The Labour Government

[yerwot?]

I think it's more a case of who shouts loudest gets the most publicity to be honest. Sure, they have momentum for now but the there's a bigger, more silent, majority who wouldn't vote for them but their numbers are split across several parties

i think it's more a case of who owns the media.....ffs

 

[blueinsa]

My new energy tariff offer is currently a 7% increase on last offer yet price cap supposedly gone down.

All lies.

I was £1200 in credit, paying £160 a month th and in the same month the cap goes down and I’m told Labour are reducing my bills I get told they want to up my DD to £214 a month.

Yeah, fucking right!

 

[hilts]

At the risk of repeating myself, also, in normal walks of life and employer will say "Sorry <workforce< but the figures this year are not good and you're not getting a payrise. Why this is unthinkable in the public sector, I don't know.

Worse, in the private sector, they might also say "And 10% of you are being made redundant". Doctors don't have to worry about that either.

Honest to god, if I had my career choices all over again, I'd choose the public sector for sure. People rarely get sacked, they earn very good money, get more holidays, get great pensions and get to retire early. And get to moan incessantly about hard done by they are. Oh, and get MBE's and OBE's thrown in as well.

One of the joys of companies house is reminding company owners how much of a raise they gave themselves in 'this period of struggle'

 

[Chippy_boy]

One of the many jobs I do is actually set the pay of other jobs in the organisation I work in. If there ever a bunch who think they are worth more than they are, it is the IT crew.

I can believe it. When I said I worked in IT, what I meant was I worked in sales for an IT company. Not as e.g. a developer, support desk or DB admin etc.

 

[hampshireblue]

1. Look at Wales.... 25 years Labour highest waiting lists worst anbulance service.
2. Now train drivers and NHS staff and many other groups are lining up for more handouts... (can't wait for winter)
3. Workers rights? What rights do workers now have? If you mean things like probation periods being axed then that is just ludicrous.

But you get free prescriptions. The cost of that is £600m+ per year. In 2022 a population of 3m were dispensed nearly 79 million items. That's 26+ per person per year. Either it's a very sickly populaton or some, as I've previously alluded to, claim benefits that depend on them continuing to take medication whether they still need it or not.

Being paid decent wages are not "handouts". I bet you didn't go home after a pay rise and tell the Mrs you'd just been awarded a "handout"!

Workers rights are the basis on which all T&Cs for all workers are achieved, so surely a good thing unless you happen not to be a worker.

 

[mayo31]

But you get free prescriptions. The cost of that is £600m+ per year. In 2022 a population of 3m were dispensed nearly 79 million items. That's 26+ per person per year. Either it's a very sickly populaton or some, as I've previously alluded to, claim benefits that depend on them continuing to take medication whether they still need it or not.

Being paid decent wages are not "handouts". I bet you didn't go home after a pay rise and tell the Mrs you'd just been awarded a "handout"!

Workers rights are the basis on which all T&Cs for all workers are achieved, so surely a good thing unless you happen not to be a worker.

Who tells the Mrs you had a rise

You leave that to the mistress to sort

 

[hampshireblue]

The problem here though is that the junior doctors based their pay rise demands on the growth in RPI, rather than CPI, and this government agreed to it.

So that’s an extra 0.7 to 0.8%-pt of inflation each year due entirely to methodological problems within the RPI, and the government should have pushed back against that.

There should be a single rate for pay rises and also price rises. The following are still linked to RPI so it is justifiable, particularly on rents to link a price rise to RPI:

• Train tickets: Rail fare increases are often tied to RPI.
  
  
• Mobile phone tariffs: Some providers use RPI to adjust monthly prices.
  
  
• Taxes and duties: RPI influences increases in tobacco duty, alcohol duty, and air passenger duty.
  
  
• Rent reviews: Many leases include rent review clauses that are linked to the RPI.
  
  
• Pension payments: Some final salary pension schemes use RPI to adjust payments.
  
  
• Index-linked bonds and annuities: RPI is used to calculate interest and income on some of these financial products.
  
  
• Student loan interest: The interest rate on some student loans is linked to RPI.
  
  
• Car tax (vehicle excise duty): RPI is used to determine increases in vehicle excise duty.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Workers rights are the basis on which all T&Cs for all workers are achieved, so surely a good thing unless you happen not to be a worker.

Everyone agrees workers need rights. But it seems not everyone agrees that employers also need rights.

In reality it should be a balance. It's not right that employers abuse their employees. But it's also not right to fuck over the employers with ridiculous rules and regs that hinder their ability to function profitably. That is in no-one's interest, I am sure you will agree?

One such rule is providing employment rights from day 1 of employment. There is only so much due diligence an employer can do in interviews and sometimes you might take someone on who clearly is not up to the job, either capabilities, or lack of work ethic, or just being downright flaky, or disruptive or aggressive to other employees or whatever. The idea that if this proves the case, you have to go through some protracted process to get rid of them, and/or pay them redunancy payments, is not fair on the employer. And like I say, is in no-one's interest since all it does is makes employers less likely to take people on, and keeps more people unemployed.

 

[TinFoilHat]

One of the many jobs I do is actually set the pay of other jobs in the organisation I work in. If there ever a bunch who think they are worth more than they are, it is the IT crew.

 

[hilts]

Everyone agrees workers need rights. But it seems not everyone agrees that employers also need rights.

In reality it should be a balance. It's not right that employers abuse their employees. But it's also not right to fuck over the employers with ridiculous rules and regs that hinder their ability to function profitably. That is in no-one's interest, I am sure you will agree?

One such rule is providing employment rights from day 1 of employment. There is only so much due diligence an employer can do in interviews and sometimes you might take someone on who clearly is not up to the job, either capabilities, or lack of work ethic, or just being downright flaky, or disruptive or aggressive to other employees or whatever. The idea that if this proves the case, you have to go through some protracted process to get rid of them, and/or pay them redunancy payments, is not fair on the employer. And like I say, is in no-one's interest since all it does is makes employers less likely to take people on, and keeps more people unemployed.

These things work both ways I would put a probation period at a month for example. Plenty of companies are dishonest about their expectations when telling someone about a job role. Leaving a job for a place that have lied to you is not good.
Like sick pay if you pay it then people will take the piss, don't pay it and someone who gets something serious is in the shit.

 

[Blackley_Blue]

How do you think the vote will go fella?

Based on the tiny sample size of people I've spoken to, it's unanimous for potential strike action.


Whilst the talk is on pay and pay in the NHS... The particular department I manage (and the directorate as a whole) really struggle to recruit. We just don't get the right calibre and quality of applicant as the pay is so close to the minimum/living wage. And that's not to disrespect anyone, but the last 5 or 6 staff I've recruited just hasn't been good enough. There are a lot of jobs with a lot less stress and without anywhere near the responsibility my staff have for virtually the same pay. When I started in the department 15 years ago the gap was a lot wider than it is now.

Further up the chain, there is a major problem at my trust recruiting and retaining tradesmen for example. We tend to have to recruit newly qualified and as soon as they get a bit of experience, they're off to places paying much more.

 

[hampshireblue]

Everyone agrees workers need rights. But it seems not everyone agrees that employers also need rights.

In reality it should be a balance. It's not right that employers abuse their employees. But it's also not right to fuck over the employers with ridiculous rules and regs that hinder their ability to function profitably. That is in no-one's interest, I am sure you will agree?

One such rule is providing employment rights from day 1 of employment. There is only so much due diligence an employer can do in interviews and sometimes you might take someone on who clearly is not up to the job, either capabilities, or lack of work ethic, or just being downright flaky, or disruptive or aggressive to other employees or whatever. The idea that if this proves the case, you have to go through some protracted process to get rid of them, and/or pay them redunancy payments, is not fair on the employer. And like I say, is in no-one's interest since all it does is makes employers less likely to take people on, and keeps more people unemployed.

You're right that it's a balance. A few years ago though, my stepson in South Wales ( Little Joe!! lol) had 2 employers, both high street manufacturing names, who, as soon as they had workers who got to the end of the probationary period, just dumped them and got new people in. Fortunately LJ saw it coming and got out whilst he could. The next employer, also a high street name, were ignoring H&S, no effective union, and LJ was threatenend with the sack when he tried to raise the issue eg pallets stacked, say 8 high, when the law says 4.

 

[M18CTID]

i think it's more a case of who owns the media.....ffs

Yep, that as well of course!

 

[Chippy_boy]

i think it's more a case of who owns the media.....ffs

Is that why they backed Starmer in last year's election?

During the 2024 general election campaign, the media landscape shifted notably compared to previous elections. Several traditionally Conservative-leaning newspapers—including The Sunday Times, The Economist, and The Financial Times—publicly endorsed Labour and Keir Starmer, marking a significant change from their past support for the Tories.

https://www.politics.co.uk/politics...nge-election-narrative/?utm_source=perplexity

No, it's because they want to back who they think will win, and what they think the public wants to hear.

 

[Chippy_boy]

You're right that it's a balance. A few years ago though, my stepson in South Wales ( Little Joe!! lol) had 2 employers, both high street manufacturing names, who, as soon as they had workers who got to the end of the probationary period, just dumped them and got new people in. Fortunately LJ saw it coming and got out whilst he could. The next employer, also a high street name, were ignoring H&S, no effective union, and LJ was threatenend with the sack when he tried to raise the issue eg pallets stacked, say 8 high, when the law says 4.

Outrageous behaviour from both. Regards the latter, my uncle was very senior in the Factory Inspectorate function within government and spent a lot of time in court prosecuting employers for various transgressions.

 

[Hertzblue]

There should be a single rate for pay rises and also price rises. The following are still linked to RPI so it is justifiable, particularly on rents to link a price rise to RPI:

• Train tickets: Rail fare increases are often tied to RPI.
  
  
• Mobile phone tariffs: Some providers use RPI to adjust monthly prices.
  
  
• Taxes and duties: RPI influences increases in tobacco duty, alcohol duty, and air passenger duty.
  
  
• Rent reviews: Many leases include rent review clauses that are linked to the RPI.
  
  
• Pension payments: Some final salary pension schemes use RPI to adjust payments.
  
  
• Index-linked bonds and annuities: RPI is used to calculate interest and income on some of these financial products.
  
  
• Student loan interest: The interest rate on some student loans is linked to RPI.
  
  
• Car tax (vehicle excise duty): RPI is used to determine increases in vehicle excise duty.

OMG. The ghost of Harold Wilson !

Prices and incomes policy done to death and discredited

 

[hampshireblue]

So what? Has yours? Has everyone else's in the private sector? I don't know why public sector workers think it's their god-given right to never see their pay go down in real terms, irrespective of the financial constraints the country finds itself in. Why should they get special treatment when they are in reality paid extremely well on any absolute basis.

From around 1995 to 2013, I think I got an annual pay rise perhaps 3 or 4 times, and never more than RPI in any given year. That's typical in the IT sector, especially in smaller companies. You get merit based promotions - or not - but other than that, often your pay doesn't move. And the company's pension contribution was usually 4% or 5%. Not 27%.

Public sector pay since 2010:
In 2010, the coalition government announced a two-year public sector pay freeze. This was followed by a 1% average pay cap on public sector pay awards. This cap was lifted in 2017 and from 2018 to 2020 most parts of the public sector received annual pay awards above 2%.

 

[Hertzblue]

They were getting more than enough airtime before they were anywhere near leading the polling. Farage never fails to get his mug all over our TV screens, yet he can't be arsed showing his face in his own constituency. And then you have people like Musk publicising them which is bound to swing things in their favour as well

Oh, and I''ll remind you that the Lib Dems currently have 67 more MPs than Reform

A Reform government will be an absolute fucking disaster for this country. In fact, I'd go as far as to say I'd sooner have the lettuce in charge

It may be, but we have had a succession of disasters since 1997 so we are not in unchartered territory.
They at least appear to have the will and the courage to attempt to tackle our failing state, as we have seen this last week, that is something the Labour Party do not have despite their pre - election rhetoric.

 

[hampshireblue]

I'm actually a bit mixed about the junior doctors. People train to be a doctor, knowing that over their lifetime they are going to earn a shit load of money relative to the average Joe. Not that these people with "the calling" are supposed to be going into it for the money... so they keep telling us.

By middle age, they are on perhaps £100k a year for working 3 days a week for the NHS and another £100k or so for private work. Income the vast majority of society could only dream of. Not to mention a great pension and retiring early. I don't know many doctors, but the ones I do know all live in big posh houses.

For these priviledges they have to "pay their dues" working hard for less in their younger years. Like solicitors, accountants and many other professions where the starting pay is not great... in return for the payout later in life.

But even as a junior doctor, they are paid well. Don't believe a word of this boo-hoo we only get £14/hour bollocks.

The average full-time basic pay for a resident (formerly "junior") doctor is expected to reach approximately £54,300 in 2025–26

Resident doctors pay award 2025 to 2026: investing in our medical workforce

www.gov.uk

Many earn approaching £100k from the NHS as "junior doctors". So not exactly hardship, then! The MINIMUM basic starting pay is £36.6k for a 40 hour week and since none of them work that, £50k or £60k with overtime and on-call bonuses is more realistic, AS A STARTING SALARY. Boo hoo, poor doctors.

A typical specialist registrar (ST4) working a busy rota might earn:

• Basic pay: £61,825
• Additional hours (e.g., 10/week above 40): £15,456
• On-call allowance: £4,946
• Weekend allowance (1 in 4 weekends): £3,710
• Enhanced pay for unsocial hours: £11,728

Total projected annual pay: £97,665

ST4 takes 5-8 years AFTER a degree and the 2 year foundation course. So they are, in some cases 10 years into their career and still getting a basic of £62k as well as having the student loan to repay. My recent experience would indicate they regulalry work beyond their shift times and often are working and sleeping in the hospital as it's not worth their while going home between shifts and are often on call.
If I was Streeting,I would be not charging them for the degree but would require them to remain employed 100% by the NHS for say, 10-12 years after they qualify.

It's important not to mix up resident doctors with consultants though as most RDs don't carry out external work.

 

[hampshireblue]

I was £1200 in credit, paying £160 a month th and in the same month the cap goes down and I’m told Labour are reducing my bills I get told they want to up my DD to £214 a month.

Yeah, fucking right!

Move your company then or challenge the one you're with. And what were you thinking going £1200 in credit-effectively lending them your money?