Birmingham bankrupt

That to me is the main issue. We want/expect the same kind of services as the Scandinavians (for example) but that would most likely require tax hikes and few seem to be really willing to accept that.

Cuts obviously play a major part but so too does bad management. I worked for a county council many years ago and the wastage at that time was really quite staggering.
GDP per capita is knowhere near the Scandinavian countries. So no chance of the same level of services. Poor management and no accountability has clearly played a part along with low levels of funding.

Personally I don't see the benefit of collapsing a council to settle historic wage claims. Too many people suffer. If there isn't the money to pay the claims then they should be stopped.
 
The problems happened because people doing different jobs wanted the same money as people doing other jobs if I remember correctly.

Normal council jobs with defined job descriptions are paid the same, depending on hours worked etc..etc
Aren’t they banded and they go up the band after a certain amount of time?

I guess we’d have to read the job spec and contracts to know for sure.
 
Aren’t they banded and they go up the band after a certain amount of time?

I guess we’d have to read the job spec and contracts to know for sure.

They are mate but if you are doing the same job you get the same pay.

Dinner ladies won the right to the same pay as binmen and street cleaners, if you take it to it's conclusion bin men and street cleaners need to have parity with any other council employee.
 
The problems happened because people doing different jobs wanted the same money as people doing other jobs if I remember correctly.

Normal council jobs with defined job descriptions are paid the same, depending on hours worked etc..etc
Don't they have bands or pay grades that create an equivalence between different jobs? So for example, a bin man and an office clerk are different jobs, but they could both be band C and so in theory paid the same with the same experience?
 
Equal pay for the same job and for the same time worked, any other formulae and it's ridiculous.
It was done on a spreadsheet with different weighting factors. A lot of predominantly female roles saw big increases, however most LAs did it around 2004-2009 as part of union driven job evaluation. It was also down to whoever they interviewed in that role making their case in each of the area that were scored, technical knowledge, working conditions, financial responsibility, managerial responsibility etc.

The Unison guy always used the example of Dinner Ladies and Bin Men, the working conditions for Bin Men were much better in the summer and they didn't have to lift anymore. So the former wages went up and the latter went down after a protected period. The problem was a lot of roles that had increases after the job evaluation were then contracted out as they were paying far more than market rates. Whilst a skilful programmer wouldn't score highly of they didn't manage anyone or have a budget and earn far less. There were some really odd results from the whole episode.
 
Don't they have bands or pay grades that create an equivalence between different jobs? So for example, a bin man and an office clerk are different jobs, but they could both be band C and so in theory paid the same with the same experience?


I couldn't tell you, all I know is that the ruling is a general rule and anyone could argue that the bands are unfair, if it were that easy the council would have just shifted the bin mens bands and the dinner ladies wouldn't have had a case.
 
Nottingham City Council will be next. It scraped by last year.

A Tory free council having further central funding **** for having the audacity of voters wiping the bastards out...

Notts County Council, Tory run and it's leader being their MP for Mansfield. (How does he find the time to be an MP and leader of the council I'll never know?) will get some extra funding for improvements to our version of Alderley Edge whilst the poorest area next door gets fuck all.
 
GDP per capita is knowhere near the Scandinavian countries. So no chance of the same level of services. Poor management and no accountability has clearly played a part along with low levels of funding.
In 2007, before the global financial crash, the UK's GDP per capita was $300 less than the Netherlands (yes, not Scandinavia, but still great public services by all accounts) and basically the same as Germany. In 2009, after the financial crash, we'd slipped to over $4k behind the Netherlands but were actually $1200 ahead of Germany. We're now over $10k less than Germany and $17k less than the Netherlands. It's an astonishing fall from grace. We're now less than half that of Ireland.
 
That old chestnut, they do it out of the goodness of their hearts as a favour to us ungrateful tax payers. If they could get more in the private sector, when you start adding in benefits like gold plated pensions, extra holidays, and more generous things like sick pay, and conditions they'd be off. Let's not kid ourselves.

They might not make the cut quality wise either ?
I agree with that. Very few (I never met one but you never know) public sector workers - carrying out jobs that existed in the private sector - did it out of altruism. Generally the jobs were safe, with good conditions, great holidays and excellent pensions. I do recall Birmingham Council had a reputation for paying big salaries to street lighting engineers etc due to shift payments, various allowances, overtime etc that seemed well out of market at the time - they were known to be generous and it was a topic of discussion with various contractors I was working with at time. Was around 10 years ago to be fair.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.