The govornment make me p1ss

Frank the tank

I work in the private sector, my job is under severe threat.

My mate works in the public sector his job is under severe threat.

We've both been, and both wish, to remain in full time employment.

Particularly in my mates case the (local tory council) seem hell bent on making him redundant, yet the govornment bang on about getting the long term unemployed back to work. Do me a favour, if they can't keep people that want to work in work what hope the unemployed.

rick_chasey

Makes you wonder why people voted for the party favouring the most severe austerity measures eh?

Cunobelin

... as opposed o the Party that made those measures necessary?

finchy

Cunobelin - the economic policy of minimum regulation for the financial sector was supported by both Labour and the Tories. So whichever party had been elected, we'd be in the same mess now.

spen666

johnfinch wrote:

Cunobelin - the economic policy of minimum regulation for the financial sector was supported by both Labour and the Tories. So whichever party had been elected, we'd be in the same mess now.

Th mess is down to spending far more than tax revenues

Mr_Cellophane

I think the plan is to get the unemployed back to productive/useful work. In which case that rules out most public sector jobs.

finchy

spen666 wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Cunobelin - the economic policy of minimum regulation for the financial sector was supported by both Labour and the Tories. So whichever party had been elected, we'd be in the same mess now.

Th mess is down to spending far more than tax revenues

The million billion trillion gazillion pound bailouts weren't exactly helpful, though.

finchy

Mr_Cellophane wrote:

I think the plan is to get the unemployed back to productive/useful work. In which case that rules out most public sector jobs.

Education, health, refuse collection, transport infrastructure.... yep, nothing useful there.

bristolpete

Public sector employment falls into the realms of paradox. Boom and bust, lay em all off, censored we need more staff, take em on, censored we are over staffed, lay em all off, repeat to fade.

Crazy. Saw it in my ten year stint as a Civil Servant (read lazy git)

turkeytickler

Take a step to 2003 and read this http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/a ... 150644.ece
... if the public sector is so productive, how did we ever survive pre 2003?

finchy

turkeytickler wrote:

Take a step to 2003 and read this http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/a ... 150644.ece
... if the public sector is so productive, how did we ever survive pre 2003?

The public sector isn't "productive" in terms of directly generating wealth, but how do you put a value on something like child protection, for example?

Bashing public sector workers is just bullsh1t - there are loads of public sector jobs which are absolutely vital to the functioning of our society.

rf6

johnfinch wrote:

turkeytickler wrote:

Take a step to 2003 and read this http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/a ... 150644.ece
... if the public sector is so productive, how did we ever survive pre 2003?

The public sector isn't "productive" in terms of directly generating wealth, but how do you put a value on something like child protection, for example?

Bashing public sector workers is just bullsh1t - there are loads of public sector jobs which are absolutely vital to the functioning of our society.

I agree, but, there are also a lot of jobs in the public sector that could disappear without affecting the delivery of front line services. However I suspect that many of these will remain in post while the binmen, social workers et al are further reduced in numbers and or have pay and conditions cut.

turkeytickler

johnfinch wrote:

there are loads of public sector jobs which are absolutely vital to the functioning of our society.

i know, and plenty others that are not.

spen666

turkeytickler wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

there are loads of public sector jobs which are absolutely vital to the functioning of our society.

i know, and plenty others that are not.

Clearly though, there are not enough good public sector employees teaching English

nicensleazy

Frank the tank wrote:

I work in the private sector, my job is under severe threat.

My mate works in the public sector his job is under severe threat.

We've both been, and both wish, to remain in full time employment.

Particularly in my mates case the (local tory council) seem hell bent on making him redundant, yet the govornment bang on about getting the long term unemployed back to work. Do me a favour, if they can't keep people that want to work in work what hope the unemployed.

Fully agree.....its all a knee jerk reaction!

careful

It was Gordon Brown that ruined the economy - the fact that the all of the Western world has similar problems is a pure coincidence right? A vote for Conservatives is a triumph of optimism over experience (unless you are very wealthy, or too young to have experienced them the last time around).

daviesee

careful wrote:

It was Gordon Brown that ruined the economy - the fact that the all of the Western world has similar problems is a pure coincidence right? A vote for Conservatives is a triumph of optimism over experience (unless you are very wealthy, or too young to have experienced them the last time around).

Equally coincidental that the Conservatives have taken over after Labour fecked up the country. Yes, I do remember the '70's.

Jez mon

careful wrote:

It was Gordon Brown that ruined the economy - the fact that the all of the Western world has similar problems is a pure coincidence right? A vote for Conservatives is a triumph of optimism over experience (unless you are very wealthy, or too young to have experienced them the last time around).

It was Gordon Brown who continually spent more than the government took through tax, it was Brown who proclaimed that he had ended "boom and bust" and whilst the downturn was world wide, the UK was the last major economy to come out of recession.

The conservatives did quite a bit of harm last time around, but as the previous poster alluded to labour had left the country in a bit of a state!

Gazzaputt

Mr_Cellophane wrote:

I think the plan is to get the unemployed back to productive/useful work. In which case that rules out most public sector jobs.

Pr1ck comment.

tebbit

Mr_Cellophane wrote:
I think the plan is to get the unemployed back to productive/useful work. In which case that rules out most public sector jobs.


Pr1ck comment.

In a business sense non-productive jobs are those which do not create revenue, such as support staff, still essential but you need people producing this to generate money, balance of trade, which is what I think Mr_Cellophane was alluding too.

Why don't you try to analyse an argument before you get abusive.

finchy

tebbit wrote:

Mr_Cellophane wrote:
I think the plan is to get the unemployed back to productive/useful work. In which case that rules out most public sector jobs.


Pr1ck comment.

In a business sense non-productive jobs are those which do not create revenue, such as support staff, still essential but you need people producing this to generate money, balance of trade, which is what I think Mr_Cellophane was alluding too.

Why don't you try to analyse an argument before you get abusive.

I can see the distinction between productive and non-productive, but Mr_Cellophane also used the word "useful", as if most public sector jobs were useless.

simonaspinall

I have to concur with the previous posters suggesting Brown had overspent over the years.

The major problem is the UK wants quality continental style services from US tax levels.

Public Sector workers as a rule of thumb will be very hard working and are doing exactly what is asked of them, however I think a lot of private sector workers begrudge the working conditions they receive as private sector pensions, hours, job security etc. have gone down and they don't have a union to stand in their corner or if they did then they wouldn't be taken on in the first place.

I have to say, it strikes me as quite unfair that a lower paid private sector worker who can't afford to get a pension should have to subsidise a higher paid public sector employee, whatever the size of the pension the public sector pension they receive. Most companies now (particularly small and medium sized businesses) do not offer the same levels of pension contribution that the public sector do as well as the average wage now being higher in the public sector thanks to outsourcing of lower paid jobs to the private sector and favourable trade union agreements over the new labour years.

Having said that, there's no point in having a race to the bottom and that the privatisation of public services (or elements of it) rarely succeed.

We either pay a lot more tax to keep the public sector as it was pre-coalition or accept a lot of it will go.

Flasheart

I don't know all the ins and outs and don't pretend to.
I'm a Public Sector Employee with a Local Government Council and have been for pushing 13 1/2 years now.
We put up with wages that for a comparible job in the Private Sector, leave a hellova lot to be desired.
I for one work bloody hard and always have done and I just clear 20k a year. I worked my way up form a "blue collar" role to an Admin post over the years & I also pay around £110 per month towards my pension. I can safely say that we are not all fatcats with cushy non-existant job titles that mean nothing and do even less.
And even though we are running a bare minimum of staff, we are to expect cutbacks.
I always eat at my desk as there aren't enough staff to cover lunchbreaks and have enough to cover calls and callers into the office. I go in to work on my own time in the middle of the night if alarms go off or there is an civil emergency like a flood etc. and as I'm on Flexitime, I get nothing more in my pocket for it. It's just taken as I will.
And I'm supposed to feel lucky that I still have a job because of ungrateful members of the public feel that we shouldn't have them.
When the streets clog up with rubbish and your council house needs repairs and the storms blow down the tree branches that block the roads...who do you think goes out in the worst of it and gets it sorted....Public Servants :roll:
I feel that I contribute to my community in my job role..how about you?
/rant over/

daviesee

Flasheart,

You will find that no-one is against your position.

Where the clamour comes from, and it may only be percieved, is that the impression given is that there are a lot of people in middle and upper management positions getting overpaid for doing very little and getting luxury perks into the bargain.

There is also the perception that a lot of civil servants pension is non-contributary and that early retirement on a full index-linked pension is the norm. That gets people's backs up where they have to contribute heavily or get nothing.

If these perceptions could be adequately refuted then the cuts would have to come from somewhere else. No-one wants front line services to be cut.

finchy

daviesee wrote:

Where the clamour comes from, and it may only be percieved, is that the impression given is that there are a lot of people in middle and upper management positions getting overpaid for doing very little and getting luxury perks into the bargain.

A very small minority. When I worked in public services, the managers in my department had to work very, very hard and earned about 35k. It took them decades to reach that level.

rick_chasey

daviesee wrote:

Where the clamour comes from, and it may only be percieved, is that the impression given is that there are a lot of people in middle and upper management positions getting overpaid for doing very little and getting luxury perks into the bargain.

As an aside note, but one which (I think) adds value:

If you want the talent at the top (and for important public services, why on earth wouldn't you?) you have to pay for it.

I have no qualms with civil servants being paid a lot if they are worth it and genuinely earn it.

Some people seem to think big salaries per-se are bad. Big salaries for people who aren't worth it are bad.

notsoblue

Rick Chasey wrote:

daviesee wrote:

Where the clamour comes from, and it may only be percieved, is that the impression given is that there are a lot of people in middle and upper management positions getting overpaid for doing very little and getting luxury perks into the bargain.

As an aside note, but one which (I think) adds value:

If you want the talent at the top (and for important public services, why on earth wouldn't you?) you have to pay for it.

I have no qualms with civil servants being paid a lot if they are worth it and genuinely earn it.

Some people seem to think big salaries per-se are bad. Big salaries for people who aren't worth it are bad.

Thats a very reasonable opinion, and I think most people would entirely agree with you. But judging a civil servant as "worth it" is subjective. And those who are ideologically inclined to want to reduce the public sector use this subjectivity as leverage when trying to win over public opinion.

imo

tebbit

The trouble with certain viewpoints is that people will see the headlines, a civil servant earns more than the prime minister and think that all civil servants are over paid and having a great life, whereas the a lot of civil servants and local government employees work censored hours in a stressful often under valued role. A big problem is the increase in the size of the civil service by comparison to comparison to the income earning population, that is those that manufacture goods or provide services that bring money in from abroad, the balance needs to be redressed with more people bringing in overseas earnings. The City of London used to provide a large slice of that in what was called invisible earnings, hence the banks being bailed out, they drove the economy in more and more desperate ways whereas manufacturing wouldn't have been as glamorous but it would have provided stable skilled work.

As I will probably be out of a job by the end of September, anyone who is feeling the pinch has my sympathy.

Flasheart

Can I make a small point

The Civil Service and Public service are different enterties.

Civil Servants are in Whitehall calling the shots
Public Servants for the most part are people on the street (Local Govt, Police, teachers, nurses etc) .doing the actual work directed from above( Civil Service) whether they agree with their policies or not.

rick_chasey

Flasheart wrote:

Can I make a small point

The Civil Service and Public service are different enterties.

Civil Servants are in Whitehall "calling the shots"
Public Servants for the most part are people on the street doing the actual work directed from above( Civil Service) whether they agree with their policies or not.

Edited...


Whitehall also has to do stuff whether they agree with the politics of it or not.

Pross

I've worked in private and public sectors doing roughly the same job from different sides of the fence. I moved for more money (around 10 or 12% more) but in return took a 25% cut in leave and although the hours were theoretically 0.5 hours extra a week in reality I now have to work whatever hours are needed to get the job done with extra pay. I knew this when I took the job and it's normally only an extra hour or two a week but can be more. When the recession bit we were all asked to take a 10% pay cut as well as losing other perks such as company pension contributions, fair enough as it prevented a few redundancies. Now I earn roughly the same as my public sector counterpart but they have better leave, working hours and pension. Not a complaint as I knew what I was doing taking the job and had a decade doing well. However, my industry didn't cause the financial crisis but we had to react to it and it has hit us all. Why do some within the public sector (mainly Union reps) feel that they should be immune from what the rest of us have had to face? I've nothing against the public sector which is an essential part of daily life and something I will probably return to one day but sometimes we all have to face reality.

I agree with the OP on the point of getting long termed unemployed back into work at a time many are still losing their jobs though.