So where's the Public Sector Strike thread at???

rick_chasey

Gregg, it's a little disingenuous to compare the Greek problem to the UK. You know that as well as I do...

greg66_tri_v2.0

Rick Chasey wrote:

Gregg, it's a little disingenuous to compare the Greek problem to the UK. You know that as well as I do...

I was comparing the situation in Greece with the likely situation here were we never to have adopted austerity measures, and were we to have no intention of doing so.

Even Darling recognised pre-GE that they had to be done.

rick_chasey

Darling's been pretty spot on on most things. Osbourne's current spending ended up falling very in line with what Darling predicted (overshooting Osbournes predictions), and the cuts (up till now) have been reasonably similar - I think Darling planned to cut stuff a little later.

We'd be in a stronger place had Darling been treasurer for the past 5 years judging by his recent stint.

Austerity can be managed, if it's balanced with well place stimulus. An extreme and theoretical example would be taxing savings and tax cuts on spending, for example.

jamesco

Greg66 wrote:

Yes, hello, it's Jamesco here. I'd like a ticket to Athens please. Leaving today. No, one way will be quite enough thank you...

Sun, sand, cheap wine and - best of all - the Germans pick up the tab! What's not to like about Greece?

There's no real comparison, however. Greece is in trouble because of its high debt, low productivity, tax evasion and cooking its books, among other things. They're also stuck in a single-currency strait-jacket; they need to inflation to diminish their debt and increase competitiveness, but Germany wants low inflation.

The UK has the great advantage of a sovereign currency and the flexibility that goes with it.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Rick Chasey wrote:

I think Darling planned to cut stuff a little later.

At some point during Labour's historic fifth term?

He would have been drawing those plans with considerable confidence that they'd never be tested then.

(FWIW I think Darling and Straw were the only two front benchers in the last Lab Govt that were worth their posts).

sketchley

jamesco wrote:

As to the strikes: 1% annual payrises are the functional equivalent of 4% cuts, given the rate of inflation. No wonder the strikers feel aggrieved.

There are many people at my company who would have been very happy with 1% in the last two years. Better than the zero they got! Equally there are many people in my company that would love to have a public sector pension, even the new deal, as the current return they are looking at having paid 10% of the income into the company scheme is nowhere near as good.

No wonder private sector employees cannot understand why public sector employees feel aggrieved.

W1

jamesco wrote:

W1 wrote:

Yet you still can't explain why that's the case? By not going on strike, they are doing their jobs. You will twist and turn about this, but that is a fact. Those on strike are not doing their jobs - they're not even doing a very good job of striking. They are also signifying that they understand and agree with the many people who think these striks are completely misplaced and merely evidence of the out of touch world of the union dinosaurs and some elements of the public sector. They could have slinked off to Lakeside instead, but no - they are at work. Good for them, that must be hard in some backward unionised sectors of the public sector. They deserve thanks for not trying to fool up peoples' days on some unhinged notion of "fairness".

You may think it's knobbish to thank people for grasping the real world. Many others think it's nobbish to complain about having to fund your own pension. Some people think it's knobbish to strike when there are plenty of unemployed people who would be grateful for a job that has as many perks as some public sector jobs. This is standard toy throwing from unmandated, out of touch, political union bullies. The sooner that is ended, the better.

There are very, very few working people who don't owe a great debt to the trade unions for all the benefits they get. Study the history of the labour movement and you might appreciate the absolute, grinding misery & exploitation it's saved so many from. Yeah, strikes can be infuriating, but it's the right of the worker to withhold their labour; they're not indentured servants, thankfully.

Indeed - they can always resign, and withold their labour that way. In fact that would be both far more effective and more evidential of actually caring about the problem and standing by ones principles, compared to having a jolly day off.

And you are right, when children were up chimneys and people were being starved to death in workhouses, there was a need for a strong group to make these things stop. I am grateful not to have lived in a chimney when a child. Thank you, bob crowe.

We are a long, long way from that now though, aren't we? It is pointless to say that the unions did a good job 100 years ago, so they must be worth having now. The unions are well past their sell-by date if they best they can do is drum up a minority of their members to complain about having a slightly less generous pension (which is still staggeringly, embarassingly good compared to the private sector). If they were saving people from child labour or stupidly dangerous exploitation, I would support them. If they blackmail the country to feed the coffers of their out-of-touch members, that undermines not only their current role, but also the proper, decent and worthy benefits that have been achieved before - because the word "union" is now tarnished.

W1

Sketchley wrote:

jamesco wrote:

As to the strikes: 1% annual payrises are the functional equivalent of 4% cuts, given the rate of inflation. No wonder the strikers feel aggrieved.

There are many people at my company who would have been very happy with 1% in the last two years. Better than the zero they got! Equally there are many people in my company that would love to have a public sector pension, even the new deal, as the current return they are looking at having paid 10% of the income into there company scheme is nowhere near as good.

No wonder private sector employees cannot understand why public sector employees feel aggrieved.

There are plenty of people who haven't got jobs at all who would be grateful for a salary, let alone a rise.

It's as out of touch as the argument that inflation-equalling benefits are "standard" and not even worth mentioning (as per Rick in the other thread).

tailwindhome

My work here is done.

gtvlusso

Rick Chasey wrote:

Anyway, lay off the insults about my work. We all have to eat sh!t to earn a crust. Some more than others.

Sounds like you need to go on strike.....

gtvlusso

For the record; IMHO - they are wrong to strike and I do not support their action at all. I believe that it is selfish and is hurting other people financially (childcare etc etc) for purely selfish motives in a time of great uncertainty.

My own example - payfreeze and bonus freeze for last few years off an on, salaries in my industry have dropped or stayed stagnent, I am unable to recruit from 'high cost' zone - basically, I can recruit people in India and Malaysia due to cost in the UK - my own company is making 17,000 people redundant over the next 2 years. My pay has gone backwards when you look at the rate of inflation over the last few years - even with good to great performance incentives - this only attributes to a 1% or 2% rise due to business factors. My 15 years of private pension is worth f*ck all and I have to contirbute minimum of 4%. My private pension has no governmental guarentees.

I say - welcome to the real world of the private sector, for too long it has been easy for all of us. However, I think that the public sector have had it a bit too easy and are now earning and benfiting far more than the average private sector Joe. yes - they were underpaid for a long time (especially nurses) - but when payrises are fixed and not performance related, surely it makes for an easy ride?!

Today will cost me a days holiday - although I will work from home tonight to catch up, without being paid.....

So, to those muppets shopping or on the picket - you are idiots and we cannot sustain you. Learn to accept that the luxury holiday you wanted is now off the cards and knuckle down like the rest of us.

notsoblue

gtvlusso wrote:

For the record; IMHO - they are wrong to strike and I do not support their action at all. I believe that it is selfish and is hurting other people financially (childcare etc etc) for purely selfish motives in a time of great uncertainty.

My own example - payfreeze and bonus freeze for last few years off an on, salaries in my industry have dropped or stayed stagnent, I am unable to recruit from 'high cost' zone - basically, I can recruit people in India and Malaysia due to cost in the UK - my own company is making 17,000 people redundant over the next 2 years. My pay has gone backwards when you look at the rate of inflation over the last few years - even with good to great performance incentives - this only attributes to a 1% or 2% rise due to business factors. My 15 years of private pension is worth f*ck all and I have to contirbute minimum of 4%. My private pension has no governmental guarentees.

I say - welcome to the real world of the private sector, for too long it has been easy for all of us. However, I think that the public sector have had it a bit too easy and are now earning and benfiting far more than the average private sector Joe. yes - they were underpaid for a long time (especially nurses) - but when payrises are fixed and not performance related, surely it makes for an easy ride?!

Today will cost me a days holiday - although I will work from home tonight to catch up, without being paid.....

So, to those muppets shopping or on the picket - you are idiots and we cannot sustain you. Learn to accept that the luxury holiday you wanted is now off the cards and knuckle down like the rest of us.

Envy and resentment

bigmat

Greg66 wrote:

(FWIW I think Darling and Straw were the only two front benchers in the last Lab Govt that were worth their posts).

Beats the current government 2-0 then!

hells

Im in the ambulance service and as a member of unison on strike, I am not happy about the changes and think they are unfair, although I dont really care about the change to averag salary. My concern is with having to pay more (15% instead of 11% of salary) and having to wait till 68 to retire as I dont think it's very likely that many people will continue to be paramedics into their 60s, most are forced out in their 50s due to injury (mostly back and hip from lifting our increasing obese population) and becuase we lose about 20 years off our life expectancy for doing our job.

We have the options of either scabbing (breaking the picket line), manning the picket or voluntarily responding to calls for emergency cover unpaid. I am on nights 1800-0600 which is annoying as the strike covers two half shifts. Last night me and crew mate chose to work unpaid and respond to supposedly life threatening emergency calls only, thus avoiding breaking the picket but still standing by our principles of not leaving people to die because we are on strike. We ended up going to several abusive drunks and a few children with coughs and a high temperature. Tonight I intend to start on the picket line, then perhaps doing the voluntary cover again for 2 hours before the strike ends at midnight and I am sent to all the disgruntled people who have been waiting for ages for their stubbed toe emergency. There is noway that I will break the picket line as I think that is ethically wrong, but I also am uncomfortable with not responding to things like cardiac arrests which is why I chose to go for the compromise and do unpaid voluntary cover.

Stevo_666

gtvlusso wrote:

So, to those muppets shopping or on the picket - you are idiots and we cannot sustain you. Learn to accept that the luxury holiday you wanted is now off the cards and knuckle down like the rest of us.

Sound of hitting nail on head. The public sector is too big and too expensive and needs to be cut back to a size that the private sector can afford to fund. Harsh but necessary.

rjsterry

I don't know much about picket line etiquette - striking has never really been an option for me in my line of work - but they seem like a way of intimidating those who don't agree with the union's line into joining in with the strike. What is unethical about breaking a picket line?

BTW, 15% is about what you need to put into a private pension to get anything like a decent payout, and that's before you even get to the difference between defined contributions (as most of us private sector workers are on) and defined benefits. Also, there are plenty of PrivS workers who can't work til they're 68: most of the construction trades barely make it past 50.

MaxwellBygraves

Best placard I've seen today - 'Eric Pickles ate my pension'

MaxwellBygraves

Also, plenty of popular support for the rallies today. People lined the streets to clap and cheer. Think attendance was above what was expected, definitely for the Newcastle one. Lots of cyclists present actually - conspicuous in their high-viz!

Can only speak for Newcastle/Gateshead rally, but there was no trouble whatsoever and the police were good too - kept their distance and remained neutral.

Hopefully there will be more like this - the right wing are panicking. Fully expect the right wing propaganda machines (Daily Fail etc) to go into overdrive over the next few days.

Workers, public and private, unite.

rjsterry

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Also, plenty of popular support for the rallies today. People lined the streets to clap and cheer. Think attendance was above what was expected, definitely for the Newcastle one. Lots of cyclists present actually - conspicuous in their high-viz!

Can only speak for Newcastle/Gateshead rally, but there was no trouble whatsoever and the police were good too - kept their distance and remained neutral.

Hopefully there will be more like this - the right wing are panicking. Fully expect the right wing propaganda machines (Daily Fail etc) to go into overdrive over the next few days.

Workers, public and private, unite.

Define 'worker'.

ETA: My! Those are up to date pictures.

bigmat

Stevo 666 wrote:

gtvlusso wrote:

So, to those muppets shopping or on the picket - you are idiots and we cannot sustain you. Learn to accept that the luxury holiday you wanted is now off the cards and knuckle down like the rest of us.

Sound of hitting nail on head. The public sector is too big and too expensive and needs to be cut back to a size that the private sector can afford to fund. Harsh but necessary.

Can the private sector afford the resulting mass unemployment? Or should we just leave them to rot? Maggie has a lot to answer for...

hells

I am not entirely sure of the etiquet as I have never been on a strike before, we didnt have anyone breaking the picket so I dont know what treatment those people would have received. We had a pretty much 50/50 split of people on the picket or working for free. I think you should show solidarity to your colleauges which is why I dont want to cross the picket. We had a staggering amount of public support and not a single negative comment.

Most people I know with private pensions pay in less than 10%, what counts as a decent payout? Average nhs pension for a woman is £3500 which doesnt seem gold plated to me? Most builders/laboureres I know earn a fair bit more than 21k per year aswell. Would you feel happy if someone aged almost 70 had to carry you stapped into a metal chair down several flights of stairs? I dont think most labourers/builders spend much time underneath trains and lorries providing aid, or regularly get covered in other peoples bodily fluids or get assualted and threatened at work on a depressingly regular basis.

I think all workers should recieve a decent liveable wage and should not have to face poverty in their old age. I dont understand how private companies can continue to declare record profits year after year and give their ceo's 49% pay rises then turn around and say they cant afford to pay their workers a fair wage or a reasonable pension. How can the government have money to go fight illegal wars or give billions in foreign aid but it cant afford to give a decent pension, or pay for certain life saving drugs. The nhs had a 7 billion surplus then the government took out 5billion to pay off abit of the deficit. I wouldnt mind about the increase if it was going into the pension pot but its not, its going directly into the treasury to pay off the deficit which is not fair as we didnt cause this. Funny how there is always money to bail out the banks aye.

rjsterry

hells wrote:

I am not entirely sure of the etiquet as I have never been on a strike before, we didnt have anyone breaking the picket so I dont know what treatment those people would have received. We had a pretty much 50/50 split of people on the picket or working for free. I think you should show solidarity to your colleauges which is why I dont want to cross the picket. We had a staggering amount of public support and not a single negative comment.

I think you should show solidarity if you agree with the reasons for the strike, but I don't think you should feel compelled to take part in a strike you don't agree with. I misinterpreted your earlier post to mean that you didn't agree with the changes to public pensions but weren't really in favour of striking.

Most people I know with private pensions pay in less than 10%, what counts as a decent payout? Average nhs pension for a woman is £3500 which doesnt seem gold plated to me? Most builders/laboureres I know earn a fair bit more than 21k per year aswell. Would you feel happy if someone aged almost 70 had to carry you stapped into a metal chair down several flights of stairs? I dont think most labourers/builders spend much time underneath trains and lorries providing aid, or regularly get covered in other peoples bodily fluids or get assualted and threatened at work on a depressingly regular basis.

If they put in less than 10% then they are going to see a substantial drop in living standards when they retire. By decent, I meant a pension that allows one to more or less maintain one's standard of living at the same level as when one was working. The low average of £3500 is more of a reflection of the number of low-paid women working for the NHS. Some of the lowest paid working in hospitals will be the cleaners (a job I've done when I was a student, so I'm aware of bodily fluids) who are most likely working for private contractors and won't have access to public sector pensions. That average also hides some much higher pensions for senior NHS management.

Main contractors will earn a lot more than £21K, but a basic labourer's salary would be comparable or less. Some of the people I work with spend an eight hour day in a 3m deep muddy hole barrowing concrete into foundations. Building sites are some of the most dangerous places to work. Lots of people in both private an public sector realy earn their money, but that's not really the argument is it?
Violence against NHS staff is of course unacceptable, but that's really a separate issue from pensions.

I think all workers should recieve a decent liveable wage and should not have to face poverty in their old age. I dont understand how private companies can continue to declare record profits year after year and give their ceo's 49% pay rises then turn around and say they cant afford to pay their workers a fair wage or a reasonable pension. How can the government have money to go fight illegal wars or give billions in foreign aid but it cant afford to give a decent pension, or pay for certain life saving drugs. The nhs had a 7 billion surplus then the government took out 5billion to pay off abit of the deficit. I wouldnt mind about the increase if it was going into the pension pot but its not, its going directly into the treasury to pay off the deficit which is not fair as we didnt cause this. Funny how there is always money to bail out the banks aye.

All but a few would agree with the first sentence, but high executive pay is a separate issue from public pensions. It's a relatively tiny number of people who get paid this much, and private companies can pay their employees what they like above the minimum wage. The only people who can have some impact on executive pay are company shareholders - not sure why some of the pension companies (who are major shareholders) haven't made more of a fuss about this.

Koncordski

BigMat wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

gtvlusso wrote:

So, to those muppets shopping or on the picket - you are idiots and we cannot sustain you. Learn to accept that the luxury holiday you wanted is now off the cards and knuckle down like the rest of us.

Sound of hitting nail on head. The public sector is too big and too expensive and needs to be cut back to a size that the private sector can afford to fund. Harsh but necessary.

Can the private sector afford the resulting mass unemployment? Or should we just leave them to rot? Maggie has a lot to answer for...

Really? Thatcher, still using that one.........

Change the record, take your blinkers off, think for yourself and do some reading.

W1

Koncordski wrote:

BigMat wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

gtvlusso wrote:

So, to those muppets shopping or on the picket - you are idiots and we cannot sustain you. Learn to accept that the luxury holiday you wanted is now off the cards and knuckle down like the rest of us.

Sound of hitting nail on head. The public sector is too big and too expensive and needs to be cut back to a size that the private sector can afford to fund. Harsh but necessary.

Can the private sector afford the resulting mass unemployment? Or should we just leave them to rot? Maggie has a lot to answer for...

Really? Thatcher, still using that one.........

Change the record, take your blinkers off, think for yourself and do some reading.

Of course! What else have the left got apart from someone who hasn't done anything for 20 years! They are hardly going to admit that it's Labour's fault, are they!

Stevo_666

BigMat wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

gtvlusso wrote:

So, to those muppets shopping or on the picket - you are idiots and we cannot sustain you. Learn to accept that the luxury holiday you wanted is now off the cards and knuckle down like the rest of us.

Sound of hitting nail on head. The public sector is too big and too expensive and needs to be cut back to a size that the private sector can afford to fund. Harsh but necessary.

Can the private sector afford the resulting mass unemployment? Or should we just leave them to rot? Maggie has a lot to answer for...

That old chestnut - bring out the old tory Demon, Maggie :roll:

What's the alternative? It's what's happening now: paying a lot of people to be effectively unemployed (i.e. doing nothing of any use to the taxpayer while being on Government/local government payroll). That's a lot more expensive for the taxpayer. Why should we pay for that sort of waste?

jds_1981

hells wrote:

Most people I know with private pensions pay in less than 10%, what counts as a decent payout? Average nhs pension for a woman is £3500 which doesnt seem gold plated to me?

NHS pension calculator...

http://www.nhspa.gov.uk/PDweb/PensionCa ... /index.htm

nozzac

I lost a day's work yesterday because school strikes. So there is some tax money they won't get to put in their pensions.

The simple fact of the matter is this: not every working person in the country can have an indexed linked pension of the size of the public sector workers because it is way too expensive. We simply do not have enough money. It is only possible for them to have these because there are millions of private sector workers funding them. Therefore they are unfair. Why should one section of the working public finance the pensions of the other?

I kind of like their argument that private sector workers should not be jealous but in fact should be striking for their own pensions to be as good as their's. It appeals to me. However it doesn't hold water. We cannot all get those types of pensions now that people are living longer. We either get smaller pensions or work longer.

I wish it wasn't the case but it is.

rjsterry

Interesting. So putting in a salary of £21,000, retiring at 68 after 40 years of service gives a pension of £10,500 a year + £31,500 lump sum. Not too shabby I'd suggest. If you change the years of service to 35 (retiring at 55) you still get £9,187.50 per year. Gold-plated is over stating it, but that's really pretty good.

squired

In the last few weeks I've seen lots of comments about the idea of people in specific public sector roles working into their 60s and how ridiculous that idea is. The problem is that it is bourne out of some sort of job for life idea, which is no-longer realistic.

Go into any company in the square mile and see how many people there are (who are not extremely senior) who are even in their 50s. Most have been made redundant and not been able to get back in. Or maybe try an advertising company? Or how about retail? The fact is that most people will end up having to change career at some point when they get older.

As an example, my Dad ended up working part time in Sainsburys in the wine section as he approached retirement because he was too old to continue his former career (sales). My uncle, who had a 25+ year career in the city found himself unable to get back in after being made redundant and ended up delivering packages for Parcelforce.

rick_chasey

squired wrote:

Go into any company in the square mile and see how many people there are (who are not extremely senior) who are even in their 50s. Most have been made redundant and not been able to get back in.

I thought that was because they all worked in this hell hole so they can retire when they're 50?