30th of June strikes.
- Thread starter LeJosh
- Start date
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
But it is them and us. Until the "Captains of industry" start treating staff like humans and recognising them for the contribution they make to the company, rather than seeing what profit margin the can exploit out of them, then this attitude will prevail. Employees are a companies greatest asset, not the capital the company has at it's disposal.
It's not fair for the private sector to put up with it - I've never said it's fair. But you don't create fairness by shafting both parties.
Hey, just because the majority of private sector employees are disorganised and happy to take it up the **** doesn't mean the public sector should.
I think you'll find those private sector employees that have taken the time and effort to form into workers collectives (and I'm not just talking about Unions - have a look at John Lewis) are doing quite well on the pensions front.
Private sector employees on **** pensions have no one to blame but themselves.
Last edited by a moderator:
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Kind of agreed. " B minus - must try harder" for PCS.
They've a lot of work to do before June 30th.
I'm a public sector worker these days (NHS) but I won't strike, never have and never will. I don't see any good reason to do so and it's my pension as a reasonably low to middle earner which will be hit the hardest - but we have to be sensible. I'd rather increase my contributions than see it mangled as suggested by the government, not that I can really afford to at the moment anyway but that's my fault rather than my employers.
Give employees the option to increase contributions, turn them into contribution/managed investment based (not state funded) pensions for those who aren't near retirement age and knock the rest down should they wish to manage their own pension or refuse to increase their contribution to the pot.
Give employees the option to increase contributions, turn them into contribution/managed investment based (not state funded) pensions for those who aren't near retirement age and knock the rest down should they wish to manage their own pension or refuse to increase their contribution to the pot.
Need to reinvigorate.
They have a lot to do, but outwith this narrow scope of action.
It's either the Union or the issue that is lacking in support, and less than 20% isn't a good base to start with.
The action short of strike action the other day was a joke, when I got in everyone was there.
Something has to give, and it's going to be the Union if it doesn't get it's head out of its arse and refresh the grass roots. The Union can't keep expecting low turn outs to magic huge results, nor can it continue to use some what questionable practices at times to encourage it.
You are going to be thinking wtf is wrong with me, but looking at it today something is seriously amiss.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Not at all, I'm a realist at the end of the day. I'm in the commercial sector, not much chance to influence the public sector really.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 May 2009
- Posts
- 566
I don't think it's fair. I think private sector workers should start pushing much harder for a fairer deal. I think that the huge differences between the top and bottom in both wages and 'extras' (pensions, pay-offs and other 'benefits') is obscene- but people within organisations, fields or sectors need to communicate this!
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Thank the Lord someone else is speaking sense!
Divide and Conquer is all to prevalent in the private sector. As are the "I'm all right jacks".
Associate
- Joined
- 6 May 2009
- Posts
- 566
I'm guessing though that at the heart of the current disputes is that there is no 'debate' on the issue, no real negotiation, and backtracking from government on previous 'deals'. If the situation were that proper negotiations were taking place, with sensible ideas as you've noted being properly considered, then there would (or should) be little talk of striking.
I think the Public side have sprinted too early in the long run race, it's a shame the issues then were middle grade orientated to a large degree (IR-CE band 6-8 merger) and the general workforce reductions, now years down the line when the T&C changes effects everyone - the will and force is spent.
I am becoming rather cynical of the Union and it's long term thinking, it is simply not up to the job for it's members.
Those in charge have become complacent, and I don't see how they can pull it back up.
Couldn't tell you the last time I got a BB either, or one before whatever it was relevent too. Sure, my branch you say. But it can't be the only one.
It all fell apart after I fell out with them
Last edited:
Seriously people, how can the private sector even attempt to get a 'fairer deal' when the only way the public sector gets the deal it does is that it's funded by the private sector,
Who exactly is going to fund this fairer deal for the private sector?
If public sector pensions were great and fully funded then fine, as they're not then these strikes are a joke, roll on new laws on what constitutes valid strike action, well done the Unions for bringing about these changes
Who exactly is going to fund this fairer deal for the private sector?
If public sector pensions were great and fully funded then fine, as they're not then these strikes are a joke, roll on new laws on what constitutes valid strike action, well done the Unions for bringing about these changes
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
BB?
It all fell apart after I fell out with them
Haha - I've resigned in the past!
Erm, the private sector?
My company made $2.6billion in profits last year. It's not the only one.
I bet your CEO has a good pension sorted.
roll on new laws on what constitutes valid strike action, well done the Unions for bringing about these changes
I don't think you'd like to live in this country if that ever happened.
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not funded by the private sector, it is funded by the UK taxpayer.
There is a noticable difference.
Who exactly is going to fund this fairer deal for the private sector?
If public sector pensions were great and fully funded then fine, as they're not then these strikes are a joke, roll on new laws on what constitutes valid strike action, well done the Unions for bringing about these changes
Your employer?
My company didn't make anywhere near $2.6Bn, are only huge corporations like HP allowed to survive now? or are they just the only one's were allowed to work for?
It's a very fine line...
And as above.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 May 2009
- Posts
- 566
Seriously people, how can the private sector even attempt to get a 'fairer deal' when the only way the public sector gets the deal it does is that it's funded by the private sector,
Who exactly is going to fund this fairer deal for the private sector?
If public sector pensions were great and fully funded then fine, as they're not then these strikes are a joke, roll on new laws on what constitutes valid strike action, well done the Unions for bringing about these changes
I'm pretty sure that LGPS (local government) is self-sufficient currently.
As for who is going to fund fairer deals for private sector pensions?-
Vodaphone- "Operating profit excluding one-off items rose 3.1 per cent to £11.8bn"
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ca029a54-805a-11e0-adca-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1PT41TgfI
"
Mr Colao’s basic pay and perks, including his bonus, increased 2.5 per cent to £2.7m ($4.4m) in 2010-11. At £1.3m, however, his bonus fell short of the maximum potential pay-out of £2m.
In addition to his basic pay and perks, Mr Colao will see 2.1m performance shares vest in July under the group’s long-term incentive plan.
Mr Colao was awarded 7.1m shares under the scheme in 2008, but only 2.1m will vest based on Vodafone’s operational performance over the three years to 2010-11"
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b11852d0-8c7c-11e0-883f-00144feab49a.html#axzz1PT41TgfI
Who exactly supports the private sector by educating future generations of workers? Who builds roads and operates train lines? Who makes sure employers don't have pay for expensive private healthcare insurance for their employees?
The point is that it's not public sector vs. private sector - that's what they (the establishment) want you to believe so they can play one side off against another. We're all part of the same symbiotic ecosystem - both sides need each other. If you want to cut pensions to private sector levels then fine, but you've got to raise levels of pay to private sector levels as well.
Last edited:
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
As is the teaching pension scheme.
I should imagine your employer doesn't have 200,000 staff to distribute the spoils to either.
So go one then, how much profit did your employer make last year? And how many employees does it have?
Hopefully the government will stop the Military pensions paying out until a later date the same as the rest of us and stop giving people £100k to leave approaching 22 years.
They won't do that though because of the outcry and public support, teachers are far less likely to get public backing.
They won't do that though because of the outcry and public support, teachers are far less likely to get public backing.
nothing, I'm seconded here so they could just end that and move me back down anyway.
we're having a consultation but they don't care about anything we bring up.
Yes it is a very fine line.
Yet taxation is not ring fenced.
And this 'we pay for you' is right, but to mark it so emotively and exclusively as financed from private sector work is not entirely accurate.
My uncle pays tax, as little as possible mind you, and it isn't borne from any UK operations.
He pays for me, and he isn't in the UK private sector. As an example.
The public sector is vital as an enabler, to damage it damages the UK as a whole.
It is interesting that, as a constitutional pillar, the UK has come to hate and disparage the services instead of being proud or respectful of them. This mallicious political streak seriously undermines the very concept it supports over time, the United Kingdom and it's establishment.
If your employer is not in a financial position to meet your expectations, then ultimately you cannot do anything except for increasing productivity.
With the public sector, people dissagree with the 'companies' ie governments spending priorities.
Imagine your boss wasting money on a security guard for your office when there is no requirement, for example.
This is not to say I am not sympathetic, because I am, but such simplistic lambasting isn't directly comparable. Neither is small and medium size enterprizes directly comparible to large business groups.
This is a seperate issue all together.
Last edited: