National Public Sector Pay Scales

[Hannibal]

So the government has said today that they intend to accelerate plans to end this system. I live in South Wales where the wage base is quite low and SWMBO works in the public sector so currently benifits from this system.

Despite this I'm fully behind the proposal. I really don't see why, as a tax payer, I should pay for someone from anywhere from Sunderland to South Wales earn significantly above the market rate because a of a national scale.

Discuss.........

[Para73]

I agree with the concept to an extent.

However, a nurse or paramedic etc etc gets paid for the skills, education and responsibility of the role, often graduating with £20k debt.

So should the tuition rates be reduced too?

I believe it's only happening to fund the 50p tax rate debacle, poor show.

If you pay monkey money you'll get monkey attitude from people who feel they've been stiffed, this will fuel mass exodus from public to private sector, playing right into gov't hands to privatise & then abolish much of the public sector. Once it's gone there'll be no getting it back.

I await with baited breath and an air of excitement to see the unfolding chaos as the red top rag reading masses realise how they've been played and had massive scale cutbacks to services that are often taken for granted. Just wait until a private ambulance arrives at your nearest and dearest and it transpires the crew have had a 4 day course to qualify, and no drugs will be forthcoming, you'll soon realise that you know more about medicine than they do. I'd love to tell you all that this is just scaremongering, but alarmingly it's happening right now, yes, really!

I'm a paramedic, but also an anarchist, so perhaps someone less jaded would be more horrified.

Me, I'll take some solace that so many people who don't realise what's happening, and have condemned the public sector, are going to get a very nasty reality check.

Let's all pick a comfy spot to sit back and embrace the horror.

Edited 17 March, 2012 by Para73

[mdon]

This has made me chuckle so much, you have missed the point so much it is laughable! They are talking about the local government and police staff etc etc, not paramedics, police, firefighters. The average wage in the public sector ie local government is well below national average with wages ranging from 13k - 24k for council officers (ie planning technicians, it techs, benefits clerks bin collectors etc) hardly high wages!

[Babs]

Someone doing my job should be on the money I'm on, public or private sector.

I'm agree with the proposals.

[Para73]

This has made me chuckle so much, you have missed the point so much it is laughable! They are talking about the local government and police staff etc etc, not paramedics, police, firefighters. The average wage in the public sector ie local government is well below national average with wages ranging from 13k - 24k for council officers (ie planning technicians, it techs, benefits clerks bin collectors etc) hardly high wages!

Au contraire mon ami, we in the NHS have received news of George osbornes plan to abolish our pay scale (agenda for change). This is to allow employers to negotiate at a local level, to reflect ease of filling vacancies and local cost of living etc. make no mistake, this cunning stunt will be rolled out across the public sector.

[Paul007]

Au contraire mon ami, we in the NHS have received news of George osbornes plan to abolish our pay scale (agenda for change). This is to allow employers to negotiate at a local level, to reflect ease of filling vacancies and local cost of living etc. make no mistake, this cunning stunt will be rolled out across the public sector.

+1. Another silly idea of our illustrious leaders.

[Hannibal]

I suspect this will increase the "North/South Divide" but I don't see these as a reason to not go ahead. Should the tax payer subsidies one area whilst in another there are people doing the same job who aren't earning enough to get buy?

[Para73]

I suspect this will increase the "North/South Divide" but I don't see these as a reason to not go ahead. Should the tax payer subsidies one area whilst in another there are people doing the same job who aren't earning enough to get buy?

Your thinking is flawless, sadly what will happen is those in high cost areas will remain on current pay freeze, eventually creeping up at below inflation rates, whilst those in cheaper areas will receive no raise for the prescribed timeframe.

I

[domhnall]

Local pay rates? Maybe we should have didfferent tax rates too then? Setting everything to suit prevailing conditions in london makes no continued sense if you decentralise the rates of expenditure

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[bigman1976]

While I do see and understand the need for cuts (but still am baffled that the bankers who got us into this mess seem to be getting away with it scott free) I am a teacher and don't see a comparible job to compare with in the private sector. You do have public school teachers, but they either follow the national pay scale or pay more to attract staff from the public sector. Does this mean I'll get a pay rise? Also, there is a strong correlation between the deprivation in a local area and the toughness of the job. Nobody is going to want to work in deprived areas with challenging children because you'll earn less. If anything, in teaching, it would make sense to reverse the pattern - tough school = better pay. You'd be rewarded for the more challenging circumstances. Isn't that how private sector pay works? (And I spent many years working in the private sector, so don't need a bashing!)

And as for the privatisation issue - it's well under way in education. The best and worst schools are becoming academies at the behest of Michael Gove and once they're done, the rest will follow. Local Education Authorities have been pared back to the absolute minimum and it's getting to the point that you have to wonder if they're able to do their job properly. I guess the Tories want to provatise everything. Nothing new there then.

[Babs]

bigman1976 - what they are suggesting is to align the rates of pay for comparable jobs. For example, I'm a network engineer - they are saying that a public sector engineer will be paid the same as a private sector one.

Teachers, doctors, police etc all still have their normal pay scales.

[Irvtheswerv]

You're all missing the point. The country is nearly bankrupt because Gordon Brown is a fat idiot who can't add up. He spent more than he raised in tax revenue, and borrowed from the future to pay for it. Gideon Osborne is a useless toff who can't add up. He is continuing to spend more than he raises in tax revenue. He is borrowing from the future to pay for it. Spending has to be cut.

The government raises about £590 billion in taxes, but spends about £720 billion. We can't continue to spend more than we raise. I run a business and pay VAT, corporation tax, dividend tax, income tax, employers and employees National Insurance. The government takes about 40% of my gross revenues in tax. I think I pay enough tax already. I don't see why I should pay more tax to fund sick pay, pensions and generous holiday entitlements that I cannot afford to have myself. Why shouldn't public sector wages and benefits be cut?

[Paul007]

And our Gideon is also on about tinkering with the 50p tax rate too... no wonder he's not making any money.

[bigman1976]

bigman1976 - what they are suggesting is to align the rates of pay for comparable jobs. For example, I'm a network engineer - they are saying that a public sector engineer will be paid the same as a private sector one.

Teachers, doctors, police etc all still have their normal pay scales.

Babs - From what I've heard, the teacher's pay scales will go sooner rather than later. It'll get even more complicated when all schools become academies as the sponsors will negotiate independently with their staff.

Irvtheswerve - I agree. You shouldn't have to pay more taxes. I agree that the spending needs to be alined with income and I realise that there will have to be cuts somewhere. However, I would also argue that, yes, teachers do get a good holiday and our pension has been good (though that won't be the case for long) but that's it as far as perks go. Maybe we should be angling for large cash bonuses, company cars etc. Hell, maybe we should be able to claim for overtime too. I have a salary and that's fixed no matter how many hours I work. And teachers are trying to create the next generation of taxpayers (with our hands tied behind our back much of the time).

Maybe the government should be looking to cut expenditure for those who don't contribute anything. I am always amazed how parents of the children in my school have no employment but still manage to afford a newer car than me, have all the latest gadgets and go on better holidays than I can afford. The whole benefits system is broken - they should be there as a safety net, not as a hammock. Being unemployed shouldn't be a lifestyle choice.

[gadgetman]

I suspect this will increase the "North/South Divide" but I don't see these as a reason to not go ahead. Should the tax payer subsidies one area whilst in another there are people doing the same job who aren't earning enough to get buy?

Someone in rochdale earning London wages is fueling the divide. Why should someone in a low cost of living area enjoy a wage of someone in a high cost of living area?

And our Gideon is also on about tinkering with the 50p tax rate too... no wonder he's not making any money.

How many people should pay 50p rate and how many actually do? It's a waste of time to keep it anyway and won't affect budget costings much.

[Hannibal]

Why should someone in a low cost of living area enjoy a wage of someone in a high cost of living area?

This I agree with!

Someone in rochdale earning London wages is fueling the divide.

But this makes no sense to me.

I can see why the unions will hate this. It would seriously undermine their ability to hold the country to ransom via national strikes if pay settlements are made on a regional level.

[mdon]

You're all missing the point. The country is nearly bankrupt because Gordon Brown is a fat idiot who can't add up. He spent more than he raised in tax revenue, and borrowed from the future to pay for it. Gideon Osborne is a useless toff who can't add up. He is continuing to spend more than he raises in tax revenue. He is borrowing from the future to pay for it. Spending has to be cut.

The government raises about £590 billion in taxes, but spends about £720 billion. We can't continue to spend more than we raise. I run a business and pay VAT, corporation tax, dividend tax, income tax, employers and employees National Insurance. The government takes about 40% of my gross revenues in tax. I think I pay enough tax already. I don't see why I should pay more tax to fund sick pay, pensions and generous holiday entitlements that I cannot afford to have myself. Why shouldn't public sector wages and benefits be cut?

If you don't like your self imposed employment conditions why don't you just get a job? 31 days leave per year and 12 months sick pay (6 at full and 6 at half). It's your choice just don't twine because you don't want those conditions.

[gadgetman]

But this makes no sense to me.

Substitute Rochdale with any northern town/city you like. Just picked one at random.

[Irvtheswerv]

If you don't like your self imposed employment conditions why don't you just get a job? 31 days leave per year and 12 months sick pay (6 at full and 6 at half). It's your choice just don't twine because you don't want those conditions.

I take it you don't run your business then? You're a public sector employee are you? Have you any idea how expensive it is to employ someone? Probably no idea judging from your response. Keep burying your head in the sand and hope things get better eh? Is that the solution? Didn't work in Greece did it.

[hertsnminds]

Having read this BBC news article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17411117 it seems the changes will be limited to only certain roles. It also appears to have been put forward as a good idea as it has been sold by the treasury statement claiming

public sector pay in some parts of England and Wales is up to 18% higher than the private sector.

So there are many unanswered questions such as:

Who will and who will not be included?

What criteria will be taken into consideration?

How many salaries will increase and what will the net effect be on expenditure?

What will the administration costs to administer the proposals be?

[Clunkclick]

They are on a winner as there are few government departments remaining in London.Most have been shipped-out to the provinces over the last 10 years or earlier (NHS in 1990, Met office in 1960s and again in the early 2000s, DVLA in 1970s).

MOD main building,Treasury, Foreign and Home Offices must be the last and with the "Entreprenneurs" eyeing-up the premises for possible conversion to hotels/rich people's pads, how much longer are they going to be there ? As long as the Parliament in Westminster exists, all they need to leave behind in London are the Minister's office and perhaps the Parliamentary Section and some support staff - all the rest can be done over broadband and the occasional visit to the "Smoke".

Once they've localsied pay rates, it will remove one major cost impediment, TUPE wise, to contract-out some of the higher functions purchasing, finance, HR( Or what's left of it) - the lower level support-service functions (Site management) having already been contracted out to the likes of SERCO etc.

When I recently left the MOD, Org structures of these functions had or were already being centralised, possibly in anticipation of this next step and communicate by wire, rather than face to face, was taking off amongst the lower orders (Known attractively as the High paid help) - previously having been the preserve of the military only.

Nick

Edited 19 March, 2012 by Clunkclick

[cheezemonkhai]

Local pay rates? Maybe we should have didfferent tax rates too then? Setting everything to suit prevailing conditions in london makes no continued sense if you decentralise the rates of expenditure

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

You do, it's called council tax

bigman1976 - what they are suggesting is to align the rates of pay for comparable jobs. For example, I'm a network engineer - they are saying that a public sector engineer will be paid the same as a private sector one.

Teachers, doctors, police etc all still have their normal pay scales.

Why should a public sector worker in wales be paid 18% more than the same job in the private sector?

Why should a public sector worker in England be paid 8% more than the same job in the private sector?

Why should a public sector working in the South East be paid about 0.5% more than the same job in the private sector.

Ok, so that last one isn't too bad, but stop whinging about pensions.

The other two make it effectively impossible for a company to hire staff and remain profitable in those areas, because the public sector is artificially pushing up wages. This has a negative effect on private sector companies as they can't afford staff and the workers, because the cost of everything else is going up.

Effectively what the national scale is doing, is paying london uplift to all public sector workers nationwide.

If you find this effect means less people are going to some part of the country to work there, you can up the wages for that area alone, to encourage people to apply for a particular job you're having a problem with.

[cheezemonkhai]

I take it you don't run your business then? You're a public sector employee are you? Have you any idea how expensive it is to employ someone? Probably no idea judging from your response. Keep burying your head in the sand and hope things get better eh? Is that the solution? Didn't work in Greece did it.

Well if you bury your hjead long enough, then the only option left will be mass layoffs of public sector workers

Private sector workers too a pay cut to minimise redundancies a few years back, it's just that some public workers think it does't apply to them.

Look at one union (Civil Service I think) who had a vote on a new settlement package. 90% of people who voted, voted in favour of rejecting the offer, however only 30% of staff voted. So less than a third of people voted and not all of them were for it.

Remind me how that should be in any way binding?

[mdon]

I take it you don't run your business then? You're a public sector employee are you? Have you any idea how expensive it is to employ someone? Probably no idea judging from your response. Keep burying your head in the sand and hope things get better eh? Is that the solution? Didn't work in Greece did it.

I do work in the public sector sort of. I didn't say employ someone did I? What I actually said is YOU get a job, fold your business and find employment in the public sector since its so good and your so hard done by.

[cheezemonkhai]

I do work in the public sector sort of. I didn't say employ someone did I? What I actually said is YOU get a job, fold your business and find employment in the public sector since its so good and your so hard done by.

Then watch the UK go bankrupt, because even if the public sector worker spent 100% of their wages on things that go directly back to HMRC, they are a net cost to the the public purse.

They pay back 20% of their wages in tax + 8% in NI and for every 100k spent on employing people you're getting 30k back.

Then don't forget the overheads of running office, desks, communications, pension and oh look now they're really expensive.

Edited 19 March, 2012 by cheezemonkhai