[Closed] So… public sector workers...

D0NK Winner gets a zero hour contract with no paid holidays no sick leave and [s]sub-minimum[/s] [b]no[/b] wage pay scale, whoop whoop!

If you add in "no pension" too then welcome to the world of the self-employed. We've always been in this situation.

Of course, among the whining and accusations of racing to the bottom, the small factor of our poor trend in productivity is conveniently ignored!!! The productivity gap between the UK and other developed nations is at its widest in 20 years and we expect pay rises - are we all bankers on here??

Increase cost of labour without increasing productivity and what do you get?

Each year she seems to get a pay rise (small) and move up a "spine point" on her payscale.

Is that normal?

It used to be normal.

Not so much now. In my case no spinal point progression for the past 3 years. Now they are reintorducing it but based on performance (fair enough), only every two years and they have removed the top band in each spinal point.

So move to the public sector. Problem solved.

It is very tempting, but not that simple, lack of suitable positions in my area being a key problem.

It is very tempting, but not that simple, lack of suitable positions in my area being a key problem.

Understandable. Since the financial cutback hit home we have been employing fewer and fewer llama's each year. Same goes for alpacas.

Have you considered retraining and becoming a dog?

Mrs Llama is in public sector and gets £1000 rise every year automatic (while within a pay band).

thats pay progression though, not a pay rise.
Take teaching first six years go from 21-32 unless you are shit. People start tea hing knowing this its part of the pa kage that attracts them. Now given that a third of teachers leave the profession in the first five years the government gets a good deal rather than having all of them on 29k or whatever.

There are 6 points on the main scale (£21k to £32k); each year a teacher can progress upward by one point on the scale, subject to passing certain standards.

There are 3 points on the upper pay scale (£34.5k to £37k); every two years a teacher can progress upward by one point on the scale, subject to passing certain standards...

...After 12 years you hit the top of the pay scale. You're then stuck at that until you retire/die/go into management

That is a bit missleading by omission. There are lots of ways to earn more than £37k as a teacher and still have the majority of your role be teaching kids. The 37k threshold will also increase once you are able to collectively negaotiate a new deal with the government.

Combine that with the fact that £37k is a comparably large amount to earn today as a graduate who hasn't taken on any additional responsibilities and you can see why people have a preconception of "greedy" public sector workers.

Your pay may be collectively negotiated and a private sector workers individually negotiated but they are subject to the same presures. A person in a functional role may get anual pay rises if they are lucky but they will likely be well below the published rate of public sector pay inflation. They will also be suubject to a threshold where there experiance is not longer of any addional value so the only way to increase pay is to take on additional responsibilities.

Public sector pay increases are driven by mobility. A worker can leave one company and work for another doing the same job and while do so individually negotiate a higher sallary. Companyies may pay more to retain staff. As teachers you have forfeited this right by negotiating a collective pay scheme. Free schools give you a glimpse of this option butmany teachers reject them as it is against their public sector utopian vision.

Moving in the opposite direction here. About 6000 staff set to have their hours reduced by 1 hr per week, which for me means a drop of about £740 per year.

We're effectively being sacked then re-employed on the new contract. Which is nice.

Increase cost of labour without increasing productivity and what do you get?

What do you put this down to thm? There seems to be a few inexplicable anomalies with the whole jobs market at the moment. There are apparently more people employed than ever before, but the output is lower.

Could it be that what employers think of as the holy grail, is actually anything but? So employing more people, but all on zero hours contracts, or on part time hours would on the face of greatly reduce their overheads and liabilities. But in reality, this leads to a disjointed, disconnected staff, and thus reduced productivity?

It reminds me of the whole thing of moving call centres abroad for supposedly massive cost savings. Apart from the inconvenient fact, that the cost savings failed to materialise, and all they did was piss their customers off.

In which case, its the fault of short-sighted management

No we havent you can get retention payments as a teacher, I got. 3k rise once for not going to an interview..
Simple fact is in many areas there are a huge shortage of good teachers due to masses being spent on training people who leave very quickly. The standard of graduate coming into teaching as also dropped, combined with better terms and conditions in the private sector its no suprise our education system isnt the best.

No we havent you can get retention payments as a teacher, I got. 3k rise once for not going to an interview..

In that case Miketually's statement is even more missleading. A prime example of public sector whinging while wanting to have your cake and eat it.

Binners, not least our relatively weak track record in terms of investment in investment, skills and training. There is a lot of focus on the current "productivity puzzle" as many call it. Perhaps more interesting, however, is whether the productivity improvements that took place pre the crisis were illusory or not? A nice exam question.

But step aside from the muddy waters at present. In theory, if you increase the cost of labour without adjusting productivity the new equilibrium point will have fewer people in work, but enjoying higher wages than the original point. The classic union/management/labour market conundrum!!!!

this is a race to the bottom and you're losing, get with the program dude! Winner gets a zero hour contract with no paid holidays no sick leave and sub-minimum wage pay scale, whoop whoop!

Its easy to label it a race to the bottom, but the real race to the bottom was offshore - and what we're actually seeing is manufacturing gradually coming back to Britain, so it has real, tangible benefits.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/mar/03/production-returning-uk-manufacturers-china

Perhaps 'not quite so good pay' is better than no job at all?

anagallis_arvensis - Member
The standard of graduate coming into teaching as also dropped

...along with the Hs? 😉

I thought that you were Welsh not cockney AA?

binners

I thought it had been fairly well documented that during the recessions employment didn't drop as fast was expected, many employers held onto people but effectively cut wages in real terms through no pay rises. The alternative would have been to lose more people but pay those that were left more (or at least keep their real world pay in line with the cost of living). Which would you have preferred.

If the private wealth creating sector isn't creating as much wealth there's less money to pay for the supporting services which don't directly contribute to the countries wealth.

That is a bit missleading by omission. There are lots of ways to earn more than £37k as a teacher and still have the majority of your role be teaching kids.

I didn't say otherwise.

The 37k threshold will also increase once you are able to collectively negaotiate a new deal with the government.

Yep, that's the current pay for the P3 point. Hence me saying I'd be stuck at that [i]point[/i], not that [i]money[/i].

Combine that with the fact that £37k is a comparably large amount to earn today as a graduate who hasn't taken on any additional responsibilities and you can see why people have a preconception of "greedy" public sector workers.

You think so? I'm pretty sure I earn a [i]lot[/i] less than many people I was at uni with.

No we havent you can get retention payments as a teacher, I got. 3k rise once for not going to an interview..

I've never known anyone get offered anything like that. I must just work with shit teachers.

In that case Miketually's statement is even more missleading. A prime example of public sector whinging while wanting to have your cake and eat it.

Thankfully, the teachers' pay and conditions are available for all to see online. So you get to make your mind up based on facts rather than what I may or may not have quite worded correctly on a MTB forum, in a hurry.

Is now a good time to mention the hours worked by teachers and the amount of holiday they get compared to us private sector workers?

Is now a good time to mention the hours worked by teachers and the amount of holiday they get compared to us private sector workers?

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/feb/28/primary-school-teachers-work-60-hour-week ]Knock yourself out[/url].

Yeah we get less holiday than exactly the same role in the private sector!!

How so? most private sector workers get somewhere between 23 and 28 days holiday. How many do teachers get?

As for hours, if you surveyed many private sector workers they would also tell you they work 60 hours per week. Not sure that proves anything?

Just seen on the news Cameron saying that those going up a spine point in the nhs wont get the pay rise but saying they are still getting a pay rise despite saying it was pay progression himself. What an utter ****tard.

How so? most private sector workers get somewhere between 23 and 28 days holiday. How many do teachers get?

private school teachers get longer holidays with often more pay and the same pension.

anagallis_arvensis - Member
How so? most private sector workers get somewhere between 23 and 28 days holiday. How many do teachers get?
private school teachers get longer holidays with often more pay and the same pension.

So why not become a private school teacher?

And how many days per year do you get as holiday?

Morals
Dont know I dont count em and cant change them ayway, I'll guess at lots!!!

Average public sector pay £ 16 approx per hour, private sector pay £14 approx per hour. I strongly the average work conditions favor the public sector worker.

Did you ever stop to think that there may be a disproportionate amount of minimum wage jobs in the private sector, eg hospitality that brings that average down.

If some of the scientists in my department went back into private industry as opposed to working for a government department..eg DEFRA, they'd dwarf their current earnings.

Private school teachers do get longer holidays, but not necessarily more pay. They also may[b] work longer weeks, for example I teach on Saturdays, run sports in afternoons (incl. Sats) and have boarding duties until 10pm. So it isn't more holidays for exactly the same job.
However, I think that public sector workers, including teachers, do deserve a pay rise and in general do a great job. I would accept a tax rise to fund this. I don't believe that you can cut back without impacting on services and that scale of potential efficiency savings has been overstated for years.

anagallis_arvensis - Member
Morals
Dont know I dont count em and cant change them ayway, I'll guess at lots!!!

So it is morally wrong to be a private school teacher, even though you think you are underpaid and overworked (but with lots of holiday) where you are now?

I have the wonderful time of being a private sector employee in a public sector job. I get the same salary as the people on the bottom of their pay scale But none of the public sector benefits, no sick pay, pension (my employer pays £1.50,in a week) less holiday etc all for doing the exact same job!

Hooli, Ibelieve so yes.

RichT indeed pay isnt automatically more but any good teacher I know who has jumped ship has been paid more. As for the hours well its hard to say but class sizes are certainly smaller that must help. Discussion for another day though.

wiggles, change jobs then.

If you add in "no pension" too then welcome to the world of the self-employed. We've always been in this situation.

*But i guess there maybe a bunch of SE people doing jobs they hate for tuppence a week and getting taxed ha'penny of that.

More of the scientists in our lab are leaving. Over the last few years there has been a trend towards some pretty experienced people leaving and going into the private sector or leaving the sector al together. We have a pretty high turnover now. When I last looked I am paid a few thousand less than the average in my field for the number of years experience. I am paid less than the average person in Bristol apparently, even with a doctorate directly related to my job.

You can keep reducing the pay but it is unlikely you will retain the same type of staff.

AA, I'm trying but Newport is not exactly a hub of growth and opportunity

True, but it's complicated by fewer opportunities for progression by lower staff turnover (in some cases). I don't have any particular agenda but just wanted to clarify some of the differences. I trained in the state sector and saw loads of great teaching, life just went in a different direction! I think Gove's recent comparisons of the two has not been helpful to anyone.
Back to work now. Cheers.

No doubt there are differences Rich but its a good example of very comparable public and private sector jobs.

Oooh, I'll get the 1% as I'm at the top of my pay band! 🙂
Ahhhh, most of it'll go with the new pension contributions. 🙁

Thanks to those for clarifying the previous norms in university pay behaviour (and I'm painfully aware of her being stop at the top of her payscale).

There's a enat trick that all politicians play: they take a specific example ("Mrs Miggins had her wheelie bin stolen last week") and turn it into a general rule ("our elderly are left open to attack by feral youths"). The same is true of anyone using themselves (or their other half) as an example of how life is generally or how it ought to be.

Southmouthers are significantly better paid than us in the teaching profession. One of Goves early statements was about a national pay agreement, funny where that one went.

Whats a southmouther?

It is a Island term for anybody who comes from South of Shetland

I'm going to use mine to put into my pension fund, well I have no choice as that's where it's going.

Why the focus on Teachers again? Fwiw there are some public sector employees you gladly pay money too - I wouldn't bat an eyelid I I found out a teacher / fireman/ surgeon was being paid more than me.

I do however see many examples of Wiggles post. I've even seen public sector management put a Wiggles type employee to task and bugger off home because "he done his 37 hours this week". I'm not saying that's true for everyone on public sector.

I do however see many examples of [s]Wiggles[/s] [i]insert generic name here[/i] post. I've even seen [s]public[/s] private sector management put a Wiggles type employee to task and bugger off home because "he done his 37 hours this week". I'm not saying that's true for everyone on [s]public[/s] private sector.

[i]"Average public sector pay £ 16 approx per hour, private sector pay £14 approx per hour. I strongly the average work conditions favor the public sector worker."[/i]

Did you ever stop to think that there may be a disproportionate amount of minimum wage jobs in the private sector, eg hospitality that brings that average down.

If some of the scientists in my department went back into private industry as opposed to working for a government department..eg DEFRA, they'd dwarf their current earnings.

The trouble is that you need to also factor in the value of employer pension guarantees / payments and differences in hours / patterns of early retirement - do that and the gap between median public / private sector total remuneration is as high as 30-40% and partially explains why so many cities outside of London are shrinking as the private sector can't attract or retain staff when public sector organisations are effectively overpaying for many skill sets.

http://www.rosaltmann.com/public_sector_pensions.htm

Trouble is that on median earnings public sector workers earn £3K more than their private sector peers who apparently all get massive bonuses. Factor in the value of employer pension guarantees / payments and differences in hours / patterns of early retirement and the gap between median public / private sector total remuneration is 30-40% and partially explains why so many cities outside of London are shrinking as the private sector can't attract or retain staff when public sector organisations are effectively overpaying for many skill sets.

so what you're saying is that apples and pears are different. Wow amazing. Thats why I was talking about teachers as we can compare apples to apples.