Public sector pay since 2010

[taleofbluehalves]

My thoughts on this:

Firstly a 1% payrise for the public sector costs the country £1.8bn per year incrementally. This is already £180bn pounds per year, 9% of GDP. It doesn't go away the following year, it's not a 'one-off'. People are incredibly expensive to a business and the NHS are people heavy. Not on the front line, but across the piece.

Secondly the NHS accounts for almost 25% of the total UK budget. That's one in four pounds supporting a very worthwhile cause and most Britons will be supportive of that, but also £1 less that could be spent on education, welfare, defence etc. We have to manage the budget (currently still running a deficit) and that means being responsible with our spending.

Thirdly my biggest gripe with the NHS is the way it is structured. Why do we each have local trusts buying drugs separately? Why can't we use that collective bargaining power to demand cheaper prices? Instead we have the Big Pharma companies turning over billions in profit and holding the NHS to ransom. A paracetamol prescription costs the NHS £3.19. It's available in the shops from 19p. Instead of asking why it costs the NHS 1700% more than it does a supermarket, we ask people not to use prescriptions to obtain paracetamol.

Finally the front line of the NHS is understaffed and clearly the area that needs funding. The government did absolutely the right thing in insisting the increase is self funding, we need to look at how this organisation is run and why we get such little return on that investment (compared to other developed nations).

Yet all I hear is people screaming for more money.

100% agree on buying medicines. My mother-in-law gets paracetamol on prescription. NHS pay multiple times the cost of buying them in Tesco. It’s madness!

 

[worsleyweb]

If you are a fat fuck you should have to pay for treatment. Harsh but true.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

I expect people would be more willing to expect a lack of pay rises if it applied to everyone. It's when those at the top of the ladder are awarding themselves massive salary increases and insisting everyone else tightens their belt that you have an issue. The worst examples are universities. At a time when tuition fees have basically tripled and university professors are increasingly being hired on non-permanent contracts, the salaries of vice chancellors have gone up by a massive 41% in 10 years. Instead of investing in education, they're opening state of the art buildings that look good in a prospectus. They claim that it's performance-related rewards, but any increase in university funding can only be the result of massive increases in student numbers of effectively funding from the government in the form of loans (which we'll all pay for later when the inevitable failure to repay materializes). In fact, the clamour for ever increasing student numbers led to a record number of unconditional offers this year, meaning that huge numbers of students went into their A-levels without it mattering what they got. Universities are booming, and yet academic staff have received just a 3% increase in 10 years under the guise of austerity, while all of the excess money has been spunked up the walls on vanity projects.

 

[Blue Hefner]

If you are a fat fuck you should have to pay for treatment. Harsh but true.

What about those that break their legs playing rugby?

 

[worsleyweb]

What about those that break their legs playing rugby?

Yes them too

 

[bluesoup]

Hoping this thread doesn’t turn into the usual public v private sector blurb. Sadly I think it might be.

Knowing many people in both sectors, it’s all relative but getting to the crux of this thread, public sector workers pay, has indeed been squeezed year on year. Acceptable at first but now it’s becoming unfair. To the point whereby I wonder why on earth would young people choose to do these very important jobs that require a specific skill set and aptitude.

Many years ago - in 1996, I qualified as a teacher (not a teacher now thank god!) and my starting salary was 18k. Roll on today, 22 years later. Starting salary for the same job is 23-24k. A few thousand difference in 20 years!!

And even if the younger ones spend their next few years getting promotions in the public sector, they’ll end up on approx. 35k as a first line manager.

How the heck can they afford a house or flat when they are loaded with debt from studying for years and have a salary so far removed from house prices.

Remember most public sector workers do not enjoy any bonuses, cash incentives, paid for staff gatherings as most other private sector companies enjoy. The uproar from just having free biscuits at team meetings tops papers these days and is scrutinised by media.

They do however have one perk, they get a decent pension but they also pay a large chunk of their salary into it too. It’s not a blooming freebie as it’s made out to be; they need to invest their working life to get a decent payout.

In the long term, we want the best people to work in our hospitals, teach our kids, provide social care, look after our neighbor hoods / communities and keep us safe. If we can’t attract talent from the new generation now then this is a ticking time bomb for the next decade.

 

[worsleyweb]

Hoping this thread doesn’t turn into the usual public v private sector blurb. Sadly I think it might be.

Knowing many people in both sectors, it’s all relative but getting to the crux of this thread, public sector workers pay, has indeed been squeezed year on year. Acceptable at first but now it’s becoming unfair. To the point whereby I wonder why on earth would young people choose to do these very important jobs that require a specific skill set and aptitude.

Many years ago - in 1996, I qualified as a teacher (not a teacher now thank god!) and my starting salary was 18k. Roll on today, 22 years later. Starting salary for the same job is 23-24k. A few thousand difference in 20 years!!

And even if the younger ones spend their next few years getting promotions in the public sector, they’ll end up on approx. 35k as a first line manager.

How the heck can they afford a house or flat when they are loaded with debt from studying for years and have a salary so far removed from house prices.

Remember most public sector workers do not enjoy any bonuses, cash incentives, paid for staff gatherings as most other private sector companies enjoy. The uproar from just having free biscuits at team meetings tops papers these days and is scrutinised by media.

They do however have one perk, they get a decent pension but they also pay a large chunk of their salary into it too. It’s not a blooming freebie as it’s made out to be; they need to invest their working life to get a decent payout.

In the long term, we want the best people to work in our hospitals, teach our kids, provide social care, look after our neighbor hoods / communities and keep us safe. If we can’t attract talent from the new generation now then this is a ticking time bomb for the next decade.

Good post.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Hoping this thread doesn’t turn into the usual public v private sector blurb. Sadly I think it might be.

Knowing many people in both sectors, it’s all relative but getting to the crux of this thread, public sector workers pay, has indeed been squeezed year on year. Acceptable at first but now it’s becoming unfair. To the point whereby I wonder why on earth would young people choose to do these very important jobs that require a specific skill set and aptitude.

Many years ago - in 1996, I qualified as a teacher (not a teacher now thank god!) and my starting salary was 18k. Roll on today, 22 years later. Starting salary for the same job is 23-24k. A few thousand difference in 20 years!!

And even if the younger ones spend their next few years getting promotions in the public sector, they’ll end up on approx. 35k as a first line manager.

How the heck can they afford a house or flat when they are loaded with debt from studying for years and have a salary so far removed from house prices.

Remember most public sector workers do not enjoy any bonuses, cash incentives, paid for staff gatherings as most other private sector companies enjoy. The uproar from just having free biscuits at team meetings tops papers these days and is scrutinised by media.

They do however have one perk, they get a decent pension but they also pay a large chunk of their salary into it too. It’s not a blooming freebie as it’s made out to be; they need to invest their working life to get a decent payout.

In the long term, we want the best people to work in our hospitals, teach our kids, provide social care, look after our neighbor hoods / communities and keep us safe. If we can’t attract talent from the new generation now then this is a ticking time bomb for the next decade.

They're not interested in investing in training our population up though. Much cheaper and easier to just get India to do it and then take all of their best talent.

 

[taleofbluehalves]

Hoping this thread doesn’t turn into the usual public v private sector blurb. Sadly I think it might be.

Knowing many people in both sectors, it’s all relative but getting to the crux of this thread, public sector workers pay, has indeed been squeezed year on year. Acceptable at first but now it’s becoming unfair. To the point whereby I wonder why on earth would young people choose to do these very important jobs that require a specific skill set and aptitude.

Many years ago - in 1996, I qualified as a teacher (not a teacher now thank god!) and my starting salary was 18k. Roll on today, 22 years later. Starting salary for the same job is 23-24k. A few thousand difference in 20 years!!

And even if the younger ones spend their next few years getting promotions in the public sector, they’ll end up on approx. 35k as a first line manager.

How the heck can they afford a house or flat when they are loaded with debt from studying for years and have a salary so far removed from house prices.

Remember most public sector workers do not enjoy any bonuses, cash incentives, paid for staff gatherings as most other private sector companies enjoy. The uproar from just having free biscuits at team meetings tops papers these days and is scrutinised by media.

They do however have one perk, they get a decent pension but they also pay a large chunk of their salary into it too. It’s not a blooming freebie as it’s made out to be; they need to invest their working life to get a decent payout.

In the long term, we want the best people to work in our hospitals, teach our kids, provide social care, look after our neighbor hoods / communities and keep us safe. If we can’t attract talent from the new generation now then this is a ticking time bomb for the next decade.

Just left teaching what do you do now mate?

 

[taleofbluehalves]

I expect people would be more willing to expect a lack of pay rises if it applied to everyone. It's when those at the top of the ladder are awarding themselves massive salary increases and insisting everyone else tightens their belt that you have an issue. The worst examples are universities. At a time when tuition fees have basically tripled and university professors are increasingly being hired on non-permanent contracts, the salaries of vice chancellors have gone up by a massive 41% in 10 years. Instead of investing in education, they're opening state of the art buildings that look good in a prospectus. They claim that it's performance-related rewards, but any increase in university funding can only be the result of massive increases in student numbers of effectively funding from the government in the form of loans (which we'll all pay for later when the inevitable failure to repay materializes). In fact, the clamour for ever increasing student numbers led to a record number of unconditional offers this year, meaning that huge numbers of students went into their A-levels without it mattering what they got. Universities are booming, and yet academic staff have received just a 3% increase in 10 years under the guise of austerity, while all of the excess money has been spunked up the walls on vanity projects.

Funny how MPs see fit to accept a huge hike but no-one else.