Public sector pay

[Berberis]

All the information is in the link in the first post, which is below.

 

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160107090910/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_383355.pdf

 

I would say the ONS are a pro-Government organisation, so they should be trustworthy.

 

Where is the council staff comparison?

[El Cid]

Where is the council staff comparison?

 

Why single out council staff?

[Guest sibon]

I see that the forum Tories have the knives out for the overpaid nurses, teachers and firefighters once again. It is a good job that some in the cabinet understand that public opinion and diehard Tory opinion are very different things.

[Berberis]

Why single out council staff?

 

You did.

 

They might well be correct, but when the size of the organisations are taken into account, council employees are under paid..

 

I want to know how you come to this conclusion.

 

---------- Post added 17-07-2017 at 13:32 ----------

 

I see that the forum Tories have the knives out for the overpaid nurses, teachers and firefighters once again. It is a good job that some in the cabinet understand that public opinion and diehard Tory opinion are very different things.

 

Im not a Tory but I do not see this in the thread. People are questioning the information that is being provided to us by both sides. Thats not "knives out" as you put it. I would say that's more an indication of your own opinion labeling all Torys.

[Andy1976]

I see that the forum Tories have the knives out for the overpaid nurses, teachers and firefighters once again. It is a good job that some in the cabinet understand that public opinion and diehard Tory opinion are very different things.

 

Certainly not seen that. 'Public sector' includes a lot of different jobs, not just those you mention.

[El Cid]

I want to know how you come to this conclusion.

 

 

"public sector was between 3.3% and 4.3% lower than the private sector"

 

Council employees are part of the 'public sector'.

[gomgeg]

Public sector employees and unions are always up in arms when there is any suggestion of services being put out for tender to the private sector.

You would have thought they would have been all for it as their wages and conditions don't come up to the private sector standards.

[ez8004]

Not all companies in the private sector are equal. Far from it.

 

I wasn't happy in my old job because it effectively froze my pay from 2009 to 2015. I moved to another job in 2015 and immediately got a 60% increase. My new company has since given me 2% annual pay rises since I joined coupled with a 2.5% annual bonus.

 

So from where I am sitting, yes the public sector are underpaid.

[andrejuan]

I would 100% agree with that BUT its also important to ensure someone keeps their eyes on a potential imbalance between those at the lower end of the public sector and those at the lower end of the private sector.

 

As someone who has been working in the private sector for most of my career I have heard on more than enough occasions some colleagues upset because they have NO payrise whatsoever year on year let alone 1% one. They have no decent pension scheme. They have little opportunities to flex time, flex working or special leave offered to SOME of those in the civil service. They have no acccess to incremental pay scales, overtime payments, paid sick leave or other financial protections offers to SOME of those in the civil service.

 

That can cause its own imbalance.

 

 

 

If there is action to be taken against low pay, it should be in ALL sectors and ALL industries. This constant focus on the "public" sector from certain political sides and the unions is doing nothing more than create friction and a loss of sympathy from those working in similar roles on the private (and often non unionised) side.

 

Whatever Hammond said or however clumsily he said it, that IMO is the point he was trying to make. For all the press hubub and all the left wing jumping up and down he MAY well have a good point.

 

Agree 100%

Most comparisons between Public/Private only look at salary or hourly pay. The benefits you outline (and many more) in the public sector are what puts those workers leagues above Private sector workers.

The pensions alone are as good as a lottery win for even the lower earners.

 

It also beats me how a Policeman or say a hospital Sister and a Firefighter on £35,000 or more, gets to use a special supermarket where prices are way less than half of Tesco prices.

In a fair country it should be the people on min. wage or less that get that benefit ?

[L00b]

I don't mind public sector pay levels as much as I used to.

 

However, I now mind much more about the 'deserving' character of those pay levels, in a performance-related aspect: e.g. no problem with how much teachers are getting paid according to scales, but when a school gets through so many teachers in a year (and foists supply teachers -different ones every other week- on the kids), with a clear detriment to the academic progress of the kids, then that should be reflected in the pay of the school management.

 

Likewise when a teacher is basically job-hopping through 5+ schools within a year. For a professional-level position, in the private sector, that sort of job-hopping would earmark him or her as unreliable and a severe hiring risk, not worth bothering with.

 

Doesn't seem to make any difference in practice as, from where I'm sitting and looking, all schools I'm aware of -directly and indirectly through hearsay- seem to have a severe staff turnover problem, with teachers all playing musical chairs between them to grapple this or that extra little perk or tidbit, and sod the syllabus and the kids.

 

Seems teachers are all paid regardless of how the (different every other month) kids under their (highly varying levels of-) care do, likewise headmasters and other school managers regardless of how well the school is managed or not. That's not right.

Edited July 18, 2017 by L00b