Public Sector Pay Cuts

Originally Posted by Bri w

Put another way, if you owned a Company, or managed a Company and you knew that certains actions were needed to protect that Company but some of your employees were fighting you what would you do? Now you can either let the workers manage it, and see it go down the pan, or you can make unpalatable decisions that protect the majority. Now swap Country for Company.

Ok, looking at events gone by, if I use the swap country for company theory, using the age old example of Wales in the early 80s, I see that the unpalatable decision is to shut coal mines with still healthy reserves, removing employment for entire communities.

Perceived union mismanagement notwithstanding, cut to the chase and you get to the point where the mines do close. I see large swathes of a country ****ed, not a majority protected.

Originally Posted by timwilky

They would all never consider employing people for who there was no work. I see no difference in public sector.

Out of interest, do you think that the hundreds of thousands of public servants now facing the chop all sit at work doing nothing? Do you believe that the cuts are because there is no work for these people?

[maviczap]

Originally Posted by eviltwin

Ok, looking at events gone by, if I use the swap country for company theory, using the age old example of Wales in the early 80s, I see that the unpalatable decision is to shut coal mines with still healthy reserves, removing employment for entire communities.

Perceived union mismanagement notwithstanding, cut to the chase and you get to the point where the mines do close. I see large swathes of a country ****ed, not a majority protected.

And because it was cheaper to import coal dug by little Colombian kids and now by Russian miners, all in aid of making bigger profits for privatised energy firms, which is what Maggie T did. She wanted to crush the miners, for whatever reason. Miners didn't help themselves by having Arthur in charge.

From what I remember Maggie wasted all our oil reserve cash

We will pay the price someday for not investing in our own power generating, and relying on imported gas and fuel

[maviczap]

Originally Posted by eviltwin

Out of interest, do you think that the hundreds of thousands of public servants now facing the chop all sit at work doing nothing? Do you believe that the cuts are because there is no work for these people?

No we're not, lots of stuff is falling off the end because there aren't enough people to deal with it.

If Joe Public was aware of how much criminal activity wasn't being delt with they'ed be horrified.

I'm not talking about a few dole cheats neither

[timwilky]

I believe that a lot of work has been "invented", public servants deciding they need to do x and y. There has to be a decision made along the lines of :-

What are we the tax payer willing to pay for? What services do we want? what can go? What gives value for money? What is good money after bad?

We only have a finite budget. We need to live within our means. The public service has expanded exponentially over the past 15 years. Why? Are we getting value for money. has every 50% increase in funding provided at least a 50% improvement in service. I think not.

[G]

Originally Posted by Bri w

To be blunt, if you don't like the direction of a Company, go and work somewhere else.

Exactly.

The problem is a lot of public sector workers are unemployable in the private sector. The work ethos between the two is completely different.

I work with various local authorities and the project managers for example work on ONE project only, most are tiny, as the big ones get shopped out to consultants. The consultants work on 3 or 4 jobs at a time and are run off their feet.

[G]

Originally Posted by timwilky

I believe that a lot of work has been "invented", public servants deciding they need to do x and y.

And you would be suprised by just hom many of those invented jobs are filled by wives, family and friends

Originally Posted by timwilky

I believe that a lot of work has been "invented", public servants deciding they need to do x and y.

You should get together for a pint with Pickles http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...less-jobs.html

With misery about to be heaped on many people, this is the best news angle the Telegraph can take on it. Hilarious!

I do a lot of contract work for a large local authority. I'm only here cos they don't have sufficient inhouse resource as it is, and if they have to make redundancies just who is going to do the work.

[G]

Originally Posted by Ed

I do a lot of contract work for a large local authority. I'm only here cos they don't have sufficient inhouse resource as it is, and if they have to make redundancies just who is going to do the work.

The inhouse resources are largely incomptetent and work shy.

Here are some examples of the construction division of one local authority I work for...

They employ the same amount of people as a construction company with a turnover of £30m...yet struggle to turn over £10m and they do not make a profit.

When they tender for a job (and i'll word that loosely as they don't really tender for the work it is given to them on a framework/plate) they will state the work will take 12 weeks to complete when other framework contractors are stating 6 week durations.

They will then cause delays and go on for longer than 12 weeks, external contractors on the framework will very rarely not complete on time.

The standard of work is terrible and general site procedures are non existent (they are even being investigated by the HSE at the moment)


Now this is one department in one local authority, I know they are not all the same and there will be some good ones. But I work with a lot, and the majority are like the above.