The contract we had with them to provide is likely not to be renewed because we (the incompetent NHS) can do the job better and cheaper. But, hey why let some facts get in the way of a decent rant?

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

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?

Banned ? Shame 😐 But you seem to know why he's been banned ...... for having a pop at Lanesra.

Although I agree with you that it's hard to imagine anyone taking the Lanesra v Dolittle sitcom seriously.
And if everyone who's ever had a pop at Lanesra were to be banned, then this place would be very quiet indeed.

Oh well there you go, just means that this place has lost a couple of more characters, and will be a little bit less interesting imo.

Different point about the banks and yes they made a fundamental error in buying instruments they did not understand,

But you seem to know why he's been banned ...... for having a pop at Lanesra.

The fact seems to be that yet again the PS hired an incompetant, expensive supplier - can't say Im surprised really. To me that suggests that the public sector are useless at selecting service suppliers and need to get better at it, not go backwards.

Awesome arguement. The private sector take on a contract, fail to meet it and that shows how inept the public sector is. Mind you, should anyone be suprised

- if we weren't legally compelled to employ so many PS workers

]we could let the public decide what they are worth,

Re public sector pensions.

Are there some public sector pensions that do not involve any contributions from the employee, or do some people just mistakenly think that public sector workers get these great pensions without making any contribution themselves?

(I'm well aware that these pensions can be very generous in comparison to some private sector pensions, but had assumed that the employee still puts money in)

lol,yes you are right the PS is so efficient that they decide to outsource to the private sector, they made a mess of it, case proven the PS is great and the private sector is rubbish. Awesome argument. 😆
We are legally compelled to pay taxes which pays for the PS which employs lots of staff, that's a fact.
The current approach suits you fine that is clear, but the PS is inefficient and needs modernising. Introducing competition for service contracts & reducing the masses of state employees would improve efficiency.

SirJonLordofBike1 ............ but the PS is inefficient and needs modernising.

and you know this how? the NHS provides more care for less money than any comparable system and spens a smaller % of its costs on admin and management than any comparable system

it dowes work cheaper than private healthcare with better outcomes.

Introducing competition for service contracts & reducing the masses of state employees would improve efficiency.

rubbish - every time this is analysed the4 only way any private concern is cheaper - and they rarely are is by reducing pay rates. there is no increase in efficiency

You spout this stuff as if its true - find some real data to back it up - you can't 'cos its bollox

SirJonLordofBike1, it's [i]incredibly easy[/i] to chant choice and competition mantras about public service delivery - and understandable given the desire for value. But it can get pretty meaningless at the actual coalface (or even - dare I say it - in the messy, unpredictable [i]real[/i] world). My dad is coming up to retirement after a lifetime in public healthcare (Army Doc, and latterly as a Consultant Paediatrian) - he has yet to hear a convincing explanation of how the market works in, say, neonatal intensive care, or major trauma, or mental health. None of these things are like visiting the supermarket, where the market works because of [i]repeated[/i] switching behaviour by consumers (it's kind of hard to switch after a failed resuscitation). Only overpaid muppets from McKinsey & the like make-believe it [i]can be so[/i] - and much damage (to basically sound services) has resulted from this Gov's love affair with management consultancy, and their great "need" to hand out public assets like sweets, or inflict nonsense like PFI, ISTCs and NHS[h]IT upon us all. Of course, certain interests have done [i]very[/i] well out of all this, and - surprise, surprise - they continue to beat the privatisation drum hard, despite the pisspoor results (see also MOD). What generally counts in good public service delivery is often stuff that is well beyond the job description/specification - and in the case of healthcare, bloody hard-won experience. The trick is not to throw all of that away.

No teeth, perhaps it is easy to advocate more private sector involvement in the PS, but it could be said that it's also very easy for the PS to chant that we are the best at what we do and the cheapest- fully costed I seriously doubt that and given the Mrsa problems,various hospital scandals, dropped super computer projects, social care failures and various quangos even the die hard dinasaurs must deep down have a seed of doubt.
Clearly most services could not be provided on a basis of frequently changing suppliers, the same is true of many services a degree of continuity is necessary. As i said competition should clearly not be based soley upon price but also on service levels and delivery. In the end greater efficiency in all PS leads to benefits for us all, not least in the PS or healthcare - the same or more delivery for less means more ICU beds, hip joint replacements or medicines. I do agree that the no doubt considerable assets of knowledge and experience in the PS should not be thrown away but be used in delivery, the best would thrive - the passengers would not.

I work for a government funded agency and a lot of work goes out to contract. Fair enough we haven't the man power any more due to cuts to do a lot of the work, but what annoys me is when we have to go back and put their work right after they have been paid so it makes us look expensive.

Why don't we just agree that public sector doesn't deserve a pay cut, like the way workers in the private sector don't either... that is, unless you were responsible for the mess in the first place?

In over a decade in public sector my experience is that we are already streamlined (don't think I have ever managed to do as little as a 9-5 shift in my whole career, work over lunch and regularly lose around 2 days worth of unpaid hours a month), have already had 3 years of a pay freeze due to a flawed evaluation process, and early in my career was paid £6k less for my job than the 'average salary' in private sector and had to fight tooth and nail for equal pay so it is certainly no 'gravy train'. Add to that, public sector don't get performance related pay or bonuses, and tend to get minimal cost of living rises - we do get a reasonable pension, which we no contribute to more than ever, perhaps better job security (or used to) and reasonable holidays (if you have worked in public sector a while).

I would say I like my job, work hard with some great professional people and love the fact that we are always busy. I get a bit scunnered at the old views people have that public sector workers live in a silver cloud - not true... If I wanted to earn loads i would have went into the Financial Industry.

I would say for most of my career I would have been better off financially doing same job in private sector, I had a choice and could have moved - just the same as people whinge about public sector being better off. Just a thought - I know way more people who have switched to private from public sector jobs, always financial reasons.

I think the desire to cut public sector pay, especially 'back room' staff over frontline (such as police, nurses etc.) is about vote winning in these difficult times. It would have been much less difficult if we threw less at the 'private sector' banks I think?

I can do no better than cut-and-paste a comment from a similar thread elsewhere. With apologies to the original author:

Jesus H Christ on a bike. This thread proves that politicians are geniuses. Absolute bloody geniuses.

This is what you do if you're you're a politician. You sit back watching your old school chums in the city trousering MASSIVE salaries for gambling ever more recklessly with other people's money. Then, when the whole thing goes tits up, as it inevitably was going to, you bail out your rich friends out with the poor people's money.

That's not the genius bit. This is the genius bit.

Instead of the poor people being annoyed with you and the rich people, YOU GET THEM ANNOYED WITH EACH OTHER!! You play off the public sector against the private, and everyone moans about how everyone else has it easy. From time to time you look grim and say things like "we're all in this together" (which is patently untrue), and people dutifully put on their hair shirts and feel guilty about the slightest decent thing going on in their lives.

Private sector workers; the public sector is not full of incompetent people slowly organising lesbian peace workshops and retiring at 50. Some of them do difficult, unpleasant and necessary jobs very well indeed. Next time you need your life saving at three in the morning, it's a public sector worker that's going to do it. And the public sector doesn't have a monopoly on incompetence and waste, there's plenty of it around at your place too.

Public sector workers: the private sector is not full of Armani-suited flash gits buying new Ferraris every year. Some are quite badly paid, exploited and overworked, and they don't have much security. Chances are they are far more scared than you are at this moment, and for good reason. And the private sector doesn't have a monopoly on greed, cynicism and naff corporate wannabe dickheads, there are plenty of them in the public sector too.

Everybody: there's an increasingly blurred line between public and private sector. Both cover a huge range of jobs. Generalising about one or the other invariably means that you're talking bollocks. Can we actually start blaming those at fault for the current crisis, instead of each other?

If you got this far, I hope I've offended everyone equally, and thanks for reading.

Genius

where did you find it?

The country is skint, many are out of work, many others including myself have taken pay cuts, why on earth do some in the public sector expect to be exempt ffs. Any who think they should be are bloody selfish and deluded.

PhilO - that's far too sensible and realistic.

That should be the last word...

That is a fantastic post PhilO, it does sum it up really.

many others including myself have taken pay cuts

And you are pissed off about it, yes? Who wouldn't be. My pay was frozen this year and I'm not too chuffed either, exactly like the OP in fact.

Pissed of yes, but my point is that no Public Sector workers should expect immunity from the financial burden which we all now share

This is the first time in 3 years I am getting a pay rise, public sector workers are NOT all the same.

Why not though enfit? I think his point was really "I've done nothing wrong, worked my ass off and you want ME to pay for the ****ups? Get bent!"

Seems a fair point to me, and perhaps similar to what you and I feel. I don't expect to be immune from the recession fallout, despite personally not being involved. Doesn't stop me being pissed off that people are losing jobs and having their salaries cut. Ironically my company is doing really well, just being cautious so I hope to hear more positive news next month.

no Public Sector workers should expect immunity from the financial burden which we all now share

I know that I just think that we should make the people who got us into this mess be the ones we target first. I fail to seewhy we should be targetting Dr, nurses, teachers , refuse collectors, social workers pay as a result of the the banking sectors gree, incompetence and unregulated pursuit of money....is it really the fault of the public sector?

Banks incompetenet - Yes
Bankers incompotent - YES
Banks bailed out with our money- Yes
Incompotent Bankers paid out WITH huge pensions as they are no longer fit to run said bank- Yes
Bankers keep their bonuses - yes *
Country now skint due to above - YES
Those responsible for mess to pay -- erm no lets pick on someone else instead.

* how the **** can they have earned a bonus THIS year?

I didn't expect immunity from pay cuts and it gets my goat for anyone to expect it themselves simply because they work for the government. Nothing to do with people being upset just about people thinking they are somehow above being affected by the fallout like everyone else.

Welcome to the real world.

Think yourself lucky you don't actually do anything productive which would mean being threatened with a real drop in earnings or redundancy.

yes we are lucky and we do nothing productive. I mean what is the point in saving lives, helping the sick, delivering babies, educating your children, rescuing you from fires, arresting criminals etc... I wonder why we bother doing this unproductive sh1t sometimes. I mean, i could work in banking totally f@ck up an entire economy, be bailed out by a government, keep my bonus and then make the public sector pay for it as we are all in it together.

Being a public sector worker myself, yes, we do get a good pension, but we 'pay' for it throughout our careers by shit wages all the way along.

99% of people who have either lost their jobs or has pay freezes/cuts in the private sector have also [i]"spent the last 20 years working away quietly as a public servant, noticeably not involving myself in any global financial crisis shenanigans, not paying myself silly bonuses, not lending money to folk who can't repay, not suckling at the teat of the great goddess of finance, just paying my debts on time"[/i]

It's unfortunate, but being public sector doesn't mean you have any more rights than private sector. It's just ingrained in the mentality of public sector that they get special treatment.

no Public Sector workers should expect immunity from the financial burden which we all now share

Yes we should, because we got bugger all share in the profits in the good times.

Doesn't matter if you got a share of the profits or not. The simple fact is that the country is near bankrupt so whether it seems fair or not is irrelevant.

As I said much earlier in this thread I, as a Nurse, accept that I'm going to have to contribute to this ****-up.

It does gall that those responsible seem to still be getting their bonuses - my mates just got £1400 bonus and reckons on a larger one at the end of the tax year.

He works in finance for an organisation that's not done too well, has laid off tons of folk but is now re-entering profitability.

So he's on big rises and I'm on a pay freeze - seems a bit wrong to me.

I don't think anyone on this thread has been arguing that public servants deserve hige pay rises - just arguing against the series of lies and misconceptions that the press and the tory party are using to attack the public sector and that labour aree so weak that they are running scared from

some folk on here have swallowed this propaganda as truth

Lie 1) - the public sector is inefficient

It simply is not - every time the private sector gets involved in the NHS it raises costs and decreases quality - well proven over much research. The NHS delivers more for less money than any comparable system, the NHS spends a smaller % of its total costs on admin / managemant than any comparable system

lie 2) - the public sector is overstaffed and bloated.

There are constant complaints about the service delivered from the same people. You need the staff to provide the service. Child protection, NHS, bins etc.

Lie 3 ) the public sector workers are overpaid with fantastic pensions that the rest of the country pay for.

Actually the public sector are paid less than the private sector for most posts, much of the pensions are self funding and contributory. The true situation is that most private sector workers have rotton pensions - thats the scandal. Companies taking pension contribution holidays when the stock market rode high - now closing the pension funds.

This one simply is the politics of envy.

Tj you talk utter rubbish 😆
That's right it's really efficient and there's no wastage at all. Read the following from the Tax Payers Alliance site:

SENIOR executives – some earning more than £100,000 – have been kept on, even though their jobs have been made redundant under the latest NHS reorganisation.

The Western Mail understands that chief executives and finance directors displaced by new arrangements that came in last week have a guarantee that their existing salaries will be protected for 10 years.

Under changes introduced by Health Minister Edwina Hart, the number of Local Health Boards (LHBs) has been reduced from 22 to seven. Amalgamations involving some NHS Trusts have also occurred. Yet the policy of no compulsory redundancies, repeated publicly by Mrs Hart, means that despite the reduction in senior posts, those who wish to stay are being accommodated.

Last night Mark Wallace, campaign director of the Taxpayers’ Alliance, said: “It’s completely unacceptable that the savings derived from NHS restructuring are being eroded by such overly generous deals.

“Any taxpayer in the private sector will be staggered to learn that the normal rules of redundancy simply don’t apply to highly-paid NHS bureaucrats.

“It’s already clear that there is going to be a reduction in the number of staff employed by the NHS, particularly at managerial levels. There can be no question of allowing people to go on gardening leave or hobnob with colleagues for a decade.”

Tax Payers Alliance

..that name tickled me. 😀

The tax payers alliance for your sources? A front for neo cons and fascists

Thats your argument lost all credibility

Ha ha ha ha ha

Well Jeremy as we've already seen, if you say, then it must be so!

As usual you resort to name calling and insults - you are clearly an intellectual pygmy so I'll stoop to your level
... you're looney lefty and your mum dresses you funny too, there thats all your credability lost 😆

I'll see your "Ha ha's" and raise
....................... Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha HA!!

Sorry TandemJeremy but we have not just "swallowed this propaganda as truth..Lie 1) - the public sector is inefficient".

There's plenty of evidence that parts of the public sector is inefficient, and even the NHS come to that:

[url= http://www.healthcarerepublic.com/news/941965/Watchdog-calls-greater-NHS-productivity/ ]Watchdog calls for greater NHS productivity[/url]

or

[img] [/img]

The above graph shows that productivity has consistently fallen in recent years, despite substantial increases in funding. Whilst some of the funding has undoubtedly been well used, the rate at which the NHS has been able to absorb the increases hasn't kept pace, with the result that some (not all) of it hasn't been put to good use. To put the graph below into context, it's worth noting that in the same period, the economy has a whole increased in productivity.

Bankers keep huge pensions and bonuses. Do you know exactly how many people who work in banks actually make GOOD money? Its only the very top.

What do public workers do to justify final salary schemes? ****ed if I know. Just seems to be alot of 'give me the extra money, not because I deserve it but because we will strike if you dont'.

Holding your own country to ransom to fill your pockets. Nice. I still think the OP was trolling by posting the obvious inflamotory initial post. He obviously cant beleive what he actually wrote can he?

We within the service already have a good idea of where hard earned tax payers money goes SirJon, and yes Farmer John, much of the money that comes into the service goes on crap and management we don't need.

However, productivity from the point of view of front line services does seem to be improving.

And you've got to understand some of the measures that can cause failure. To meet some performance indicators staff must provide a poor service to patients. If we choose to put patients first then we will show as failing.

2 points then I give up.

That graph may be right - but these things are difficult to assess and there are many well researched explanations for this. However it does nothing to disprove the point that the NHS as a state monopoly is more efficient than private healthcare. Compare the independent treatment centres - the cost per op is higher and the outcomes worse in the independent treatment centres than in the NHS - fact.

Pensions - Hora - you ask the wrong question. Why should private business get away with such poor pension provision for its employees?

so poor that the pensions have to be subsidised by the taxpayer.

Many of the big companies had plenty of money in the funds to pay final salary schemes but took payment holidays leaving the funds in deficit when the stock market turned down.

For every pound that the taxpayer subsidises public sector pensions the taxpayer subsidises directly thru tax breaks private pensions by £2.50 and then further thru pension tax credits and other benefits as the pensions are so low.

hora,

it's the ****ers at the top taking most of the money in the Public Sector same as in the banks.

And why should I lose my nice pension just cos you've lost yours.

Surely we should be trying to improve your lot not make mine worse.

If you got your bike nicked would you want it found and the perpertrators caught and punished, or would you want the people who still had bikes to have theirs taken too to make you all equal?