Strike action in the public and private sectors !

[AdamSmith 10]

There has been a lot of strike action recently including firemen and other public sectors , why is it that then private sector rarely strike anymore? Is it because they know their Jobs would Be at risk? Isn't it about time the

Public sector realised this ? Or even that strike action should be gross misconduct and punished by dismissal ?

[Stan Tamudo 10]

There has been a lot of strike action recently including firemen and other public sectors , why is it that then private sector rarely strike anymore? Is it because they know their Jobs would Be at risk? Isn't it about time the

Public sector realised this ? Or even that strike action should be gross misconduct and punished by dismissal ?

 

They don't need to strike, they seem to have cushy jobs where they spend most of their time on internet forums criticising public sector workers.

Edited November 4, 2013 by Stan Tamudo

[alchresearch 214]

Maybe its because there's more public sector union members working together in a single place?

[SpikeMac 10]

Isn't it about time the

Public sector realised this ? Or even that strike action should be gross misconduct and punished by dismissal ?

 

I'm not sure that Adam Smith would agree with you.

 

I never had you down as a Leninist.

[AdamSmith 10]

They don't need to strike, they seem to have cushy jobs where they spend most of their time on internet forums criticising public sector workers.

 

They don't strike stan because they know it will harm their

Prospects and the private sector employers won't stand for the union nonsense as for time on Internet forums it makes the day more interesting between ensuring my staff have jobs with enough work coming in

[crazybaby 10]

The majority of the unions are there to protect the public sector workers rights. With around 5.9 million workers in the public sector, union membership is around 4m. The private sector has around 23.3 million with the majority of people employed in small businesses, union membership in the private sector is around 2.5m, I would say that the majority of people employed in the private sector small business are the ones who need more protection, the trouble is small businesses are usually working to a minimum profit & can't afford to increase wages. Whereas the public sector get their wage rises from the tax payer.

 

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/pse/public-sector-employment/q1-2012/stb-pse-2012q1.html

[Hillpig 10]

The "deal" used to be that public sector workers would receive relatively modest salaries during their working lives but would receive relatively generous pensions.

 

This was during a time of high paid manufacturing jobs in steel, engineering and other jobs in mining etc. The unions put paid to these jobs when their incessant demands made them uneconomic and they were lost abroad.

 

Whilst this decline went on in private industry, public sector jobs became more attractive as salaries increased and pensions and other benefits improved.

 

Now the situation has reversed as private business owners have learned their lesson and generally ignore Unions keeping terms and condition sensible.

 

The public sector is seen as sucking the life blood out of the system for no good reason. I note for instance, that the gaps left by striking firemen are being covered by private contractors, a trend we should encourage.

 

In short, let the public sector go on strike, they are I no position to do serious long term damage, they have to be brought to reality.

[taxman 12]

 

Whilst this decline went on in private industry, public sector jobs became more attractive as salaries increased and pensions and other benefits improved.

 

 

George Osborne thought this was the case a couple of years ago when he announced plans for market facing pay within the public sector. This was a plan to align public sector wages to that of local private sector employers.

 

The Hay Group was commissioned to write a report. It was assumed it would show the areas where public sector pay was above that of similar jobs in the private sector and it would then identify areas where the public pay could be reduced.

 

When the Hay Group reported back George Osborne suddenly announced he was no longer in favour of market facing pay and it was quickly dropped.

 

The reason? Because the report highlighted the fact that if market facing pay were to be introduced many public sector workers would have to see their pay increase to match that of similar private sector workers.

 

But hey, don't let the truth get in the way of a tired old story.

[crazybaby 10]

 

The reason? Because the report highlighted the fact that if market facing pay were to be introduced many public sector workers would have to see their pay increase to match that of similar private sector workers.

 

.

 

Would this be high end public sector workers or the bottom end of the pay scale.

 

"Public sector employees (pretty much the only people left who will now get inflation- and salary-linked pensions) will say that there is a trade-off here. Private sector employees tend to get paid higher base salaries than public sector employees, something that makes them better off than public sector employees.

 

This is a good line – and it used to be true. The problem is that it isn’t true any more. In fact, on ONS numbers (which accept that this stuff isn’t easy to measure), excluding pensions, the average public sector employee is paid well over 7% more than the average private sector employee. Public sector salaries are also rising even as private sector salaries are frozen. Add in pension benefits, and its tough to even begin to argue that the public sector is worse off than the private.

 

The perception problem here, I think, is very often down to mild innumeracy. So here’s what I’d like to do: I’d like to change the way that salaries are quoted completely. Instead of quoting one cash number and a list of benefits, we should all always be obliged to quote a package value"

 

http://moneyweek.com/merryns-blog/the-ever-increasing-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay-64100/

[Bypassblade 10]

There has been a lot of strike action recently including firemen and other public sectors , why is it that then private sector rarely strike anymore? Is it because they know their Jobs would Be at risk? Isn't it about time the

Public sector realised this ? Or even that strike action should be gross misconduct and punished by dismissal ?

 

Can you please explain you're last sentence, as in this country it is not illegal to strike, or take action short of a strike, if ballot favours it. I love it when all the people come on here knocking people for striking, they are defending what is theirs and have every right to withdraw labour.

 

The union membership used to be very high in this city, and we had closed shops but, in those days we had mining and steel & engineering, for the unions to look after.

 

I am lost as to why people condone such wholesale changes in people's pensions & such, they are taking the lifeblood out of them. You all ought to remember when you go on fancy holidays, or sit down to Christmas lunch & such, it was people striking and unions that got these rights for ALL workers.

 

In addition they were instrumental in bringing H & S regulations into place in the workplace. Perhaps if people "grew a pair" and didn't let people walk all over them, this country would not be in such a bloody mess.

 

There's only so many times you can kick a thing, before it bites back.

[crazybaby 10]

I don't oppose strike action at all - not if it's mainly the low paid that benefit. But what I don't agree with is that the most benefit is gained from people at the mid-higher end of the pay scale & the poor sods at the bottom are forgotten.

[Mister M 1,625]

Can you please explain you're last sentence, as in this country it is not illegal to strike, or take action short of a strike, if ballot favours it. I love it when all the people come on here knocking people for striking, they are defending what is theirs and have every right to withdraw labour.

 

The union membership used to be very high in this city, and we had closed shops but, in those days we had mining and steel & engineering, for the unions to look after.

 

I am lost as to why people condone such wholesale changes in people's pensions & such, they are taking the lifeblood out of them. You all ought to remember when you go on fancy holidays, or sit down to Christmas lunch & such, it was people striking and unions that got these rights for ALL workers.

 

In addition they were instrumental in bringing H & S regulations into place in the workplace. Perhaps if people "grew a pair" and didn't let people walk all over them, this country would not be in such a bloody mess.

 

There's only so many times you can kick a thing, before it bites back.

 

Perhaps the people complaining about unions would be very happy to give up their cushy weekends, bank holidays, safe working environments etc....Maybe they like to spit venom on those who fight for these rights whilst enjoying the benefits, or maybe they just prefer other workers went without? Who knows their motivations?

 

---------- Post added 04-11-2013 at 12:46 ----------

 

I don't oppose strike action at all - not if it's mainly the low paid that benefit. But what I don't agree with is that the most benefit is gained from people at the mid-higher end of the pay scale & the poor sods at the bottom are forgotten.

 

I agree with this. I was listening to the radio yesterday and some bloke from the Institute of Directors was on complaining about the living wage, and warning of inflation busting pay rises for the low paid.

They never seem to consider inflationary consequnces when bosses are paying themselves huge salaries....They're necessary to attract the brightest and the best