Public sector pay since 2010

[Onholiday(somemightsay)]

My daughter just got great gcse results and wants to be a paramedic or nurse. 27k debt after university and a starting salary of 23k? That’s a joke.

Yeh those scales need to be re-balanced.......

They play the on the good nature or people's ambition to have always wanted to be a nurse / firefighter / soldier etc. Especially when university fees come into play - very large financial commitment over over a years starting salary

 

[117 M34]

Not sure if i agree with that but she shouldn't have to pay it back unless she is earning a decent living wage, and then depending on what she earns (the more) would mean she would pay a higher % per year.
Atm, once a teacher is earning over £18k they have to start paying back 9%. Thats across the board.

Havingjust read the above online, surely this is wrong.
If a student is earning the lowest threshold for repayments they shoupd have a smaller % compared to the higher earners. A staggered system?
If the site is correct then surely this system is wrong and again favours the higher earmers over the lower earning graduates?

Start at 4% and for every £3k you can increase the percentage by 0.5%. This wont onlyhelp the graduates but it will also help driver the economy forward to as people will have more spare change.

It's 9% of anything above the threshold

 

[squirtyflower]

Not sure if i agree with that but she shouldn't have to pay it back unless she is earning a decent living wage, and then depending on what she earns (the more) would mean she would pay a higher % per year.
Atm, once a teacher is earning over £18k they have to start paying back 9%. Thats across the board.

Havingjust read the above online, surely this is wrong.
If a student is earning the lowest threshold for repayments they shoupd have a smaller % compared to the higher earners. A staggered system?
If the site is correct then surely this system is wrong and again favours the higher earmers over the lower earning graduates?

Start at 4% and for every £3k you can increase the percentage by 0.5%. This wont onlyhelp the graduates but it will also help driver the economy forward to as people will have more spare change.

I completely disagree, without teachers, doctors, nurses et al we’d be up shit creek without a paddle. They shouldn’t be paying to qualify to do a job that is a needed service.

 

[blueinsa]

I completely disagree, without teachers, doctors, nurses et al we’d be up shit creek without a paddle. They shouldn’t be paying to qualify to do a job that is a needed service.

Absolutely agree. Opening a can or worms here but i'm old school in that University should be for the very brightest. Too many see it as a right these days and its become a huge money making racket as far as i can see with a majority going to just rack up debts that will often not be repaid and with little or no chance of a meaningful career to show for it at the end.

It should be scaled right back, examinations made to sort the wheat from the chaff and those not gaining the grades to go on to Uni can then do what we did years ago and enter the job market and learn trades and skills needed. Every year it like a race to see if we can improve the percentage of passes with A grades or 9 score and for what? What is it actually proving because i dont for a second think it's doing the country any real good or showing the progress some want it to show.

The savings can be invested to make sure our future doctors and nurses etc, vital the the country for generations get the training the need without the debt.

 

[squirtyflower]

Absolutely agree. Opening a can or worms here but i'm old school in that University should be for the very brightest. Too many see it as a right these days and its become a huge money making racket as far as i can see with a majority going to just rack up debts that will often not be repaid and with little or no chance of a meaningful career to show for it at the end.

It should be scaled right back, examinations made to sort the wheat from the chaff and those not gaining the grades to go on to Uni can then do what we did years ago and enter the job market and learn trades and skills needed. Every year it like a race to see if we can improve the percentage of passes with A grades or 9 score and for what? What is it actually proving because i dont for a second think it's doing the country any real good or showing the progress some want it to show.

The savings can be invested to make sure our future doctors and nurses etc, vital the the country for generations get the training the need without the debt.

It has become a racket.
There are students now doing ‘academic’ subjects at A’Level that are not suitable. Don’t get me wrong, they are bright and they are savvy, but not academic. We’re losing a generation of people who could set up their own businesses or work for themselves and earn a great living being sold the dream of University. Then they rack up huge debts at a shit university that has been rebranded having been a shit college earning a degree of uselessness. They then enter the job market and get a job that doesn’t require the levels they’ve gone to and they could have been doing the job instead of racking up the debt. And some totally miss out on the trades as they’re too old and owe too much to start again.

 

[blueinsa]

It has become a racket.
There are students now doing ‘academic’ subjects at A’Level that are not suitable. Don’t get me wrong, they are bright and they are savvy, but not academic. We’re losing a generation of people who could set up their own businesses or work for themselves and earn a great living being sold the dream of University. Then they rack up huge debts at a shit university that has been rebranded having been a shit college earning a degree of uselessness. They then enter the job market and get a job that doesn’t require the levels they’ve gone to and they could have been doing the job instead of racking up the debt. And some totally miss out on the trades as they’re too old and owe too much to start again.

Given what you do for a living im more than happy that you endorse my opinion mate.

I will add that extending education for many stops them from gaining the much needed work ethic as well with thousands of 20 somethings leaving Uni never having done a days work in their lives and they dont even know were to start.

Nobody seemingly wants to get their hands dirty for want of a better phrase yet if they did, they would as you say be potentially earning a very good living doing so and probably running their own companies and setting themselves up for life.

Start again, make Uni free for the very best academically, make sure via the exams system that those going have really earnt that right and the rest do what we all have to do and that is enter the work market.

 

[worsleyweb]

LMFAO. We've been trying to tell you for the pst 2 years. Not with a Tory governemnt ;)

This labour government is highly dangerous. Can be a Tory and still want decent public sector pay.

 

[inbetween]

Yeh those scales need to be re-balanced.......

They play the on the good nature or people's ambition to have always wanted to be a nurse / firefighter / soldier etc. Especially when university fees come into play - very large financial commitment over over a years starting salary

Degrees should be paid for if there is a value of a degree to that job. A firefighter does not need a degree to put out a fire the same a soldier does not need a degree to shoot back at people. The benefit to the taxpayer of having people do a degree who do not need one is nothing. It is like building new roads to nowhere.

Doctors and nurses yes obviously they should get funding and AFAIK they do. I have many young engineers here who all had their degrees paid for but that is because they bring a direct benefit to the company. Would they get their degrees paid for if they got their degree and left to go somewhere else, of course not.

Public servants do a lot to serve us but I don't see why they should be treated any differently, they should be paid better than they are in many cases but that is a different issue and doing a degree and putting yourself in that 'debt' is a choice.

Degrees are not cheap and in my experience far too many people are doing them and being lead down the wrong path, we shouldn't be encouraging more people to blindly do degrees but rather the right people to do them. Where we have skills shortages and problems with people not doing degrees, there should be funding to help. We can't have funding to help if every single person is doing one.

 

[worsleyweb]

Bollox i was wanting WW to reply ;)

You can have one. I have always been savvy with my money from a very early age. Kids in school should be taught one principle thing in my opinion that is hugely overlooked - that you don’t get rich selling your time. 99 percent of money I have made has been from house price increases, building things that I sell for more than they cost to build and more recently just simple investments. That was built on the back of having a succesful window cleaning round age 17 that I did for 5 years very Saturday and Sunday while going to university one day a week and training as a quantity surveyor and bought two cheap tearrace houses on the back of. My kids have had a far easier start to life than I had but are clueless when it comes to the real world. Kids should have a lesson every week on financial management and the power of compound interest and the dangers of debt. They are not coming out of school prepared for the real world.

My point is being age 21/22 and a qualified nurse but with 40k debt at an interest rate of 6 percent and a salary of 23k is not an attractive proposition. She could leave school in 2 years set up a small business with my support and earn far more than that in a few years and have no debt.

I completely agree with squirty that people offering a public service like a teacher or a nurse should not be left with any debt. Kids just think that they can get these a stars and a levels and a degree and life will be happy ever after. I see in real life 22 year olds with a load of debt looking for a first job and as sexist as it may sound in this mad new world (in a women’s case wanting to have a kid maybe before 30?).

I also take on board wallys point that that 23k is basic and can rise and she can earn reasonable money as she gets older but it is a big turn off for many I would imagine having that level of debt.

Rather have saved 40k by 23 through graft and have it earning me 5 percent a year for the rest of my life than having it the other way round.

 

[Ricster]

You can have one. I have always been savvy with my money from a very early age. Kids in school should be taught one principle thing in my opinion that is hugely overlooked - that you don’t get rich selling your time. 99 percent of money I have made has been from house price increases, building things that I sell for more than they cost to build and more recently just simple investments. That was built on the back of having a succesful window cleaning round age 17 that I did for 5 years very Saturday and Sunday while going to university one day a week and training as a quantity surveyor and bought two cheap tearrace houses on the back of. My kids have had a far easier start to life than I had but are clueless when it comes to the real world. Kids should have a lesson every week on financial management and the power of compound interest and the dangers of debt. They are not coming out of school prepared for the real world.

My point is being age 21/22 and a qualified nurse but with 40k debt at an interest rate of 6 percent and a salary of 23k is not an attractive proposition. She could leave school in 2 years set up a small business with my support and earn far more than that in a few years and have no debt.

I completely agree with squirty that people offering a public service like a teacher or a nurse should not be left with any debt. Kids just think that they can get these a stars and a levels and a degree and life will be happy ever after. I see in real life 22 year olds with a load of debt looking for a first job and as sexist as it may sound in this mad new world (in a women’s case wanting to have a kid maybe before 30?).

I also take on board wallys point that that 23k is basic and can rise and she can earn reasonable money as she gets older but it is a big turn off for many I would imagine having that level of debt.

Rather have saved 40k by 23 through graft and have it earning me 5 percent a year for the rest of my life than having it the other way round.

Fair play to you man, and thanks for the honest reply.

My question would be where do you stop at healthcare? Do you only allow graduate nurses, or do you open it up to others in the health professions which would be a wide variety of services?
What my point was, and I think it was overshadowed by the disagreement is the way things are structured right now is unfair on nurses wit their low pay.