Winter of public sector strikes

[crankedup5]

Mounting pressure on the Government, will the Government crumble and give the nod for hundreds of thousands of public sector workers to receive a pay award ‘linked to inflation’?
Read today that 2000 military staff are being trained to help cover fire and emergency cover.

[PushedDover]

I assume they’d turn the Tax up for all to pay for this…..
Is the inevitable tax rise explained to those that want to strike ?
Also if private sector is getting circa 5% what grounds should the Piblis sector get double ?

Edited by PushedDover on Sunday 4th December 17:03

[crankedup5]

PushedDover said:

I assume they’d turn the Tax up for all Tom pay for this…..
Is the inevitable tax rise explained to those that want to strike ?
Also if private sector is getting circa 5% what grounds should the Piblis sector get double ?

Apparently the public sector have dropped 4.4% in real terms and private sector have risen 4.3%. This is time period 2010 - 2022. and averaged.

[Electro1980]

PushedDover said:

I assume they’d turn the Tax up for all Tom pay for this…..
Is the inevitable tax rise explained to those that want to strike ?
Also if private sector is getting circa 5% what grounds should the Piblis sector get double ?

Public sector have got between 2&3%. Average pay growth has been around 6% in private sector. Had offers of 5-6% been made in the first place these strikes might have been avoided or delayed, but they would still be against a backdrop of public sector offers being half that of the private sector for the last 13 years.

[Louis Balfour]

PushedDover said:

I assume they’d turn the Tax up for all Tom pay for this…..
Is the inevitable tax rise explained to those that want to strike ?
Also if private sector is getting circa 5% what grounds should the Piblis sector get double ?

So Tom is paying for the the Piblis sector to get double. Have I understood that correctly?

[vulture1]

Electro1980 said:

PushedDover said:

I assume they’d turn the Tax up for all Tom pay for this…..
Is the inevitable tax rise explained to those that want to strike ?
Also if private sector is getting circa 5% what grounds should the Piblis sector get double ?

Public sector have got between 2&3%. Average pay growth has been around 6% in private sector. Had offers of 5-6% been made in the first place these strikes might have been avoided or delayed, but they would still be against a backdrop of public sector offers being half that of the private sector for the last 13 years.

Thing is its the high end of the private sector thst have had these raises. The bottom end have not. Supermarkets etc

[LukeBrown66]

Strikes and therefore unions only really work when the general public are affected by the action, It really is that simple sadly.

[CoolHands]

It’ll be the same old story from the government to show pay restraint. In other words all the workers continue to be screwed over to pay for covid fraud and incompetence.

I say fking strike

[Electro1980]

vulture1 said:

Electro1980 said:

PushedDover said:

I assume they’d turn the Tax up for all Tom pay for this…..
Is the inevitable tax rise explained to those that want to strike ?
Also if private sector is getting circa 5% what grounds should the Piblis sector get double ?

Public sector have got between 2&3%. Average pay growth has been around 6% in private sector. Had offers of 5-6% been made in the first place these strikes might have been avoided or delayed, but they would still be against a backdrop of public sector offers being half that of the private sector for the last 13 years.

Thing is its the high end of the private sector thst have had these raises. The bottom end have not. Supermarkets etc

Those at the bottom have had significant increases to minimum wage, which also forced up close to minimum wage.). The rises are across the spectrum. Yes. They are probably more at the top and bottom and less in the middle, but that is the case in the public sector too.

[survivalist]

LukeBrown66 said:

Strikes and therefore unions only really work when the general public are affected by the action, It really is that simple sadly.

Or when it has a significant impact on the employer’s income / profits.

I’d argue that the Royal Mail strike doesn’t have a significant impact on the majority of people as letters aren’t really significant to the majority these days. However, if all the parcel delivery spend goes to Evie, DPD etc then it could have a big impact on RM.

That’s said, I’m not really sure they can survive in their current state.

[loskie]

PushedDover said:

I assume they’d turn the Tax up for all to pay for this…..
Is the inevitable tax rise explained to those that want to strike ?
Also if private sector is getting circa 5% what grounds should the Piblis sector get double ?

Edited by PushedDover on Sunday 4th December 17:03

I work for a Govt agency (you'll sneer I know). We're not all shirkers
I get paid £26700. With inflation ONLY it should be around £36k and that's not counting this recent spike.
We have pretty much had a pay freeze since 2009. Plus pension cut despite never having any changes to my contract.

I work in a technical field based, customer facing role and yes I'm bound to say it but I work bloody hard. Not standard 0830 to 1700 hours not always home based. Dealing with challenging outbreak work. Managing people often paid way more that I am.
By having my pay frozen (read cut in real terms) since 2009 it's as if I'm(an other public sector workers) facing an extra tax burden to dig the country out of the mess it's in.
I feel terribly uncomfortable about going on strike. The govt agency will not care, nor will the general public. It's the business that I'm there to serve that will suffer and me too We really are in an awful position.

[troika]

loskie said:

I work for a Govt agency (you'll sneer I know). We're not all shirkers
I get paid £26700. With inflation ONLY it should be around £36k and that's not counting this recent spike.
We have pretty much had a pay freeze since 2009. Plus pension cut despite never having any changes to my contract.

Why should it be more than £26,700? You have had 13 years to find an alternative role or employer if you are not satisfied with your terms and conditions. Presumably that’s the market rate for the role?

[loskie]

I'm not sure that there is a "market rate" for the role. But thanks for confirming I'd get responses from sneering people like you.

[bloomen]

loskie said:

I'm not sure that there is a "market rate" for the role. But thanks for confirming I'd get responses from sneering people like you.

Frankly, anyone not on a tax free contract somewhere in the UAE should be executed for dumb insolance. And shirking.

I really mean that.

[troika]

loskie said:

I'm not sure that there is a "market rate" for the role. But thanks for confirming I'd get responses from sneering people like you.

Not sneering at all, just trying to understand. In the private sector I never, ever had an automatic pay rise. If I wanted to earn more, I had to demonstrate my value and progress to the next role or organisation.

[Boringvolvodriver]

troika said:

loskie said:

I'm not sure that there is a "market rate" for the role. But thanks for confirming I'd get responses from sneering people like you.

Not sneering at all, just trying to understand. In the private sector I never, ever had an automatic pay rise. If I wanted to earn more, I had to demonstrate my value and progress to the next role or organisation.

Whilst I never worked in the public sector, from talking to people who do, it may not always be as easy to do those things in the public sector

My view is that the public sector have been badly affected, probably since 2010 with austerity measures and that the government now claiming that to give them an inflationary rise would add to inflation is disingenuous.

The latest claim that to give them a rise would help Putin is also a pretty poor excuse in my opinion

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/dec/04/st...

Speaking on Sky News’ Ridge on Sunday, Zahawi insisted it was up to union leaders to call off the strike and suggested they were playing into the Russian president’s agenda as he uses high energy prices fuelling inflation as a “weapon” in his war against Ukraine.

Zahawi said the government needed to show discipline in not raising public sector pay in line with inflation, which could fuel inflation further.

Urging unions not to proceed with strike action, he said: “This is a time to come together and to send a very clear message to Mr Putin that we’re not going to be divided in this way … Our message to the unions is to say ‘this is not a time to strike, this is a time to try and negotiate’.”

[anonymous-user]

troika said:

loskie said:

I'm not sure that there is a "market rate" for the role. But thanks for confirming I'd get responses from sneering people like you.

Not sneering at all, just trying to understand. In the private sector I never, ever had an automatic pay rise. If I wanted to earn more, I had to demonstrate my value and progress to the next role or organisation.

Civil service pay has been stuck somewhere between 0% - 2% for the last decade. Inflation is 11%, private sector pay is increasing on average about 6%. People on lower grades working in the public sector are claiming Universal Credit because they are classed as working poor. It’s pretty obvious why people are going on strike.

[loskie]

when you read Civil Service pay rise is 2%

That's not the full story.

I got 2% yes.
0.75 of that was consolidated and pensionable yes but the rest as a one off annual "bonus". Whereas grade 6s got a much higher % increase

Going back to "market rate"

There used to be no vacancies for my job until someone retired. People were dedicated and tended to stick in the role for a lot of years. Now we have a massive staff turnover. The poor ones get promoted, the decent ones stay. But they cannot fill vacancies so pay and agency £350 day to put unskilled, untrained bums on seats. So the jobs just do not get done. Or boxes ticked and little more

[troika]

loskie said:

when you read Civil Service pay rise is 2%

That's not the full story.

I got 2% yes.
0.75 of that was consolidated and pensionable yes but the rest as a one off annual "bonus". Whereas grade 6s got a much higher % increase

Going back to "market rate"

There used to be no vacancies for my job until someone retired. People were dedicated and tended to stick in the role for a lot of years. Now we have a massive staff turnover. The poor ones get promoted, the decent ones stay. But they cannot fill vacancies so pay and agency £350 day to put unskilled, untrained bums on seats. So the jobs just do not get done. Or boxes ticked and little more

Sounds a shambles. No reflection on you whatsoever but you will understand why people are reluctant to embrace tax rises (to cover public sector pay increases) when the funds disappear into a black hole of incompetence and inefficiency. Folks wouldn’t mind if they received improved services.

[Biggy Stardust]

loskie said:

There used to be no vacancies for my job until someone retired. People were dedicated and tended to stick in the role for a lot of years. Now we have a massive staff turnover. The poor ones get promoted, the decent ones stay. But they cannot fill vacancies so pay and agency £350 day to put unskilled, untrained bums on seats. So the jobs just do not get done. Or boxes ticked and little more

Is there any evidence to support these claims? Why are the bad ones promoted? Why are unskilled people hired if they produce little or nothing?

Why is the 'correct' rate for the job £36k, ie 35% more than is actually paid?