Poll: The Budget

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Also the major influence for actually putting most of the significant government in these areas is political.
They have historically placed lots of these departments in areas with high unemployment to actually influence those figures and stop the decay of the area.
Its actually one of the things I am most intrigued about the possible scottish devolution, why would the rest of the UK allow any significant employment to remain in Scotland if they go do their own thing? Makes no sense to leave it there imo

 

[piggeh]

Total compensation, for similarly skilled employees, is, on average, substantially higher in the public sector

Ensuring pay is competitive means cutting the overall compensation for many in the public sector, be careful what you wish for.

There are some jobs which the private sector pays substantially more for. I don't disagree with other jobs possibly being overpaid compared to private equivalents, but where it happens (private pays more) there's a potential for a skills drain to the private sector if pay is not high enough.

I would imagine you also get into other issues such as commutable distance when considering changes in pay. For London, how do you assess the cost of living? People working in London could come from the edges of Kent where it's much cheaper to live.

I do think in principle it's wasteful paying people in Wales or the North the same as the South East, as there is a large disparity in living costs, but working out all the details and impacts of such changes nationwide is a minefield.

 

[Danthus]

Because the rich self-fund whereas the poor tend to be funded by others, and there is a world of difference between not taking as much of someone's property, and not giving someone as much of other people's property?

What?

 

[Von Smallhausen]

Interesting that MPs pay isn't going the same way. Coincidence I'm sure.

 

[Andy90]

I'm all for regional variations in pay.

So long as there are regional variations in the wages of Politicians and Local Councellors.

I mean if it is ok to pay a Teacher more per month in London than one in Dundee, shouldn't the same thing apply for Members of Parliament?

They're 'public servants' as well aren't they, paid for out of the public purse. So it seems fair to me.

I must admit that this Government really has started to scrape the bottom of the barrel.

The Government are saying that Public sector pay in places like Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the North East is higher than the average wage in the area. You cannot really argue against this since they've got all the figures.

Isn't this spin though, why not say private sector wages in these areas are on average lower than the norm? I'm fairly certain that this is the case and lets not forget that Public Sector pay in these areas being higher than average is in fact a direct result of Government Policy - ie to move State services out into areas of high unemployment over the years. So who is to blame?

You often cannot say that Public Sector Wages are the 'norm' because in many case like for like examples don't exist.

There isn't a like for like example for the Police, Fire, HM Customs and Excise for example so it makes a comparison difficult.

Granted for Nursing and Teaching there are well established private employment, it would be interesting to see what a Private Teacher in one area gets compared to a 'State' Teacher. I suspect there will again be some variations. I bet a teacher at Gordonstoune will get a little bit more than one in the local Comprehensive, but who is under more pressure and more importantly who is going to get the pay cut? If we are talking fairness on wages then why are we not talking about fairness when it comes to the stresses and strains of the job.

How far do we go. Armed Forces? Lets pay a someone based at the top end of Scotland far less than someone in Plymouth? Police Services of Northern Ireland - its out of the way, its a depressed area and the wages are higher than the norm, so lets pay some poor plod there less money than someone in say Windsor. Doesn't stack up does it, particularly where one might get his brains blown out of the side of his head when he starts his car in the morning.

This Government has no idea on how to tackle this economic problem. Its solution so far seems to be depress spending in areas already struggling to keep jobs... good idea - not.

 

[Muffin`]

Interesting that MPs pay isn't going the same way. Coincidence I'm sure.

All in the game.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

Will you be worse off under Hutton Andy ?

 

[Andy90]

Will you be worse off under Hutton Andy ?

Already worse off, will be at least £2k a year. I'm 5 years off retirement and theoretically can go at 49.5 years of age. I'm not going to be sat doing nothing so hopefully will get another job, paying my taxes and contributing to society as I have done since I left School. The prospect of being told hey you've actually got another 15 years do fills me with dread. However I suspect the extra 10 years where I will be blocking new recruits coming into the job and a situation where they pay me approximately 1/3rd more in wages than it would cost to pay my maximum pension before commutation doesn't compute with the government.

 

[Hagar]

Regionalised pay scales will not work. However individual pay agreements will. That is the lesson from Sweden. Pay bands are set locally but are flexible and negotiated with the employee.

You can reward high achievers or positions difficult to fill and pay less to low achievers.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

Already worse off, will be at least £2k a year

Thanks for your hard work, getting assaulted on a regular basis, getting bricked during civil unrest, working all manner of unsociable hours, being recalled to duty, getting rest days cancelled and protecting the public 24/7 but up yours.

 

[Andy90]

Don't mention it Mr Prime Minister it's been a pleasure, /backs out of room tugging at his forelock....

 

[Von Smallhausen]

 

[atpbx]

If it was so great in London, I wouldnt be surrounded by thousands of the unbareable cockney ******* up here in the midlands telling me how great it is in London.

 

[kinetic747]

Because the rich self-fund whereas the poor tend to be funded by others

You aren't a 19th Century industrialist by any chance are you?

 

[stockhausen]

... You can reward high achievers or positions difficult to fill and pay less to low achievers.

There is quite an interesting example of how well this works in relation to GPs.

When New Labour negotiated the disastrous agreement with GPs, it was based on GP effectiveness.

GPs working in middle-class leafy suburbs where their patients are educated and motivated get QOF points and points mean money; GPs working in deprived, inner-city areas where their patients are poor, badly educated and not motivated lose QOF points and consequently do less well than their colleagues in the leafy suburbs.

The upshot of this is that GPs will always try to work in middle-class leafy suburbs rather than deprived, inner-city areas where they are potentially most needed. Neither New Labour or the Tories have thought of addressing this issue by paying bonuses to GPs willing to work in deprived, inner-city areas.

Of course, electors living in deprived, inner-city areas will typically not vote or will vote Labour, so why would the Tories care?

 

[Destination]

People actually voted Lib dem last election....

If I did...I would be furious

Gladly I used my brain

What way didyou vote?

 

[s0ck]

I'll have a little giggle in two years when applicants dry up for nursing and teaching posts.

Guess who will be teaching your kids, in these areas, in the next 3 - 5 years.

Clue: it won't be locals.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Guess who will be teaching your kids, in these areas, in the next 3 - 5 years.

Clue: it won't be locals.

Martians?

 

[drunkenmaster]

Well - they get to live in London, which though some will disagree, is a world city with many benefits of being there. It's a great place to live. Rotherham, on the other hand, is pretty crap. So currently you can live in London and be less well off but benefit from living in a great city. Or you can live in a crap city but benefit financially..

Why would anyone want to live and work in some of the places in the UK if there was no financial advantage to them doing so? Will we see talented teachers simply upping sticks and thinking they might as well live in Hertfordshire?

Difference is due to the pay scale the guy working in London both can't afford to go out in London, and will have a much worse quality of life, while the guy working in Rotherham will both have a higher quality of life, much bigger house/flat, less crime, less polution AND be able to actually afford to travel to and go out in London.

It costs more to live in london which is why the majority of jobs have London weighting to the pay, paying all public sector workers the same is a disgrace, has always been a joke and costs billions and billions a year to overpay workers, nothing more or less.

As has been pointed out, when outside of London public sector pay essentially becomes 10% higher than private sector, private sector suffers badly, with less people interested in the jobs, less growth and less competitive.

THe MAIN thing this does is make it easier for private sector to get the best staff with competitive wages, which helps push the hugely excessively large public sector workforce into private sector jobs, which has a massive, simply massive benefit to the country.

We need private sector to employ vastly more people than it does now and public sector to employ vastly less.


Anyway, for people who live in London a lot of them will tell you much of it is a big ****hole, it sticks, its loud, its dirty and the people are in general rude. That are huge area's of incredibly poor people, lots of "bad" area's, high crime and many many people I know would prefer to live out of London than in, including me.

For all the benefits of London, it has many many negatives, and for all the "its not London" negatives of places outside of London there are a huge number of positives.

 

[mattyg]

Guess who will be teaching your kids, in these areas, in the next 3 - 5 years.

Clue: it won't be locals.

At least the kids will have a trade to fall back on

Plastering
Bricklaying
Painting