industrial action by council is absolutely rubbish (pun intended)

[JUMPURS]

No I don't work every single day, I have to work my fair share of weekends and early starts etc like a lot of private sector workers. Not these cushy public sector ones that think they are badly done to.

Yeah because no nurses, police officers, fire fighters work at weekends or bank holidays.

Also all those bin men that only work 9-5. I mean, i don't drive past them on my way to work at 8 when they are already well into their rounds, no siree

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Yeah because no nurses, police officers, fire fighters work at weekends or bank holidays.

Also all those bin men that only work 9-5. I mean, i don't drive past them on my way to work at 8 when they are already well into their rounds, no siree

Yeah, and when I worked for the civvy I never did 24/7 continental shifts or got called out on New Years eve or Christmas day.

 

[RDM]

I'm applying for jobs at the moment. It's worse, we're about 15% behind the typical IT sector job now. When I joined it was about par, but with a better pension scheme.

If the money is that important, apply outside of the public sector. IT is one area where job prospects are pretty good if you have the right skill set.

 

[Sayso]

When i had the flat some ******* put a sofa in with the bins, so the binmen refused to empty them for a month, it stank with vermin running all over it (about 20 flats worth)

 

[~>Dg<~]

funny thing was david our fav in laws bin wasnt emptied phone call later they sorted it

 

[Faustus]

Straw man, nowhere did I suggest such a thing.

It is simply a case of understanding what the strike is demanding.

It can be summed up as either a) more money from taxpayers in the private sector (because taxes paid by public sector workers don't actually increase the amount of money the state has to spend) or b) cuts to other services.

When put in that way, the claims of the strikers then need to be evaluated against the wider society. Whether or not you have had a past pay rise is ultimately irrelevant as to whether or not you should get one now. What matters is whether the job is paid the right amount to attract and retain people with the appropriate skills.

Given that the public sector did not share in the pain of the crash to anything approaching the extent of the private sector, the argument that they should share in the recovery is somewhat blunted.

Where do you get this rubbish from Dolph? Most PS workers have not seen a sniff of a pay rise since 2009. Add to this thousands of jobs have gone in the PS but you claim they were not hurt by the recession? Very junior managers are now being asked to make decisions that are way above their pay grade or experience. Sooner or later something serious is bound to happen, at which point Joe Public will be up in arms demanding to know how such a thing could occur. Of course at that point the government who are covered in Teflon when it comes to such things will point the finger at whichever agency is involved but will feign amnesia regarding the fact that it was their cuts which led to said disaster.

Also despite what the Daily Wail would have everyone believe your average PS workers are not on gold plated pensions either and following the latest changes to their pensions they are now worth even less.

I'm never sure whether Dolph writes out of envy, malice or whether he's just a believer in a race to the bottom - except of course not for him.

 

[MagicBoy]

Very junior managers are now being asked to make decisions that are way above their pay grade or experience. Sooner or later something serious is bound to happen, at which point Joe Public will be up in arms demanding to know how such a thing could occur.

Most of our junior managers got sacrificed at the restructure. The responsibilities have dropped down to the couple of scales below which were previously specialism grades. A colleague of mine has had their previous clerical and finance responsibilities reassigned to staff three pay grades below (on half the money!) and is now managing a team of 20 with no experience.

Meanwhile the mid-level managers that survived the bloody battle of the fittest are juggling twice the work and making bad decisions without taking advice.

Reading that back I've no idea why I went on strike for an inflationary pay rise we should get by default. It's the least of my work worries frankly.

 

[davido_labido]

funny thing was david our fav in laws bin wasnt emptied phone call later they sorted it

il ring them monday morning then i guess, with them saying it would be collected today, i didnt bother!

 

[Pottsey]

No I don't work every single day, I have to work my fair share of weekends and early starts etc like a lot of private sector workers. Not these cushy public sector ones that think they are badly done to.

I wouldn't call it cushy as its no where near a cushy as those private sector workers who get paid for all those holidays. Cheaper holidays as well as they can choose when to take time off when prices are cheaper

Cheaper holidays and all holidays paid wouldn't it be nice to be a private sector workers? Talk about a cushy job.

 

[MrMoonX]

I'm never sure whether Dolph writes out of envy, malice or whether he's just a believer in a race to the bottom - except of course not for him.

Think you nailed it with this. Dolph probably works in retail, that's why he's so bitter and twisted about everyone who has real jobs

 

[Dolph]

Where do you get this rubbish from Dolph? Most PS workers have not seen a sniff of a pay rise since 2009. Add to this thousands of jobs have gone in the PS but you claim they were not hurt by the recession? Very junior managers are now being asked to make decisions that are way above their pay grade or experience. Sooner or later something serious is bound to happen, at which point Joe Public will be up in arms demanding to know how such a thing could occur. Of course at that point the government who are covered in Teflon when it comes to such things will point the finger at whichever agency is involved but will feign amnesia regarding the fact that it was their cuts which led to said disaster.

Also despite what the Daily Wail would have everyone believe your average PS workers are not on gold plated pensions either and following the latest changes to their pensions they are now worth even less.

I'm never sure whether Dolph writes out of envy, malice or whether he's just a believer in a race to the bottom - except of course not for him.

I am not sure whether you deliberately missed the context or not, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt and post like you aren't being deliberately misleading.

What I said (and have provided evidence for) is that the public sector was not hit anywhere near as hard as the private sector, not that it wasn't hit at all. The continuance of tenure based pay rises has had a big impact on this, but they most definitely are pay rises.

As for my position, I support a market driven meritocracy where pay depends on level and rarity of skills and strength of delivery rather than what you can blackmail or ensuring some twisted form of equality where people are paid the same regardless of performance or skills. For some people, with limited skills and a poor work ethic, such an approach is probably not to their benefit, but that doesn't make it wrong.

With regards to the pension, it isn't about what is received, but the input/output comparison which makes the public sector pensions so good. Only getting a few k a year sounds bad until you work out what actually needed to be paid to achieve it vs what has been paid by the employee. The deal public sector workers are getting is still being massively subsidised

 

[Dolph]

Think you nailed it with this. Dolph probably works in retail, that's why he's so bitter and twisted about everyone who has real jobs

Ahhh, when you have nothing left to actually argue a point with evidence, an ad hom fallacy is the lowest form of debate.

PS. I don't work in retail

 

[Faustus]

I am not sure whether you deliberately missed the context or not, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt and post like you aren't being deliberately misleading.

What I said (and have provided evidence for) is that the public sector was not hit anywhere near as hard as the private sector, not that it wasn't hit at all. The continuance of tenure based pay rises has had a big impact on this, but they most definitely are pay rises.

As for my position, I support a market driven meritocracy where pay depends on level and rarity of skills and strength of delivery rather than what you can blackmail or ensuring some twisted form of equality where people are paid the same regardless of performance or skills. For some people, with limited skills and a poor work ethic, such an approach is probably not to their benefit, but that doesn't make it wrong.

With regards to the pension, it isn't about what is received, but the input/output comparison which makes the public sector pensions so good. Only getting a few k a year sounds bad until you work out what actually needed to be paid to achieve it vs what has been paid by the employee. The deal public sector workers are getting is still being massively subsidised

You really are on a loser debating this issue with me as I was in the PS for many years and can quote you chapter and verse on its workings.

Workers who have reached the top of their span have not had a pay rise in years. Workers who should have been paid a pay increment for length of service have had them stopped by Maude and his cronies - illegally I might add. A whole tier of management has been stripped out of most PS organisations. Whilst the jobs have disappeared the work hasn't and that work has simply been pushed down a tier to the most junior managers. These managers are now being forced to make decisions for which they have never been trained for or in many cases are not qualified for.

I know of a number of people who have left the PS because they were simply burnt out and unappreciated. Most have got jobs in the private sector and wish they had done so years ago as their lives are now much easier and stress free by comparison.

Take it from me when I say the Government are a bad employer. As for pensions - PS workers now have to pay more into their pensions than in the past yet have not had a pay increase to compensate. Don't forget that the deal in the PS was - the pay is not brilliant but they got a better pension at the end to compensate. They now have the worst of all worlds - an employer that demonises them at every opportunity, poor pay and increased pension contributions. Now you explain to me and everyone else how you see that as a good thing?

 

[Dolph]

Because maybe the taxpayer has been paying over the odds given the appalling quality of work delivered by most public sector agencies?

I notice you haven't provided any evidence yet to support that the public sector was hit as hard as the private sector. Your anecdotes don't trump the data already provided. BTW, the source has to be comparable to the ONS data provided. No union opinion or perception surveys.

I also notice you completely failed to address the point made on pensions about input vs output. An increase in input doesn't make the deal bad, just slightly worse for the employee than it was before. They are still getting a very good deal at the expense of the taxpayer.

 

[estebanrey]

Because maybe the taxpayer has been paying over the odds given the appalling quality of work delivered by most public sector agencies?

Sigh

 

[Faustus]

Because maybe the taxpayer has been paying over the odds given the appalling quality of work delivered by most public sector agencies?

I notice you haven't provided any evidence yet to support that the public sector was hit as hard as the private sector. Your anecdotes don't trump the data already provided. BTW, the source has to be comparable to the ONS data provided. No union opinion or perception surveys.

I also notice you completely failed to address the point made on pensions about input vs output. An increase in input doesn't make the deal bad, just slightly worse for the employee than it was before. They are still getting a very good deal at the expense of the taxpayer.

Well as usual Dolph your responses relate to all that you have been fed and obviously you know better than someone who has years of experience of the PS.

I could do all sorts with stats which can be manipulated to tell almost any story you wish - ask the government (any colour) they have been doing it for centuries.

How do you quantify someone making widgets to a social worker dealing with complex child abuse. Which is more valuable, the widget or the victim of abuse? One could argue it all depends on your perspective.

You may not realise this but when you make a request from a PS body and they say they can't do what you request they are not doing so because they are being bloody minded or can't be bothered. Each agency has a sort of bible that the are obliged to adhere to. If the request falls into a category that is permissible then fine, if not then you are out of luck.

The managers cannot make an arbitrary decision to ignore the said bible. Now is that the workers fault or is it the fault of government who put the statutes together?

As for pensions - I think the LGA stated that their average pension for employees was £4044 whilst the average private sector pension was £3700. You have also to take into account that the lifetime wage for the PS employee is likely to have been lower.

As usual Dolph I'm sure you will have Daily Wail clippings that state each PS workers pension is better than a lottery win. Still you know what they say about an empty vessel?

 

[Pottsey]

I am not sure whether you deliberately missed the context or not, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt and post like you aren't being deliberately misleading.

What I said (and have provided evidence for) is that the public sector was not hit anywhere near as hard as the private sector, not that it wasn't hit at all. The continuance of tenure based pay rises has had a big impact on this, but they most definitely are pay rises.

You didn’t provide valid evidence. You provide distorted evidence that isn’t the same as what is happening in the real world. Take a look at monthly wages, job loess and public sector jobs outside London and not counting the minsters/MPs and such who are in a different league to the rest of the public workrs and it paints a massively different picture.

That and the evidenced you used didn't take into account the delayed pay cuts and job losses. For example Nottinghamshire had over 800 job cuts and has to make a saving of 154 million which means more pay cuts and more job cuts. That’s just one council of many.

London is not the same as the rest of the councils.

 

[Pottsey]

I notice you haven't provided any evidence yet to support that the public sector was hit as hard as the private sector. Your anecdotes don't trump the data already provided. BTW, the source has to be comparable to the ONS data provided. No union opinion or perception surveys.

You didn’t provide valid evidence. You provide distorted evidence that isn’t the same as what is happening in the real world. For example Nottinghamshire has over more 800 job cuts coming and has to make a saving of 154 million that is after the 3,000 council jobs lost since 2010. That’s just one council of many. London is not the same as the rest of the councils.

“Your anecdotes don't trump the data already provided. BTW, the source has to be comparable to the ONS data provided. No union opinion or perception surveys.”
For me it’s the other way around your distorted data isn’t matching what I am seeing in reality. My local public work place massive pay cuts, massive job loss and 5+ year pay freeze. My partners job in Nottingham city miles away from me has massive pay cuts, massive job loss and 5+ year pay freeze. My mums job in different public job same story. Friends in other places and and asking around same story. Yet I am meant to believe you when you say we haven’t been hit hard? Where is your evidence?

That rubbish hourly document doesn’t prove anything. For example private sector workers tend to get paid holidays while many public works like me got told as public workers we are not being paid for holidays anymore. According to your hourly document we had zero change in wage. In reality we lost £1000’s. Our hourly wage has not changed but our monthly wage dropped. That is the type of data being hidden by the document you used and it changes the story a lot.

 

[Dolph]

You didn’t provide valid evidence. You provide distorted evidence that isn’t the same as what is happening in the real world. For example Nottinghamshire has over more 800 job cuts coming and has to make a saving of 154 million that is after the 3,000 council jobs lost since 2010. That’s just one council of many. London is not the same as the rest of the councils.

“Your anecdotes don't trump the data already provided. BTW, the source has to be comparable to the ONS data provided. No union opinion or perception surveys.”
For me it’s the other way around your distorted data isn’t matching what I am seeing in reality. My local public work place massive pay cuts, massive job loss and 5+ year pay freeze. My partners job in Nottingham city miles away from me has massive pay cuts, massive job loss and 5+ year pay freeze. My mums job in different public job same story. Friends in other places and and asking around same story. Yet I am meant to believe you when you say we haven’t been hit hard? Where is your evidence?

That rubbish hourly document doesn’t prove anything. For example private sector workers tend to get paid holidays while many public works like me got told as public workers we are not being paid for holidays anymore. According to your hourly document we had zero change in wage. In reality we lost £1000’s. Our hourly wage has not changed but our monthly wage dropped. That is the type of data being hidden by the document you used and it changes the story a lot.

You are confusing overall trends with individuals, and not recognising the need for comparison. It isn't about the public sector in isolation, but in comparison with the private sector that the trends need to be evaluated.

The point I made initially was that the public sector has not been hit as hard as the private sector. Nothing you have said refutes this because the implication was not that the public sector hadn't been hit, but that it hadn't been hit as hard.

 

[Dolph]

Well as usual Dolph your responses relate to all that you have been fed and obviously you know better than someone who has years of experience of the PS.

I could do all sorts with stats which can be manipulated to tell almost any story you wish - ask the government (any colour) they have been doing it for centuries.

How do you quantify someone making widgets to a social worker dealing with complex child abuse. Which is more valuable, the widget or the victim of abuse? One could argue it all depends on your perspective.

You may not realise this but when you make a request from a PS body and they say they can't do what you request they are not doing so because they are being bloody minded or can't be bothered. Each agency has a sort of bible that the are obliged to adhere to. If the request falls into a category that is permissible then fine, if not then you are out of luck.

The managers cannot make an arbitrary decision to ignore the said bible. Now is that the workers fault or is it the fault of government who put the statutes together?

As for pensions - I think the LGA stated that their average pension for employees was £4044 whilst the average private sector pension was £3700. You have also to take into account that the lifetime wage for the PS employee is likely to have been lower.

As usual Dolph I'm sure you will have Daily Wail clippings that state each PS workers pension is better than a lottery win. Still you know what they say about an empty vessel?

So the entirety of your argument is that you can't judge the public sector unless you are or have been part of it?

You do also seem to be making an argument for substantial reform of the public sector to be a customer centred service..

You also again miss the point about pensions, as your payout figures do not include the comparison with amount paid in.