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.

remember that you are there to serve us

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.

Yup, like McDonald's and CocaCola, spending a forune on marketing to deliver a sh1t product that damages the health of the country, so the NHS can deal with all those rotten teeth and fatties.

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?

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 do work with private sector healthcare and they are 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?

No, all that does is postpone the problem for a couple of years. The solution is to attract the required staff who need to be starting now in order to have the bank of experience required to run a department.

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,

No, same point. Your saying that public sector management is incompetent and that everything would be great if it was contracted out to the private sector. NR, BoS and RBoS, unless I'm mistaken were once private sector but the incomptence of their senior management saw them being baled out by the taxpayer. Something you and I will be paying for for a long time.
maybe you think banks don't count, and we should be using more more succesfil business models, like Woolworths, or Sinclair Research, or onDigital, or .. do I need to go on?

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

eh? Surely not. Having a go lanarsehole isn't a crime, it's a public service

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

-Who is legally compelled to employ any number of public sector staff? If you don't have any meaningful facts to back yourself up, why not make something up?

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

-And how would we do that? Public services delivered by the private or public sector will have to be delivered to a standard and to a budget. Where that trade off occurs will need to be established, possibly by public vote, about every 4 years or so, and we could decide a few other issies as well. And we could televise the whole thing and call it a General Election.
Good idea, but I think someone's beaten you to it, just not ar5ing about with privatising public services.

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 incredibly easy 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 real 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 repeated 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 can be so – 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 very 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.