Public Sector Cuts and Job Losses.

[DIFFBROOK]

There are so many myths around Public Sector job security, pay and pensions. The Civil Service (and I am refering to the core Civil Service) was cut by a third in 2004/5. Thats a big cut and is now historically low. Obviously I cant speak about NHS or Council Staff. We will be cut again to pay for the City.

Public Sector pay. The average member of staff in the Civil Service is around AO grade whose max is less than £20k. I doubt that could be included in any fat cat definition.

Lastly pensions. Civil Service pensions are non contributory. However, an AO who worked 40 years solid service would get precisely half there salary as a pension, plus 3 times whatever that is. So an AO would get £10k a year, plus £30k lump sum. Again, not exactly life changing is it nor Gold plated. Many staff will never work 40 years, so their actual pension will be much smaller.

Civil Servants, face losing employment, an attack on redundancy payments so that staff are laid off on the cheap, pay freezes on already low salarys, changes to pensions that will undoubtedly leave staff worse off.

I

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

I work in local government and we are looking at 20% cuts across my department. We generate income which essentially funds our core services. Discretionary services which encourage private sector spending will be cut, as will jobs as the funding to local councils is being significantly reduced over the next 4 years to offset the costs of bailing out the banks and private sector economy.
Whilst I work in the public sector I do not get a bonus, a company car, corporate weekends away etc. My pension is ok, not anything like that given to civil servants however. I have friends who work in all areas of the private sector. They have not had pay cuts or lost their jobs.
I can't see how cutting a large number of public sector jobs and increasing unemployment in a recession will save money in the long term. Further, it is clearly evident that the essentially tax payer owned banks are still paying 7 figure salaries to their directors and a massive bonus culture still exists. How can the banks be paying such salaries and bonuses with the massive IOU stuck to their foreheads? Why is the public sector taking the fiscal flack for private sector mistakes?
It seems to me that the government don't have the balls to take on any kind of private sector organisation and are therefore flogging the public sector instead.
Yes, the NHS does have a crazy budget and needs remodelling to get it out of the mid twentieth century. Yes, there will be a pension crisis and the final salary pension at 60 will need to be changed without a doubt but cutting jobs across the board is not the answer.

I have worked in both the publi and private sectors and I must say there are a lot more people taking the piss in the Civil Service than there are in the private sector where results (or lack of them) dictate whether or not you keep gainfully employed.

Pehaps my view is tarnished by those I know who seem to be off sick half the year and more concerned with their silly internal promotion wranglings seemingly based on how many extra training courses they've been on than whether or not their actual performance merits recognition and promotion. I have a mate who spent years working for the Government (wont say where as no doubt some on here know him) who left to go and work in the commercial world and nearly shat himself at the amount of personal responsibility he suddenly had to take.

Unfortunately the talent in the civil service is often ground down and turned into a rights-aware bore before they even realise that its happened to them.

The government simply cannot afford to pay massive pensions and benefits to these particular workers when the rest of the country is being asked to accept far far less

 

[Lokki 7]

Why is the public sector taking the fiscal flack for private sector mistakes?

Or you could ask, why has the private sector been taking the flak (in the form of high taxes) for the inefficiencies of the public sector for 50 years?

Yes, the banks cocked up and needed bailing out but in all liklihood the taxpayer will make money on their shares in the medium term, and even if they don't, how much revenue have the banks pumped into the public finances over the years?

The public sector is bloated and inefficient and needs cutting back, it's painful but ultimately healthy. The same thing happens on this scale in the private sector every recession, why should the public sector workers be insulated from the harsh realities of the global economic climate?

 

[beorhthelm]

Whilst I work in the public sector I do not get a bonus, a company car, corporate weekends away etc. My pension is ok, not anything like that given to civil servants however.

nor do most people in private, nor even in the boogie man banking sector. i'll bet your pension is non-contributary and alot better than my contributary one. btw those making bonuses did so because they hit the targets set. there are issues around how those targets are set and other practice in the financial sector, but i dont see why people keep having a go at those doing their job well. also, what happens to all the bonus money, they dont stick in the bank.

The Civil Service (and I am refering to the core Civil Service) was cut by a third in 2004/5.

thats half the problem, core Civil Service has been replaced with many other new positions in departments and regional schemes, councils and organisations outside the old whitehall machine. as for the "attack on redundancy", its to make it vagely nearer to real life job redundancies. sorry to be harsh but i was told recently how much a typical public sector worker would get on loss of their job and when they retire (under the older scheme), and the numbers staggered me. it was certainly alot more than 10k.

i know, pay is lower and the excuse has alwasy been that theres better pensions and benefits. problem is that used to work with far fewer public sector workers with the numbers now it does add up anymore and the government/country is in a bit of pickle. the solution would be to rebalance current pay/pensions which will be cheaper and require fewer job losses, but thats probably to much for the unions who fight everything.

 

[Rusthall Seagull]

There are so many myths around Public Sector job security, pay and pensions. The Civil Service (and I am refering to the core Civil Service) was cut by a third in 2004/5. Thats a big cut and is now historically low. Obviously I cant speak about NHS or Council Staff. We will be cut again to pay for the City.

Public Sector pay. The average member of staff in the Civil Service is around AO grade whose max is less than £20k. I doubt that could be included in any fat cat definition.

Lastly pensions. Civil Service pensions are non contributory. However, an AO who worked 40 years solid service would get precisely half there salary as a pension, plus 3 times whatever that is. So an AO would get £10k a year, plus £30k lump sum. Again, not exactly life changing is it nor Gold plated. Many staff will never work 40 years, so their actual pension will be much smaller.

Civil Servants, face losing employment, an attack on redundancy payments so that staff are laid off on the cheap, pay freezes on already low salarys, changes to pensions that will undoubtedly leave staff worse off.

I

they don't get paid huge salaries as most only work part time - I mean 6 weeks holiday a year is a joke

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Do people honestly think that cutting the civil service will make a difference? If you're going to make a difference you've got to cut Health, Education or the Old Age Pension. That's where most Government money goes.

By the way. Most civil service spending goes into staffing job centres and tax offices.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Do people honestly think that cutting the civil service will make a difference? If you're going to make a difference you've got to cut Health, Education or the Old Age Pension. That's where most Government money goes.

By the way. Most civil service spending goes into staffing job centres and tax offices.

What about Public Sector Pensions?

They are quite simply unaffordable and are completely unsustainable.

20% of Council Tax now goes to pay the Pensions of Public Sector Workers.

No black hole in their pensions like their is in the Private Sector - if there's a shortfall just increase Council Tax to cover it.

All the Political Parties know it, but none have the balls to tackle the problem. After all, they work inthe Public Sector so hardly want to see the end of their own final salary Pensions.

BTW my wife works in the Public Sector, so unlike some I can see both sides here.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

What about Public Sector Pensions?

They are quite simply unaffordable and are completely unsustainable.

20% of Council Tax now goes to pay the Pensions of Public Sector Workers.

No black hole in their pensions like their is in the Private Sector - if there's a shortfall just increase Council Tax to cover it.

All the Political Parties know it, but none have the balls to tackle the problem. After all, they work inthe Public Sector so hardly want to see the end of their own final salary Pensions.

BTW my wife works in the Public Sector, so unlike some I can see both sides here.

I agree something needs to be done. But any changes to that are going to take decades to realise any savings, not the reduction in spending that we need soon.

 

[London Calling]

Lot of confusion here between Civil Servants, LOcal Government officers and NHS.

All are different all have different terms and conditions and within the services.

Some pretty stupid and nieve statements about bloated, inefficient services.

If yo want to have a serious debate about public servants, you need to be detailed about the service, the impact, the reduction, the effect of that change.

Don't also forget that in general 90% of Local Authority comes from Whitehall, not your Council Tax.

So a bit of clarification is needed whether LA Officers Pensions are 20% of Council Tax or LA Expenditure.

I have worked as Civil Servant, Regional Government, Local Authorities and Private Sector. I can assure you like for like, there is no difference. You take the services of Big Bank a billlion pound industry and compare it to Hackney Council a billion pound per annum industry, the services, the efficiencies are the same. And don't forget the democracy, information, openess of public services are positive but a drain on resouces.

You can always cut services but what are the implications.

In the 80's Britains parks suffered greatley because they were a easy cut, CCT saved money, but vandalism, crime in parks, public fear of parks increased dramatically with the reduction or non existence of the Parky.


Money is again being put back into parks, but again it is an easy cut to make.

Half a local authority budget is spent on education. So what are we saying here?

Lets have less teachers? Lets have bigger classroom numbers. For the first time since the war, we are now spending more than 4% of GDP on education. That's a true sign of a developed nation, not trident , not war planes.

So where are the cuts then, lets look at social services, about a third of local authority budget.

So what do we cut. Lets close down more OAP homes or privitise them. Lets cut the number of social workers until another child is murdered. Lets cut the drug rehabilitation centres, until crime rises again.

Housing - lets keep our Council Houses as slums - that's only right , they are all on benefits any where. So lets cull the Decent Homes Programme and the maintenance works, that KEEP THE ESTATES LOOKING LIVABLE.

Lets cut the administration officers to the highly paid professionals end up doing on the administration, instead of utilising their expertised. Imagine Beckham and co, cleaning out the showers, pumping up the footballs, vacuum cleaning the changing room!

Lets think realistically of the cuts.

Personaly, improvements in services, value for money can only come with the decentralisation of services and the budget. Most European countries deliver good local services, taxes collected and delivered locally. Our Health Service need to be regionalised if not broken down to local level, it works elsewhere why not Britain, is it right the NHS is the biggest employer after the Chinese Red Army?

 

[User removed 4]

Lot of confusion here between Civil Servants, LOcal Government officers and NHS.

All are different all have different terms and conditions and within the services.

Some pretty stupid and nieve statements about bloated, inefficient services.

If yo want to have a serious debate about public servants, you need to be detailed about the service, the impact, the reduction, the effect of that change.

Don't also forget that in general 90% of Local Authority comes from Whitehall, not your Council Tax.

So a bit of clarification is needed whether LA Officers Pensions are 20% of Council Tax or LA Expenditure.

I have worked as Civil Servant, Regional Government, Local Authorities and Private SEctor. I can assure you like for like, there is no difference. You take the services of Big Bank a billlion pound industry and compare it to Hackney Council a billion pound per annum industry, the services, the efficiencies are the same. And don't forget the democracy, information, openess of public services are positive but a drain on resouces.

You can always cut services but what are the implications.

In the 80's Britains parks suffered greatley because they were a easy cut, CCT saved money, but vandalism, crime in parks, public fear of parks increased dramatically with the reduction or non existance of the Parky.


Money is again being put back into parks, but again it is an easy cut to mae.

Half a local authority budget is spent on education. So what are we saying here?

Lets have less teachers? Lets have bigger classroom numbers. For the first time since the war, we are now spending more than 4% of GDP on education. That's a true sign of a developed nation, not trident , not planes.

So where are the cuts then, lets look at social services, about a third of local authority budget.

So what do we cut. Lets close down more OAP homes or privitise them. Lets cut the number of social workers until another child is murdered. Lets cut the drug rehabilitation centres, until crime rises again.

Housing - lets keep our Council Houses as slums - that's only right , they are all on benefits any where. So lets cull the DEcent Homes Programme and the maintenance works, TO KEEP THE ESTATES LOOKING LIVABLE.

Lets cut the administration officers to the highly paid professionals end up doing on the administration, instead of utilising their expertised. Imagine Beckham and co, cleaning out the showers, pumping up the footballs, vacuum cleaning the chaNGING ROOM!

Lets think realistically of the cuts.

Personaly, improvements in services, value for money can only come with the decentralisation of services and the budget. Most European countries deliver good local services, taxes collected and delivered locally. Our Health Service need to be regionalised if not broken down to local level, it works elsewhere why not Britain, is it right the NHS is the biggest employer after the Chinese Red Army?

what about the f***ing olympics ?? btw are you the only englishman that wrks there ? all you ever hear are aussie/kiwi/saffa accents going up to your floor .

 

[London Calling]

what about the f***ing olympics ?? btw are you the only englishman that wrks there ? all you ever hear are aussie/kiwi/saffa accents going up to your floor .

Yep and my job will probably be gone by XMAS

 

[User removed 4]

Yep and my job will probably be gone by XMAS

sorry to hear that mate, anything in the pipeline ?

 

[London Calling]

sorry to hear that mate, anything in the pipeline ?

Not really, I used to do a bit of Consultancy work on funding, programme management, business advice but I have been out of the game for some time now and things have moved on.

My present job (advisiong the businesses relocated due to the OLympic) has been pretty taxing and draining, add in 3 kids 5 and under, and I am a bit knackered.

Personally I believe we should be investing in key regeneration programmes and working with good businesses, buy hey, who cares about that community.

What about your sector? I can talk for hours in lifts about drinking a gallon of ale and shagging birds galore!

 

[User removed 4]

Not really, I used to do a bit of Consultancy work on funding, programme management, business advice but I have been out of the game for some time now and things have moved on.

My present job (advisiong the businesses relocated due to the OLympic) has been pretty taxing and draining, add in 3 kids 5 and under, and I am a bit knackered.

Personally I believe we should be investing in key regeneration programmes and working with good businesses, buy hey, who cares about that community.

What about your sector? I can talk for hours in lifts about drinking a gallon of ale and shagging birds galore!

average cocaine consumption on a weekly basis ?

 

[London Calling]

average cocaine consumption on a weekly basis ?

not enough

 

[User removed 4]

not enough

do you think you could increase it ?

 

[Dave the OAP]

Well I am yet to be convinced of the need for Submarines and Aircraft carriers.

certainly a conventional air and ground force and a token navy, but spending billions on "defence" like branbd new aircraft carriers and submarines seems to be something that would have stood us well in teh second WW but these days its only the Americans and the Russians that can afford them.

If you were really radical, you could scrap LEA's ( local education authorities) and give the devolved budgets direct from government to the schools.

 

[User removed 4]

Well I am yet to be convinced of the need for Submarines and Aircraft carriers.

certainly a conventional air and ground force and a token navy, but spending billions on "defence" like branbd new aircraft carriers and submarines seems to be something that would have stood us well in teh second WW but these days its only the Americans and the Russians that can afford them.

a token navy ?? were an island for f*** sake !! the way the world is at the moment with a resurgent russia flexing its muscles , and china waiting in the wings to put america in its place , we need to spend more , not less on defence, perhaps the legions of outreach co-ordinators and all the other non jobs advertised in the guardian could be cut for a start.

 

[Lokki 7]

I have worked as Civil Servant, Regional Government, Local Authorities and Private Sector. I can assure you like for like, there is no difference. You take the services of Big Bank a billlion pound industry and compare it to Hackney Council a billion pound per annum industry, the services, the efficiencies are the same.

You make lots of points and can't be arsed to address them all so lets look at this paragraph. The first part "there is no difference". Exactly, all are bloated and inefficient. Yes of course there are undervalued and under payed people, and some areas are more beneficial than others but we would all be better off in the long run with some heavy pruning. For every decent hard working chap that would be hard done by there'd be a dozen culls that were long over due.

How many banks have you had a complete inside knowledge of to be able to state that they are as inefficient as Hackney Council?

 

[Dave the OAP]

a token navy ?? were an island for f*** sake !! the way the world is at the moment with a resurgent russia flexing its muscles , and china waiting in the wings to put america in its place , we need to spend more , not less on defence, perhaps the legions of outreach co-ordinators and all the other non jobs advertised in the guardian could be cut for a start.

:US: