Public sector Tw*ts

[midge]

Jul 12, 2014 15:24:01 GMT 1 Christ in Shades (art) said:

Jul 12, 2014 13:31:28 GMT 1 midge said:

When people talk of this lower pay on the public sector which jobs are we actually comparing!? Are there any hard facts that suggest this is correct!?

In terms of the benefits, I guess you mean the pension as far I am aware the sickness and holiday benefits are pretty much the same as they always were!?

In the private sector, defined benefit pensions schemes are like rocking horse sh!t, so to even still have this benefit still in tact is very fortunate to say the least!

No one can doubt that we are all living longer- we are being told that cures for cancer are around the corner and there are statistics about about the percentage of us and our children that will live over 100 which is far more than at the moment!

So if you were not asked to contribute more to an already great benefit or the age at which you could take your benefits increased then you could actually argue that your benefits package is actually improving all the time, as going forward each generation of public sector worker will enjoy more and more years of index linked pension for the same contribution!!!

Currently that may well be the case but that may not be the case in the future, we are constantly being told that deaths from alcohol abuse are sky rocketing and obesity we are told is also a massive killer, cancer rates are soaring due to unhealthy lifestyles, so how do they work out that we are living longer? My mum and dads generation may well be living longer, born in the 50's but there is no guarantee my generation will live longer, born in the 70's.

Try The Office For National Statistics ( a government body no less) you will see that life expectancy has increased year on year for the last 30 plus years and is expected to continue to do so - I am guessing they use mortality stats for past data and this and various measures to predict going forward.

I am sure that this is not an exact science but pretty accurate on the conservative side!?

Have you any evidence to the contrary!?

[OldRastrickian]

For many years, there was an unwritten "rule" in the UK that the private sector got the better pay, the public sector the better pensions and job security.....a crude balance. But in recent times, that's been turned on its head.

The explosion in globalisation.....the China Effect (manufacturing) and India Effect (services) have put huge pressure on numerous companies, undermining their ability to be generous to their staff. And the negative effect on the public sector? Zero (and that annual increment buys more goods and services than it once did).

Mass immigration.....has been exploited by numerous private sector companies to reduce/hold down pay. Take construction/building.....the economic crisis triggered recession in these fields, just as tens of thousands of E European tradespeople were flooding into the UK, willing to work for a fraction of their UK counterparts. And the negative effect on the public sector? Zero (and you can now get your kitchen fitted more cheaply).

Minimum wage......applied absolutely across the public sector, but abused by many private sector employers (one reason why they're so keen on keeping the immigrants flooding in).

Gordon "F*cking" Brown......those who knock bankers forget that, at its peak, The City was paying over £60 billion pa in taxes to the "ender of boom and bust", a lot of which went to boosting public sector numbers, pay and perks. Don't bite the hands which fed you so copiously.

The private sector includes millions of self-employed people. Some are doing very well.....others are struggling to feed themselves (and there's no minimum-wage guarantee, and no employer to pay sick/holiday leave, or top up that pension).

I don't know the situation today.....but the last I read on the matter (Sunday Times, turn-of-the-year-ish, quoting ONS stats) had public sector pay still 7% ahead of the private sector. That public sector pay freeze has been a bit of a con, I think. I gather the lower paid were exempt....many people still trousered their 4% annual increment (without improving their output/productivity one jot)....and the media was always running stories of highly-paid execs receiving hundreds-of-thousands in redundancy pay, before taking up a new public-sector appointment just weeks/months after redundancy. Hard times..........

[Christ in Shades (art)]

Jul 12, 2014 15:49:09 GMT 1 midge said:

Jul 12, 2014 15:24:01 GMT 1 Christ in Shades (art) said:

Currently that may well be the case but that may not be the case in the future, we are constantly being told that deaths from alcohol abuse are sky rocketing and obesity we are told is also a massive killer, cancer rates are soaring due to unhealthy lifestyles, so how do they work out that we are living longer? My mum and dads generation may well be living longer, born in the 50's but there is no guarantee my generation will live longer, born in the 70's.

Try The Office For National Statistics ( a government body no less) you will see that life expectancy has increased year on year for the last 30 plus years and is expected to continue to do so - I am guessing they use mortality stats for past data and this and various measures to predict going forward.

I am sure that this is not an exact science but pretty accurate on the conservative side!?

Have you any evidence to the contrary!?

Of course not, but the stories of such a unhealthy lifestyles are to be believed, then surely life expectancy will go down? I'm not sure life expectancy will go up so dramatically, if it does, in fact, go up.

[rubicon]

I suppose medical advances are going up to match and better the unhealthy lifestyles. If the press are to be believed then half the population will soon be undergoing stomach stapling just for being a couple of stone overweight. Of course the simple answer is, if you were born in the seventies / eighties then bloody well sort yourselves out. Half of the previous generation were stoned out of their heads for a decade according to popular opinion, but if we're not already dead seem to have come through it with some common sense. I over emphasise of course, but in many ways it's true we've become boring old farts, given up the fags, cut down on the booze and all started running, cycling and generally trying to live to 100 or so. I'm not sure the next generations will have the stamina or willpower to do the same, after all we grew up outdoors anyway, not usually seen or heard until teatime, no chance of indoor computer games or 24 hour tv in the good old bad old days

[midge]

Jul 12, 2014 16:00:18 GMT 1 Christ in Shades (art) said:

Jul 12, 2014 15:49:09 GMT 1 midge said:

Try The Office For National Statistics ( a government body no less) you will see that life expectancy has increased year on year for the last 30 plus years and is expected to continue to do so - I am guessing they use mortality stats for past data and this and various measures to predict going forward.

I am sure that this is not an exact science but pretty accurate on the conservative side!?

Have you any evidence to the contrary!?

Of course not, but the stories of such a unhealthy lifestyles are to be believed, then surely life expectancy will go down? I'm not sure life expectancy will go up so dramatically, if it does, in fact, go up.

Well all the evidence out there, including from your public sector colleagues is that life expectancy is going up by about half a year every year. It has been doing and will continue to do so!

So as you were in that unless public sector workers pay in more or retire later, their benefit is increasing significantly and ultimately unsustainable!!!

[griffa]

Jul 12, 2014 16:00:18 GMT 1 Christ in Shades (art) said:

Jul 12, 2014 15:49:09 GMT 1 midge said:

Try The Office For National Statistics ( a government body no less) you will see that life expectancy has increased year on year for the last 30 plus years and is expected to continue to do so - I am guessing they use mortality stats for past data and this and various measures to predict going forward.

I am sure that this is not an exact science but pretty accurate on the conservative side!?

Have you any evidence to the contrary!?

Of course not, but the stories of such a unhealthy lifestyles are to be believed, then surely life expectancy will go down? I'm not sure life expectancy will go up so dramatically, if it does, in fact, go up.

Love these generalistions "the public sector has increased it's pay by 7% pa."
So the people at the bottom, who endured 0% pay increases & 1% pay increases, have clearly not benefited by 7%!
But the big earners ie Top Civil Servants etc, bump up the average earning pay averages.
Included in this are Government Special Advisers, who frequently brought in from the private sector & paid large salaries.
It's very difficult to compare & contrast, public remuneration v private remuneration.
It's great when implementing a divide & rule policy, always creating scapegoats!
Seems to me that despite 4 years of Coalition Government, it's still somebody else who is responsible for the strikes!
Methinks not, but if you read & are taken in by the Right Wing Tory press, you'd believe all of our current woes were caused by "the ghost of Banquo! (Gordon Brown).
God help us all if in May 2015, the UK returns a Tory Government!

[Deleted]

Jul 11, 2014 22:08:23 GMT 1 Christ in Shades (art) said:

What I think it boils down to Ted is, jealousy, I genuinely think some private sector workers are actually quite jealous of the 'benefits' (I use the term loosely as they are being quickly eroded) we have, most of the benefits we have are in exchange for lower pay anyway, something which they can't or won't grasp.

I disagree. It's not jealousy, it's a lack of sympathy for the constant whining, from a sector which has better conditions and benefits than most in the private sector. The only time hot topics like this come up is when the Unions call a strike.

[griffa]

Jul 12, 2014 16:48:08 GMT 1 @marcusd said:

Jul 11, 2014 22:08:23 GMT 1 Christ in Shades (art) said:

What I think it boils down to Ted is, jealousy, I genuinely think some private sector workers are actually quite jealous of the 'benefits' (I use the term loosely as they are being quickly eroded) we have, most of the benefits we have are in exchange for lower pay anyway, something which they can't or won't grasp.

I disagree. It's not jealousy, it's a lack of sympathy for the constant whining, from a sector which has better conditions and benefits than most in the private sector. The only time hot topics like this come up is when the Unions call a strike.

Unions only call a strike as result of a democratic vote.
Following the laws laid down by Thatcher!
Even that's not to Cameron's satisfaction, should look at his level of electoral support!
Total hypocrisy! - Up the Town!

[amoeba]

Jul 12, 2014 12:00:11 GMT 1 barnsleydaz said:

Jul 12, 2014 11:55:47 GMT 1 Christ in Shades (art) said:

It's called career progression and reward for self improvement.

Agreed, the same that happens in the private sector if your good enough.

How come someone in the private sector can not make it, but if he moves to the public sector he reaches the top of the pile to use Hoamers analogy.

The answer is simple really.

Sorry, will rephrase that.
"When he gets his chance in the public sector".

Maybe they taught him to spell.

[amoeba]

Jul 12, 2014 16:48:08 GMT 1 @marcusd said:

Jul 11, 2014 22:08:23 GMT 1 Christ in Shades (art) said:

What I think it boils down to Ted is, jealousy, I genuinely think some private sector workers are actually quite jealous of the 'benefits' (I use the term loosely as they are being quickly eroded) we have, most of the benefits we have are in exchange for lower pay anyway, something which they can't or won't grasp.

I disagree. It's not jealousy, it's a lack of sympathy for the constant whining, from a sector which has better conditions and benefits than most in the private sector. The only time hot topics like this come up is when the Unions call a strike.

I think what this thread has proved more than anything else is that everybody moans about their job. The people moaning about the public sector are often complaining about their own pay/conditions being cut. What I still cannot understand is why complain about people trying to protect their previously negotiated terms and conditions? 'They shouldn't be allowed to because I lost mine' is just a petty argument and to me provides more power to the argument that the private sector needs stronger unions. A union doesn't automatically mean a 3 day week and power cuts.

[Deleted]

Jul 12, 2014 18:45:22 GMT 1 amoeba said:

Jul 12, 2014 16:48:08 GMT 1 @marcusd said:

I disagree. It's not jealousy, it's a lack of sympathy for the constant whining, from a sector which has better conditions and benefits than most in the private sector. The only time hot topics like this come up is when the Unions call a strike.

I think what this thread has proved more than anything else is that everybody moans about their job. The people moaning about the public sector are often complaining about their own pay/conditions being cut. What I still cannot understand is why complain about people trying to protect their previously negotiated terms and conditions? 'They shouldn't be allowed to because I lost mine' is just a petty argument and to me provides more power to the argument that the private sector needs stronger unions. A union doesn't automatically mean a 3 day week and power cuts.

Couldn't agree more mate. It's as though people think that everybody should be on a shit pension rather than everybody on a decent one. Let's pick on the firefighters because they dare to fight for what they signed up to.

Had I known my pension would be decimated, 12 years ago I would not have paid £400 a month into it, I would have invested it into property. I was in effect mis-sold the pension and am currently looking into this legally.

[Deleted]

Striking got the miners what??? it doesn't work and it's just a day off work. As someone said how many were at the picket line and how many were at home watching telly?

why don't the burger flippers strike,they have shit pay and no pensions.

a foreign worker will come and take all your jobs if you don't want them no question.
Don't trust the union guys they are only after themselves.

[Doc Halladay 32]

Jul 12, 2014 19:34:41 GMT 1 @melthamnut said:

Striking got the miners what??? it doesn't work and it's just a day off work. As someone said how many were at the picket line and how many were at home watching telly?

why don't the burger flippers strike,they have shit pay and no pensions.

a foreign worker will come and take all your jobs if you don't want them no question.
Don't trust the union guys they are only after themselves.

Striking miners were amongst other things trying to look after the future of their industry. After they had witnessed what happening to the local steel industry.

History tells us that they lost and so did the mining industry, we literally are sat above rich seams of coal in this fine county of ours.

How many working mines are there in Yorkshire? Let me think now.... UK coal announced in April the closure next year of their last Yorkshire coal mine at Kellingley.

The majority of coal for our local power stations is imported. Were the miners right to strike .....you tell me?

[Deleted]

Drax will be getting its coal from abroad instead of across the road.crazy

[Deleted]

Let's just be thankful for free speech. Just as there are lazy feckless buggers in the public sector they also exist in the private sector...

Striking is always a last resort and for all the knockers you need to get to the nub of the problem as to why they're striking. Sometimes whatever side of the fence you sit on it doesn't harm to put yourselves in the shoes of the other side, even more so when you don't actually sit on either side and you're just voicing an opinion, often driven by some form of media...

For the avoidance of doubt I've always worked in the private sector and work with many public sector clients and as per the private sector it's the big wigs that are just in this for themselves and their pensions. The little guys are just trying to get by...

[monkbar]

Crazy but still cheaper. And that's the be all and end all these days.

[terrier5]

Jul 13, 2014 0:31:56 GMT 1 monkbar said:

Crazy but still cheaper. And that's the be all and end all these days.

Not quite my friend. The cheaper coal from Poland that persuaded thatcher that we could manage without our own pits turned out to have far less calorific value ie, it was of much lower quality. So you had to burn much more...

The problem in this country is not too much union power, it's not enough. It always takes 2 hands to clap and we are cursed in this country with an aggressive, elitist govt hell-bent on further entrenching inequality between the 5% and the rest of us. If you had a union in your workplace which could fight injustice and the rampant insatiable greed we see so much of in this country at the top, then join it. It's still a basic right. Look at that bankrupt economic backwater Germany, where companies of a certain size require workforce representation on the board. We associate the 70's with strikes but why did we lose our car industry? Bad management.

A more balanced approach in this country - a rebalancing of labour relations would do us all a world of good. As it is, power is concentrated in the hands of a few etonian class shits who absolutely don't care what happens to this country and its people as long as they are raking it in. Which brings us back to the point about there being not enough union power.

We wouldn't need to strike if there was! It's not as if we want to!

Idiots like the OP simply take their world view obediently from the sun newspaper. You seriously want our world to be shaped according to loathsome turds such as Murdoch? Coulson? The rest of them? Unelected, unaccountable hypocritical, lying bullies who have the brass neck to label union leaders 'barons'.

You don't like what's happening to your pension, fight it. Join a union. It's not all about striking, you know. Our union, the FBU has been discussing, arguing and fighting legal cases for 2-3 years before we called a strike ballot. The govt is just_not_listening. And we need to fight the bastards.

[Deleted]

Jul 12, 2014 18:09:36 GMT 1 griffa said:

Unions only call a strike as result of a democratic vote.

Yeah, because the majority of workers wanted to strike didn't they?
That'll be why only 27% of NUT members bothered to vote, 20% of Unison, 20% of Unite union, 23% of GMB bothered to vote....

Take Unison as an example, 58% of the 20% voted YES to strike, making around 12% of Unison members who actually voted yes to a strike...Democracy at it's finest eh?

[Macduff]

Yes mate, exactly the same democracy that gave us Cameron and his chinless chums.
UTT

[Deleted]

Jul 13, 2014 10:14:33 GMT 1 terrier5 said:

Jul 13, 2014 0:31:56 GMT 1 monkbar said:

Crazy but still cheaper. And that's the be all and end all these days.

Not quite my friend. The cheaper coal from Poland that persuaded thatcher that we could manage without our own pits turned out to have far less calorific value ie, it was of much lower quality. So you had to burn much more...

The problem in this country is not too much union power, it's not enough. It always takes 2 hands to clap and we are cursed in this country with an aggressive, elitist govt hell-bent on further entrenching inequality between the 5% and the rest of us. If you had a union in your workplace which could fight injustice and the rampant insatiable greed we see so much of in this country at the top, then join it. It's still a basic right. Look at that bankrupt economic backwater Germany, where companies of a certain size require workforce representation on the board. We associate the 70's with strikes but why did we lose our car industry? Bad management.

A more balanced approach in this country - a rebalancing of labour relations would do us all a world of good. As it is, power is concentrated in the hands of a few etonian class shits who absolutely don't care what happens to this country and its people as long as they are raking it in. Which brings us back to the point about there being not enough union power.

We wouldn't need to strike if there was! It's not as if we want to!

Idiots like the OP simply take their world view obediently from the sun newspaper. You seriously want our world to be shaped according to loathsome turds such as Murdoch? Coulson? The rest of them? Unelected, unaccountable hypocritical, lying bullies who have the brass neck to label union leaders 'barons'.

You don't like what's happening to your pension, fight it. Join a union. It's not all about striking, you know. Our union, the FBU has been discussing, arguing and fighting legal cases for 2-3 years before we called a strike ballot. The govt is just_not_listening. And we need to fight the bastards.

Excellent post.

I think the most disturbing thing for me here is the sheer volume of working class people actually coming out with and believing such drivel as the OP, purely because they are engineered to think like this by the media (The same media that is owned by the very corporations whose greed and manipulation of policies are keeping your wages and working conditions down, whilst keeping their profits up).

"Unions are bad, the public sector are earning this and that and doing nothing, we don't get the same terms and conditions as them so they should be punished and get what we get instead blah, blah blah."...........Well get off your arse and do something about it then!!!!!!!!

To actually then repeat such rubbish then makes you complicit, as well as naive and foolish.

It's like Stockholm syndrome on an industrialised scale.

For centuries the working class lived with nothing and were merely disposable bodies, it's only really in the last century with the labour/union movements that a decent standard of existence and rights were won.

Yet these rights, many of which we all take for granted, are being eroded at an alarming rate and by the time the fucking idiots realise this, we'll already be back to Victorian times, with too few rights to be able to effectively do anything, exactly where the big corporations and their government puppets want us!

[Deleted]

Jul 13, 2014 10:54:34 GMT 1 @terrierists said:

Jul 13, 2014 10:14:33 GMT 1 terrier5 said:

Not quite my friend. The cheaper coal from Poland that persuaded thatcher that we could manage without our own pits turned out to have far less calorific value ie, it was of much lower quality. So you had to burn much more...

The problem in this country is not too much union power, it's not enough. It always takes 2 hands to clap and we are cursed in this country with an aggressive, elitist govt hell-bent on further entrenching inequality between the 5% and the rest of us. If you had a union in your workplace which could fight injustice and the rampant insatiable greed we see so much of in this country at the top, then join it. It's still a basic right. Look at that bankrupt economic backwater Germany, where companies of a certain size require workforce representation on the board. We associate the 70's with strikes but why did we lose our car industry? Bad management.

A more balanced approach in this country - a rebalancing of labour relations would do us all a world of good. As it is, power is concentrated in the hands of a few etonian class shits who absolutely don't care what happens to this country and its people as long as they are raking it in. Which brings us back to the point about there being not enough union power.

We wouldn't need to strike if there was! It's not as if we want to!

Idiots like the OP simply take their world view obediently from the sun newspaper. You seriously want our world to be shaped according to loathsome turds such as Murdoch? Coulson? The rest of them? Unelected, unaccountable hypocritical, lying bullies who have the brass neck to label union leaders 'barons'.

You don't like what's happening to your pension, fight it. Join a union. It's not all about striking, you know. Our union, the FBU has been discussing, arguing and fighting legal cases for 2-3 years before we called a strike ballot. The govt is just_not_listening. And we need to fight the bastards.

Excellent post.

I think the most disturbing thing for me here is the sheer volume of working class people actually coming out with and believing such drivel as the OP, purely because they are engineered to think like this by the media (The same media that is owned by the very corporations whose greed and manipulation of policies are keeping your wages and working conditions down, whilst keeping their profits up).

"Unions are bad, the public sector are earning this and that and doing nothing, we don't get the same terms and conditions as them so they should be punished and get what we get instead blah, blah blah."...........Well get off your arse and do something about it then!!!!!!!!

To actually then repeat such rubbish then makes you complicit, as well as naive and foolish.

It's like Stockholm syndrome on an industrialised scale.

For centuries the working class lived with nothing and were merely disposable bodies, it's only really in the last century with the labour/union movements that a decent standard of existence and rights were won.

Yet these rights, many of which we all take for granted, are being eroded at an alarming rate and by the time the fucking idiots realise this, we'll already be back to Victorian times, with too few rights to be able to effectively do anything, exactly where the big corporations and their government puppets want us!

Very diplomatic.

[Deleted]

Should train drivers earn double what a nurse does?

Should we be subsidising the railways through taxes when the bloke driving the thing is earning £50k a year?

Would you support a train drivers strike, simply because you believe in "unity"?

[terrier5]

Jul 13, 2014 11:14:46 GMT 1 @billynomates said:

Should train drivers earn double what a nurse does?

Should we be subsidising the railways through taxes when the bloke driving the thing is earning £50k a year?

Would you support a train drivers strike, simply because you believe in "unity"?

Not sure what your point is Mel. I don't begrudge train / tube staff their wages.

Try answering the point in the post you just quoted rather than playing the man and seeking more division. Or... you could join Cameron's government!

[Deleted]

Jul 13, 2014 11:24:03 GMT 1 terrier5 said:

Jul 13, 2014 11:14:46 GMT 1 @billynomates said:

Should train drivers earn double what a nurse does?

Should we be subsidising the railways through taxes when the bloke driving the thing is earning £50k a year?

Would you support a train drivers strike, simply because you believe in "unity"?

Not sure what your point is Mel. I don't begrudge train / tube staff their wages.

Try answering the point in the post you just quoted rather than playing the man and seeking more division. Or... you could join Cameron's government!

My point is that the train drivers are ridiculously well paid thanks to a very strong union.

As for the quote I posted, is anybody that doesn't believe in supporting trade unions a "fucking idiot". It's hardly an effective way to engage people into the debate is it?

[Deleted]

Jul 13, 2014 10:47:09 GMT 1 Macduff said:

Yes mate, exactly the same democracy that gave us Cameron and his chinless chums.
UTT

A YES/NO vote is hardly the same as a general election. For a start, in a Union vote, you only get a choice of agreeing or not with left wing Labour funding socialists. There is no right wing alternative.

[terrier5]

Jul 13, 2014 11:35:07 GMT 1 @billynomates said:

Jul 13, 2014 11:24:03 GMT 1 terrier5 said:

Not sure what your point is Mel. I don't begrudge train / tube staff their wages.

Try answering the point in the post you just quoted rather than playing the man and seeking more division. Or... you could join Cameron's government!

My point is that the train drivers are ridiculously well paid thanks to a very strong union.

As for the quote I posted, is anybody that doesn't believe in supporting trade unions a "fucking idiot". It's hardly an effective way to engage people into the debate is it?

... and the thread title? Or did that not bother you?

[Deleted]

Jul 13, 2014 12:39:22 GMT 1 terrier5 said:

Jul 13, 2014 11:35:07 GMT 1 @billynomates said:

My point is that the train drivers are ridiculously well paid thanks to a very strong union.

As for the quote I posted, is anybody that doesn't believe in supporting trade unions a "fucking idiot". It's hardly an effective way to engage people into the debate is it?

... and the thread title? Or did that not bother you?

Well no as I'm not in the public sector. If I was though, I'd have taken exception to it.

[buzz]

Remove the people's right to protest in which ever form and we may as well rename our wonderful country North Korea! The last time we had such a swing to the right in Europe a certain Mr Hitler gained power! Be careful what you wish for!!!!!

[buzz]

Jul 13, 2014 12:39:22 GMT 1 terrier5 said:

Jul 13, 2014 11:35:07 GMT 1 @billynomates said:

My point is that the train drivers are ridiculously well paid thanks to a very strong union.

As for the quote I posted, is anybody that doesn't believe in supporting trade unions a "fucking idiot". It's hardly an effective way to engage people into the debate is it?

... and the thread title? Or did that not bother you?

[amoeba]

Jul 13, 2014 11:52:17 GMT 1 @marcusd said:

Jul 13, 2014 10:47:09 GMT 1 Macduff said:

Yes mate, exactly the same democracy that gave us Cameron and his chinless chums.
UTT

A YES/NO vote is hardly the same as a general election. For a start, in a Union vote, you only get a choice of agreeing or not with left wing Labour funding socialists. There is no right wing alternative.

There will have been right wing people standing for election to Union leadership posts but they won't have been voted in.