regional pay scales

[Howard Webb]

blimey! didnt think Osborne had the Kajones for this one. Hes effectively casting the north adrift, in public sector pay terms. Interesting idea, im pretty sure it will cause political hell. How about politicians getting regional pay grades? Dont think thats going to happen....What is the public sector now anyway? Half of it is private.

This is all a bit mental. Anyone got any idea how its going to work? How will pay be graded, if not set by central gov? whos going to pay for that service, how will it be implemented?

 

[southstand1882]

I would've started on the Pilgrims first

But good to see.

It is rediculous that some pen pushing public sector workers are paid 11% more than their private sector equivalents, with added gold plated pension

It used to be that public sector workers were paid less, but the pension and working conditions made up for it

THERE'S NO MONEY LEFT PEOPLE!!!

 

[Leeds Spur]

Seems like common sense to me. London struggles to attract key workers and the cost of living in the north is a lot lower. Get it done.

 

[Leeds Spur]

Regarding pen pushers my wife can never place ex public sector workers as they have zero work ethic and ask for too much money! Employers also avoid them like the plague.

 

[P.D.]

I'm astounded that this doesn't already exist. I had no idea. Ridiculous that someone in middlesborough for instance gets paid the same as someone in surrey for an identical job.

Wonder how many public sector workers will vote Tory next election, they have been pretty ruthless on them but this kind of decisive action is required.

 

[monkeybarry]

not quite sure hows its going to work in practice and highly doubt it will be double edged, ie. public sector pay will rise in line with private when (if!) we reach affluence again

 

[DHSF]

Whats happened?

I know I get paid more, for being in london, than someone in my company on the same job grade in Birmingham for example.

 

[Howard Webb]

Whats happened?

I know I get paid more, for being in london, than someone in my company on the same job grade in Birmingham for example.

well the public sector also has london weighting of ?ú5k ish. So the gap is already massive, between north and south. thats one issue which will need resolving, the gap will get bigger.

also, if the principle of this measure is to make pay farer, what about inflation? Public sector pay has been many years behind inflation. What about the implied problem of having to give pay rises across the south east to reflect standard of living, compared to pay cuts across less productive areas? I cant see why a fireman is worth less in the north than the south in this example. Why should a fireman in london get an increase, plus weighting, while his equivalent is paid less and has to struggle with pay cuts ( because his/her pay is pegged at 1% regardless of the cost of living going up 30% in some areas like fuel ).

this idea seems fine on the face of it but as soon as you start to pick at it, it dosnt look rosy at all.

 

[T-C]

It will be interesting to see how this works in practice....

Admin jobs, unskilled work or other jobs that have a very competitive market I can see working.

Teachers, police, fireman, nurses etc where there is a potential shortage of good people willing to work in bad areas could be more problematic.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Hopefully the first major is step in a signficant much needed massive reduction of the public sector country wide.

 

[DHSF]

Ok just read about it. I am pretty sure that regional pay is already in place within public Sector. I know for a fact it is in for the NHS, the have London Allowance, but not well informed if other public sector areas have this.

Im not sure what the fuss is about. you cant have someone in Stoke earning the same as someone in London, if you do, you may as well say goodbye to the workers here in london as the chances are they will move out of london.

unless im mistaken here but if theyre talking about actually changing the salary to reflect the region then all they will be doing is adding the 5k london allowance to the salary and consider it a salary. Its gonna be exactly the same.

I get a london allowance, im not in public sector, but im pretty sure a brickload of private sector companies etc have a regional pay structure in place. The pay is all

Like I say maybe im being confused between the regional pay and the london allowance. I think theyre effectively the same.

 

[T-C]

Im not sure what the fuss is about. you cant have someone in Stoke earning the same as someone in London, if you do, you may as well say goodbye to the workers here in london as the chances are they will move out of london.

I know of a number of public sector organisations who have been doing that for years and I'm pretty sure it hasn't caused a mass movement of people out of London.

One example of this is an gov agency who allocated each of their regional procurement teams responsibility for a specific category of national contracts, one for print another for fleet etc All procurement officers were on the same pay scales.

As IT procurement specialists are generally more highly paid than the others (massively higher in London), that category was allocated to the Welsh regional office where the standard pay for the grade represented a decent wage in the local market. So if manged properly it can also be an effective way of saving money.

The same principals shouldn't apply to unskilled or low skill jobs though.

 

[Gordinho]

Hopefully the first major is step in a signficant much needed massive reduction of the public sector country wide.

The problem with this is that it's knowing where to stop cutting, obviously we need emergency services, then street cleansing services, social workers, welfare workers etc, where's the cut off point? I'm not saying I have the answers, just offering the point up for discussion.

Most people would feel they can justify their job, we all laugh at Guardianista type jobs such as Outreach Workers Ensuring Good Sexual Health For Workers In The Sex Industry but if they're saving the NHS their salary plus more by ensuring ladies of the night don't contract STDs or worse and pass it on then where do we draw the line?

Like I say, I don't have the answers but I'd be intrigued to see a list of what people consider to be vital workers, essential workers, disposable workers and so on.

 

[southstand1882]

We need loads of vital workers

But we just need to stop the maniacal spending on salaries and pensions

[h=1]NHS pays ?ú20,000 a week for a doctor[/h][h=2]Doctors are being hired at rates of ?ú20,000 a week by hospitals to cover NHS staff shortages caused by European rules, an investigation by the Sunday Telegraph has found.[/h]
-80 per cent of hospital trusts which provided figures admitted spending more than ?ú1,000 per shift on medical cover;

-Hospitals spent more than ?ú2 billion on temporary clinical staff in the two years since the rules came in, a sum which could have paid the wages of 48,000 nurses or 33,000 junior doctors over the period;

-North Cumbria University Hospitals Trust spent ?ú20,000 hiring a surgeon for one week and ?ú14,000 on four days’ cover for a gynaecologist;
-Mid Staffordshire Foundation Trust paid ?ú5,667 for a doctor to cover one 24-hour shift in its casualty unit;
-Christie Foundation Trust in Manchester spent more than ?ú11,000 on six days’ cover for a haematology consultant.

 

[DHSF]

Its the temporary staffing that the NHS spends on that is ridiculous. You hit a good point Southstand. Like I say I do work on public sector clients, in addition to private sector, and the amount that is spent on Temporary Staffing is fudging ridiculous.

Its not even the fact that theyre using temporary staff for short periods of time, rather than fill a post they use temporary staff to fill certain posts for four or five years. So long that the organisation forgets that the staff member is in fact a temporary staff. As you can imagine the temporary staff member is getting double if not triple what a permanenet staff member would have got

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

The problem with this is that it's knowing where to stop cutting, obviously we need emergency services, then street cleansing services, social workers, welfare workers etc, where's the cut off point? I'm not saying I have the answers, just offering the point up for discussion.

Most people would feel they can justify their job, we all laugh at Guardianista type jobs such as Outreach Workers Ensuring Good Sexual Health For Workers In The Sex Industry but if they're saving the NHS their salary plus more by ensuring ladies of the night don't contract STDs or worse and pass it on then where do we draw the line?

Like I say, I don't have the answers but I'd be intrigued to see a list of what people consider to be vital workers, essential workers, disposable workers and so on.

Can't really say I agree with some of that. Social & Welfare workers are a big part of why this country is so fudged up. The softly softly nicely nicely approach just doesn't work and it bemuses me how people just can't see it. Cleansing services should be tendered out to private companies who are then held accountable. Emergency services is a tough one. I think the NHS is fudged and it's time to wave bye bye. It's time to get with the times. Government services should be there as nothing but a safety net for those that truly require it. I'd prefer a system where health insurance was mandatory (like car insurance), but that you get to choose your provider. Hospitals should be private, but should take NHS patients (those that can't afford to pay the mandatory insurance) where required.

 

[monkeybarry]

Can't really say I agree with some of that. Social & Welfare workers are a big part of why this country is so fudged up. The softly softly nicely nicely approach just doesn't work and it bemuses me how people just can't see it. Cleansing services should be tendered out to private companies who are then held accountable. Emergency services is a tough one. I think the NHS is fudged and it's time to wave bye bye. It's time to get with the times. Government services should be there as nothing but a safety net for those that truly require it. I'd prefer a system where health insurance was mandatory (like car insurance), but that you get to choose your provider. Hospitals should be private, but should take NHS patients (those that can't afford to pay the mandatory insurance) where required.

i agree with this re healthcare with a few changes;
NHS = fundamental, basic, care. ie; A&E, minor injuries assesment, GP when you get flu
the rest should be private

have a private companies need to have a capped and controlled profit to ensure standards are kept acceptible and people are not ripped off and priced out of being able to afford being healthy (look at the train system to see how it can go wrong and benothing more than a cash cow)

 

[DHSF]

i agree with this re healthcare with a few changes;
NHS = fundamental, basic, care. ie; A&E, minor injuries assesment, GP when you get flu
the rest should be private

have a private companies need to have a capped and controlled profit to ensure standards are kept acceptible and people are not ripped off and priced out of being able to afford being healthy (look at the train system to see how it can go wrong and benothing more than a cash cow)

If the healthcare should be private - I will expect my taxes to go down. Simple. There is not a chance that I am paying taxes and not have any NHS. that said I do get private healthcare anyways but some are not that privileged.

 

[P.D.]

i agree with this re healthcare with a few changes;
NHS = fundamental, basic, care. ie; A&E, minor injuries assesment, GP when you get flu
the rest should be private

have a private companies need to have a capped and controlled profit to ensure standards are kept acceptible and people are not ripped off and priced out of being able to afford being healthy (look at the train system to see how it can go wrong and benothing more than a cash cow)

what about someone that needs a hip replacement or someone who needs intense physio on their arm to revolver from a prior injury. Do they fall into your private category as id consider them essential.

I do think the NHS is an out dated concept but no politician would ever say so directly. Its the envy of the world because everyone else is astounded that its free.

 

[Leeds Spur]

what about someone that needs a hip replacement or someone who needs intense physio on their arm to revolver from a prior injury. Do they fall into your private category as id consider them essential.

I do think the NHS is an out dated concept but no politician would ever say so directly. Its the envy of the world because everyone else is astounded that its free.

Envy of the world!!!!!

LOL!!!!!

France, Germany, the whole of Scandanavia, USA, Japan, Spain, Italy....latin america.......says otherwise.

Utter gonad*s!!!!!

Just look at the cancer, heart attack, and other major disease survival rates.

Don't chat gonad*s.