[Closed] Public vs Private (leave the trolling at the door)

Right

I have done a degree in my own time and at my own cost.

I have looked into this extensivly and there is simply nothing other than unskilled work outside of my profession I can do unless I do significant further training.

It show such ignorance of my profession that people think its easy and is simply a set of basic transferable skills. Its patronising. I have spent decades building these skills.
All those who think specialist nursing skills could be transferred to other jobs please tell me the jobs - I would be delighted to know

Proof, TJ?

I suppose some of it is about your intent of career. For example many friends went into financial services or IT at a relatively low level in order to progress within a career with the intention of moving up the career ladder.

This has also been the case for many colleagues within health and allied professions that I know. They wanted to be high fliers and being a bog standard Band 5 for a year or two was the door in.

Others, such as myself, want to be the best Nurse possible for my patients and provide that one to one hands on care. Progression in most directions would mean losing those opportunities and that skillset. Hence my choice of career progression and development is very specific and leaves me less employable outside of my profession - I have specialised myself out of wider opportunities.

My wife is moving in the other direction and will have a much wider range of transferable skills than most.

It is, however, my firm belief that both types of nurse are needed within health care for it to function effectively. Too much one way or the other and the system will fail.

Caveat - I appreciate that this is true in many other professions but I can only speak from what i know.

rightplacerighttime - Member
craigxxl,

Was that everyone in each company, from the MD down?

My Company, No management took no pay increase in 2009

My Wifes, no the management took a 10% reduction

My youngest brother, doubtful he's a porter for the NHS.

It show such ignorance of my profession that people think its easy and is simply a set of basic transferable skills. Its patronising. I have spent decades building these skills.

All those who think specialist nursing skills could be transferred to other jobs please tell me the jobs - I would be delighted to know

If you're looking for a job that isn't nursing that has exactly the same specialist skills as a nurse you won't find one.

If you're looking for another role you'd be good at there will be plenty.

The official figure touted for FTSE bosses in 2010 and 2011 were 55% and, IIRC, 49%.

Which suggests to me that we (down here, whether private or public sector) are all in it together.

Which is why I can't understand falling for divide and rule.

Personally, if the Govt were making the changes to our pay and pensions with the intention of pension redistribution to private sector workers I would find it much more paletable.

However, I suspect we (at the bottom end) will all be sat here with naff all in a few years whilst the 'real them' are laughing and sunning it up elsewhere.

((current salary - salary 5 years ago) / current salary) = 6.15%

Can you tell I'm not public sector?

If you're looking for another role you'd be good at there will be plenty.

This is like something from Lewis Carroll.

What 5thelephant - please - I would like a change of direction. I have looked and beyond coming in at the ground floor in hosptality / tourism / retail I can see nothing nor can the professional advisors I have consulted

Everyone has been pointing out you have a wealth of non-specialised skills applicable to all kinds of roles.

a couple of people have claimed this

This is like something from Lewis Carroll.

I've always found good people are good at all kinds of jobs. That's who you try and recruit.

I can see nothing nor can the professional advisors I have consulted

What about your acting career?

[img] [/img]

my aunt became a doctor by studying through the OU whilst she was a nurse and had 3 kids to look after. so thats at least one career path

I am 50 - that would take 4 years full time study. I think I would get i yrs credit for the skills Ihave

CharlieMungus - Member
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/11/public-sector-strike

Some mythbusting

Worth reading in combination with:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/8923446/Why-my-school-will-stay-open-during-the-strike.html

Out of interest, why didn't Wallace (or is it Grommit?) respond to Cameron's jibe at lunchtime about being, "left-wing" with the reply, "yes, I am"?

And going back to the NS:

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/11/spending-review-union-trade

There is, of course, a specific dispute at the heart of today's action - the government's proposals to reform public sector pensions. There is also, within that specific dispute, a detail that is often lost in reporting, which is the distinction between reforms set out in the report by Lord Hutton, subsequently watered down in negotiations, and changes introduced in last autumn's spending review. The Hutton proposals are the basis of the deal that has been offered to -- and rejected by -- unions. But many public sector workers are just as aggrieved by a mandatory surcharge on their employee pension contributions averaging 3.2 per cent that was in the small print of the spending review. That was seen by many as a pre-emptive attack on pensions rushed through before negotiations on a long-term settlement even got under way.

Labour is keen to emphasise the surcharge for precisely that reason. It was imposed by the Treasury without discussion and looks and feels like a smash-and-grab raid. There is some disappointment at the top of the party that unions have not pushed this point further. [i]But privately unions say they see no point going after the 3 per cent charge as they know this is a battle they cannot win. They are right.[/i] I was told recently by a cabinet minister with good knowledge of the pension negotiations with unions that the surcharge is non-negotiable. It isn't even on the table. That is precisely because it is contained in the spending review. That document has acquired hallowed status in the government - it is the agreement on which the coalition's whole commitment to fiscal discipline is based. Ministers from both governing parties see it as the measure that, more than anything else, bought the country long-term respite from any pressure from financial markets that have punished other indebted governments in Europe. (Whether or not this is a real danger -- or was a danger in autumn last year -- is an entirely different point.) The fact is, whatever disputes might arise within the coalition, there is absolute agreement that the spending review is closed and must not be re-opened. It is the emblem of fiscal credibility.

Teamhurtmore - that telegraph piece is long on opinion and devoid of facts unlike the staggers piece which has a bit of both - nfact the torygraph piece simply regurgitates a lie

Someone has to pay for public sector pensions – we’re all living longer, the economy is stagnating, and teachers ought to understand these facts.

They do. the teachers pension fund was reformed a couple of years ago precisely for this reason and now has a binding cap on taxpayer contributions - so teachers are paying for teachers pensions. any shortfall will come from teachers

Nay prob's TJ - the article was written by a Head Teacher. Stupidly thought he might provide some insight.

Lets stick to a chief political commentators stuff in future - much more likely to be clued-in.

Actually re-reading some of the DT stuff makes me wonder whether this Head should be allowed anywhere near kids:

This is the paradox about the unions: on the one hand, they’re very Left-wing and want money poured into deprived areas, but, on the other, they reject the measures that do some good for children in poor communities. Sadly, some unionised teachers have lost sight of why they came into teaching. Trying to improve failing schools, I have faced obstruction from militant teachers who have become so bound up in ideology that they have forgotten the children. Very often, the unions won’t tolerate anything that threatens their beloved “work-life balance”.

Bl@@dy scandal, what people get away with these days!

Swiss01....if the reality is that deep down everybody knows that 65 year old DRs, paramedics and nurses isnt going to happen and that front line medical roles are jobs for younger people then there needs to widespread reform being led by the government, not nonsense about making the NHS retirement age 68 years old.

Pay employees significantly higher wages and do away with pensions altogether, then people have the option to spend the extra money on qualifications for a second career once their front line medical career is over or make their own investments re. pensions, property etc etc....because realistically there arent that many people in any role in the NHS over 55....and the government must be paying out a fair amount in medically retiring people before the age of retirement, this will happen more and more in the future unfortunately.

I could find you a head teachers opinion that contradicts that - he is not a head teacher anyway as he is the manager for more than one school.

His ideology is clear and clearly biased - and he is not in step with the majority of his profession

For the past 10 years, I have been head teacher at Woodberry Down primary school in Hackney, and I am executive head of four schools in total.

I wonder if there is any link between that and...

he is not in step with the majority of his profession

?

And his ideology:

I trained as a teacher because I wanted to improve people’s lives. This is what we try to do in our federation of schools. I love teaching. In fact, I’m looking forward to going into work today. By coming to school I will have helped to make a positive impact on children’s lives, and on their chances of finding fulfilment and reaching their potential – something I would not be able to do standing on Victoria Embankment waving banners.

Again its a bl@@dy scandal!!

deviant, i don't think there's any acceptance, let alone recognition, esp form nhs management that an ageing staff group in a pressure area is going to work, nor as far as i know is there any skill mix work going on that would support such an approach, which is a shame. i would contrast this with what i experienced in the states in that, if you wanted to be a manager, or work in a non frontline role, you got paid less so that experienced staff stayed in the acute areas until it got too much for them (or they got too expensive in which case the management machinated a sacking).

somebody somewhere suggested a pensions cap so that you couldn't get a pension of more than twenty five grand. this seems fair to me. some form of salary ceiling seems reasonable also, particularly for those managers who seem, to me, to get paid an awful lot to go to an awful lot of meetings and spend little, if any time, actually in the place of work - and heaven forbid that they should actually appear in anything like an out of hours period!

[i]His ideology is clear and clearly biased[/i]

hmmm, someone's not been looking up tautology in the dictionary....

Swiss01....i would agree with the idea behind keeping good frontline staff in operational roles and paying managers less, this would see an end to the careerist managers in the NHS who just want to climb the greasy pole and keep managerial job vacancies for frontline staff who want to take a step back and have excellent previous experience to bring to a supervisory role.

Good plan that.

To give an example of some of the nonsense going on in the NHS where i work, a Paramedic friend of mine has just qualified....literally just qualified....i'm talking mere weeks since he was a student.
He has been a good student and will make an excellent Paramedic, here's to many years good service and the Trust recouping the money back that they spent on his training....oh hang on, thats not going to happen because the service (in its infinite wisdom) has already made him a manager!....thats right folks, they have identified him as such a good Paramedic that they are prepared to remove him from that role almost immediately and put him behind a desk!

You couldnt make it up, of course he has accepted the promotion as its more money and he has some student debts to pay off but if anybody wanted an example of how barmy things are in the NHS then that is a great example.

i would agree with the idea behind keeping good frontline staff in operational roles and paying managers less, this would see an end to the careerist managers in the NHS who just want to climb the greasy pole and keep managerial job vacancies for frontline staff who want to take a step back and have excellent previous experience to bring to a supervisory role.

+1 - would the NHS/public sector have the foresight/flexibility to implement this? Not meant to be a biased question, but really a genuine one.

It takes special management to pay their top performers more than them (although this may be more extreme than you are suggestion).

It takes special management to pay their top performers more than them (although this may be more extreme than you are suggestion).

teamhurtmore....i think the public would go for it and the majority of NHS staff too....there would of course be wailing from the unions and other professional bodies like the Nursing and Midwifery Council who would see it as some kind of career castration for their members....ludicrously i was lectured earlier this year by a Consultant Nurse who was in his early 30s....obviously being a Consultant Nurse he no longer gets his hands dirty in a front line role, he issues clinical directions to the nurses under him and lectures at the local Uni (for more money obviously)....the NHS has paid for the Degrees, Masters etc that have paved the way for him to become a consultant in his field....the NHS will also now be stuck with his inflated salary for the next 30 years and the pension provision afterwards, really what was the point in taking a bright young thing like him away from patients?

As Swiss01 suggested, his role should be manned by somebody with 20-30 years experience who is looking to step back from frontline work and willing to take the appropriate pay cut....we have things very upside down in the NHS!

Makes a lot of sense - too many industries "promote' performers into managers too quickly and without understanding that the requirements for the roles can be very different!!

5th - no smiley, so I guess thats a straight point?

The Police pension is Rediculous ..

From Police Pension doc

Most policemen will be able to retire on two-thirds of their salary after 30 years, so if a policeman was earning a typical £34,000 he might retire on a pension of more than £22,000.

.So for illustrative purposes only if your APP after 30 years service was £36,000. Your entitlement without commutation would be £36,000 x 40/60 or £24,000 p.a

You can commute a maximum of a quarter of your pension as a lump sum. So if you chose to commute the figures would be £24,000 / 4= £6000 which then has to be multiplied by your age factor, which for a male under 51 is 15. So your lump sum would be £6000x 15 or £90,000.

So if a PC joins at 20 and had earned £36000 top level PC wage since he joined , which he can't but its an example at 11pc he would have paid £3960 per year (330 per month) £3960 * 30 years is £118,800…

He rtires at 50, Say he lives to 75 that’s 25 years at £22,000 = £550,000 plus the lump sum above , total value is £640,000 and that’s just a PC who has to die at 75 for it not to cost even more

So next time we hear aye “but do ya know how much we pay in” say yes we do and ask how do you invest 118,000 “absolute max” and get 640,000 back..where does that come from add, sick pay, maybe 10 days off a year at £ 140 per day = £1400 per year @ 30 years = another £42,000

Add to the fact that his pension will be based on 2/3 rds of the highest salary from his last three years service, so he could become a sergent late on get paid £45,000 and get 2/3rds of that instead.

To me that return is crazy... not saying a Pc should not have a good pension as it an important Job, but come on it should be related to what you pay in surley
That example gives the whole contributions back within 2 years of retirement...
I Think teachers are the same..

13 percent goes into mine and paid for a lot longer and i get no where near that back

ok one quick bit - nice ride thanks

Everyone has transferable skills - they may be plenty they may be limited.
Everyone has specialist skills again they may be plenty but they tend to be job/industry specific.
So TJ has worked for say 25 years as a nurse- he will have many many specialist skills that relate only to that job/healthcare.
He will have transferable skills [ though he hides them well on here] such as communication, IT team work, management etc.
If you think these alone will get him a job in a totally different job then you are slightly deluded. I work in this area.
You seem to think if he did a one year course he would get a job as say a brickie because he has his cards. However he would have no building site experience, never have worked as a brickie in his life. Applying for the job will be people with 10 + years experience of site work and TJ with a college certificate - he may just be applying for a job he has never done but thinks he can transfer skills to that job [ say housing support officer?]. Again he is against people who are qualified in that area and have experience as well.
Who gets the job? You are recruiting who do you want MR transferable skills or the one who has doen the job for the last 10 years.
Of course you can change career but to attempt to do it in a recession where every industry has a pool of highly experienced recently made redundant individuals willing to work for much less than they were on in their last job using only your transferable skills and willingness to learn ....good luck
Why do yu think so many young people dont have work - no experience mainly. This is who companies stop recruiting as they can recruit experienced staff willing to work for the same wage as a newbie.
Trust me its what i do and it is pie in the sky deluded nonsense to think you could do it currently or easily from all professions.Like many things a few will succeed the majority will struggle/fail.

the link earlier gave the skills necessary to be a nurse they are

flexibility;-- this measn you can do shift work and do different things when asked hardly unique
adaptability; - as above really
empathy;- well not all jobs need it but he is moving away from caring so lets ignore it
organisation and time management;- again who does not have this?
leadership;- you aint going to get amanagement job as a noob so irrelevant
determination and tenacity; Welll he has that in spades an will need ot to change jobs
the ability to conduct research.- one word Helmets - shame he cannot interpret it [ sorry TJ only kidding]

So what job for this skill set with no experience please. I only ask as i am intrigued to where the hive mind can advise me to do my job better - no retraining as that gives other skills.

Should be an amusing list
Again of course you can change jobs but it is close to impossibel currently and "transferable skills" dont really matter what employers want is experience...just start applying for jobs you have never done before if you doubt me. I bet you wont get an interview from 500 applications.

5th - no smiley, so I guess thats a straight point?

Big earners are sales people and top technical staff. Managers somewhere in the middle. The directors may be the best paid but not always.

but to attempt to do it in a recession where every industry has a pool of highly experienced recently made redundant individuals willing to work for much less than they were on in their last job using only your transferable skills and willingness to learn ....good luck

Aiieee, you're right, may as well quit before you start then.

My company:

2009 3.5%
2010 nil
2011 nil

My wifes

2009 -5% to avoid redundancies
2010 2.5%
2011 2.5%

My brother

2009 nil
2010 redundant
2011 agency worker on less than he was before redundancy

My youngest brother

2009 2.4%
2010 2.25%
2011 ?

Not prepared to scan payslips for your evidence though

Not much point, all you'd find is more anecdotes

EWM - seems right, still can't see why PC's and the like shouldn't have the same retirement regimes as the rest of us, no different to a labourer - just need to find 'other' work once you're not physically up to it.
Plus, there is no way any other 'working man' would be able to afford to retire at 50.

So LHS you cannot offer anything of substance in response but will still give a pithy reply to show your disdain

can i do the same?

No no you are right everyone should swap jobs tomorrow as we can all do everything and anything we want as we have transferable skills- your powerful retort and overwhelming evidence has persuaded me of that

No no you are right everyone should swap jobs tomorrow as we can all do everything and anything we want as we have transferable skills- your powerful retort and overwhelming evidence has persuaded me of that

??
this place just gets more and more like the playground every day - no grown up debates just gobshite sounding off with no real knowledge and then not backing down and then odd random stuff like that.

Unfortunately you are trying to boost your own self image by belittling someone else ...dont worry I forgive you, do you need a hug?
Not hard to do but somewhat pointless and childish.

FFS we are mainly middle aged men here 🙄

this place just gets more and more like the playground every day - no grown up debates just gobshite sounding off with no real knowledge and then not backing down and then odd random stuff like that.

No no you are right everyone should swap jobs tomorrow as we can all do everything and anything we want as we have transferable skills- your powerful retort and overwhelming evidence has persuaded me of that

no trolling, arguing or the usual rubbish please

🙄

FFS we are mainly middle aged men here

Speak for yourself JY, if I live that long, I get to retire in 34 years time now! 👿 and indeed 😆

The really disappointing thing is that we are actually all in it together, we all have to live here, we all want the same stuff, for ourselves, for our families, and so on, but we are reduced to bickering over scraps while others sit back and rake it in. Sad.

Good program on BBC2

Rich paying for the poor.

Apparently 12% of people employed in the private sector get pensions as good as the public sector according to BBC news tonight.
Not heard anything from anyone in such a scheme yet on any of these threads ...but plenty from people in the private sector who want to bash the public sector pension schemes because their own pensions provision is poor.
The more pertinent question should be if some private sector companies can provide a good pension for their employees then why not more?

we're all being shafted at the end of the day...

(by which I mean "you", obviously)

His ideology is clear and clearly biased

hmmm, someone's not been looking up tautology in the dictionary....

"Clear and clearly biased" is not a tautology because "clear" and "clearly biased" do not mean the same thing. You could, for example, have an ideology that was muddled and clearly biased, or one that was clear but not obviously biased. If you're going to be pedantic...

The more pertinent question should be if some private sector companies can provide a good pension for their employees then why not more?

Because for the majority of companies they are unaffordable and would bancrupt the company, a bit like what is happening to the government.

LHS - its not unaffordable - Its because they can get away with it.

If all companies had to provide decent pensions there would be no competitive disadvantage. companies on the whole will give as little to their workforce as they can. The manage to provide huge remuneration to the bosses and huge pension funds. You are only taking a few % on costs

Some manage to - John Lewis for example.

Public sector pensions are not banckrupting the government - its perfectly affordable as the real numbers show.