Number of Sheffield Council employees on at least £50k

[Planner1 428]

It's not a matter of how public sector salaries compare with private sector, it's about the number of employees on over £50,000.

 

Financial Year 2006/7 was pre-credit crunch which started to occur in the second half of 2007 with the fall of Northern Rock and numerous other banks, so the 2006/7 figures for numbers of employees earning over £50,000 should have represented a peak.

 

Instead, we're now as a city employing more people earning over £50,000 than before the financial crisis started, which is absolutely barmy.

 

What is the council doing now that is didn't in 2006/7? What extra services are being delivered for the number of extra people earning over £50k?

 

If it can be shown that more services are being provided for those people, that debunks the myth about cutting services. If it's wage inflation that has taken more people over £50k, that debunks the myth about wage freezes.

 

Times change and so do Council services and the staff structures that are needed to deliver them. Talking about arbitrary points in time and the number of staff on more than a particular salary point is meaningless unless you get into the detail of exactly what they are doing and how things have changed in the organisation.

 

I'll give you an example.

 

Recently, the Council has become responsible for the delivery of Public Health services. That has entailed the transfer of a substantial number of staff from the NHS to the Council and no doubt some of them are earning over £50k. (and what is this obsession with people earning over £50k anyway?)

 

Also, the Council has introduced a Private Finance Initiative to maintain the City's Roads, that has meant a wholesale restructure of the Transport and Highways service and the transfer of many staff to the private sector contractor.

 

That's just two examples, the Council is changing all the time and it's structure changes to accommodate that.

 

Your use of headline figures takes no account of how the Council's staffing and structure has had to change to meet evolving challenges, so it's really pretty meaningless.

[SevenRivers 10]

Times change and so do Council services and the staff structures that are needed to deliver them. Talking about arbitrary points in time and the number of staff on more than a particular salary point is meaningless unless you get into the detail of exactly what they are doing and how things have changed in the organisation.

 

I'll give you an example.

 

Recently, the Council has become responsible for the delivery of Public Health services. That has entailed the transfer of a substantial number of staff from the NHS to the Council and no doubt some of them are earning over £50k. (and what is this obsession with people earning over £50k anyway?)

 

Also, the Council has introduced a Private Finance Initiative to maintain the City's Roads, that has meant a wholesale restructure of the Transport and Highways service and the transfer of many staff to the private sector contractor.

 

That's just two examples, the Council is changing all the time and it's structure changes to accommodate that.

 

Your use of headline figures takes no account of how the Council's staffing and structure has had to change to meet evolving challenges, so it's really pretty meaningless.

 

So what you are saying is for those additional people earning over £50k (those are the figures provided in the article which is why it's the subject of the thread), extra services are being provided, in which case it can't be claimed services are being cut.

[Planner1 428]

So what you are saying is for those additional people earning over £50k (those are the figures provided in the article which is why it's the subject of the thread), extra services are being provided, in which case it can't be claimed services are being cut.

Services are being cut, you can't take tens of millions out of an organisations budget without cutting something.

[andygardener 10]

£50k is an obscene basic salary for anyone, let alone a public paid person. If someone in the public sector is generating revenue worth millions then pay them accordingly on bonus, if not then don't. There are a lot of targets in the public sector, let's start paying/fining managers based on those rather than rewarding failure.

[Guest sibon]

£50k is an obscene basic salary for anyone, let alone a public paid person. If someone in the public sector is generating revenue worth millions then pay them accordingly on bonus, if not then don't. There are a lot of targets in the public sector, let's start paying/fining managers based on those rather than rewarding failure.

 

How much do you think we should pay a good Maths graduate, to Head up a Maths Department in an Inner City comp? For example.

[andygardener 10]

How much do you think we should pay a good Maths graduate, to Head up a Maths Department in an Inner City comp? For example.

 

If the results are competing with Eton and Harrow then the skys the limit, if the results are dross then a fiver an hour seems about right.

 

High pay is not an issue. High pay not linked to performance is.

[Nesbitt 10]

No Sheffield council employee should be on more that £28,306.5 per year.

[ShefChipShop 10]

If the results are competing with Eton and Harrow then the skys the limit, if the results are dross then a fiver an hour seems about right.

 

High pay is not an issue. High pay not linked to performance is.

 

Spot on! Ask not what you can gain as a teacher, but what you can give.

[Guest sibon]

If the results are competing with Eton and Harrow then the skys the limit, if the results are dross then a fiver an hour seems about right.

 

High pay is not an issue. High pay not linked to performance is.

 

 

I think that you will find that the £50k+ salaries in schools are closely related to performance. They also have to be competitive. Mathematicians, Scientists and excellent communicators are in high demand.

 

Many of the posts that the OP is foaming about will be senior positions in secondary schools that have moved from just below £50K to just above, in seven years.

 

They will be off the council's balance sheet soon, as most schools become academies. You can look forward to the Mirror running an article about the drop in £50k+ salaries paid by Sheffield. Coming to a news stand near you in 2014.

[Stan Tamudo 10]

If the results are competing with Eton and Harrow then the skys the limit.

[Happ Hazzard 10]

Since when has £50k been a "vast" salary?

 

Check how the salaries of Directors and Chief Execs at Councils compare to similar size private sector organisations and you will find that the Council remuneration is not generous at all.

 

"Similar size private sector organisations" have to compete to stay in business, and if they don't provide a good service, the public will take their custom elsewhere. The council don't have to compete, and if they make a mess of things, they just put council tax up.

[Nesbitt 10]

David Cameron is the NINETEENTH British Prime Minister who attended eton. They must work very hard there for their success.......or could it conceivably be something else?:suspect: