Furious that MP's are to get an 11% pay rise!

[Millenniumbug1]

Why? When the rest of the country is wondering how we're going to pay our heating bills, we had 30,000 deaths due to the cold last year, (many more than Switzerland), but the MPs award themselves this pay rise.
I always feel indebted to vote, but I wish we could have a box on the ballot paper which says that we don't like any of them! I just don't think they've earned an 11% pay rise.

What on earth makes you think that is just those on benefits/disabled and the unemployed that use food banks? We get loads who work but just can't afford food after the rent, travel and heating.

interesting article

Expat i was thinking about that £75 a week breakfast budget they have, that would feed myself and the kids 3 meals a day for just shy of 2 weeks.

Let me explore the concept of fairness.

It's quite fair that I should have a Christmas dinner to comprise a salmon starter with champagne, roast turkey, christmas pudding, followed by mince pies and brandy. Nothing wrong with that, it's perfectly fair. Lots of people with similar responsibilitie expect the same. Now consider that due to a downturn in business, times are hard, so I have explained to the smaller piglets that there will be no presents this year, and they will be getting cornflakes for their Christas dinner, because there is no money left for anything better. Surelely it is "fair" (in a kerala sense) for me to expect Mrs Piglet to serve up my dinner on a tray in the drawing room, then she and the smaller piglets can sit quietly in the scullery with their cornflakes and newspaper-hats? I will brook no complaints in my house, kerala.

Bet those in the comparable jobs have to pay for their own power/gas.

MPs can do other jobs too (eg David Cameron can be prime minister and an MP). So I have even less sympathy for the argument that they need such a salary. Maybe it should be pro-rata based on actual days worked on the job.

why the fuck can't they get a salary and that is it? why all the extras? why are we buying them breakfast?!

if they work so little why do they all need second homes? why cant they share a travel lodge room with their mp mates?

imagine James and Barnaby having to share lol.

"why the fuck can't they get a salary and that is it? why all the extras? why are we buying them breakfast?!"

I have a job (private sector) that involves a lot of travel. When I travel the company pays my hotel bills, transport costs, meals (including breakfast)... all of which I claim back with receipts rather than paying out of my own salary. That's how it works in the real world.

But Cogito, you are staying in a hotel. The MPs have a second home, paid for by us, where surely they could keep a box of Weetabix.

cogito

if you worked "every day" at the Palace of Westminster, it would be classed as your Normal Place of Work so you would have a hard job getting travel and accomodation paid for without it being a taxable benefit.

When doctors are on call in hospitals they have access to a room in which to sleep.
They are not furnished with a second home at the taxpayers expense, near the hospital to fulfill their duties.
This also occurs in the real world.

My DH is a physio and doesn't have a room to sleep in when he's on call. He just has to hope there's somewhere available if he gets called in.

I'm disgusted, I'm a nurse and I'm sure when our 1% pay rise was announced we were told we had to do our bit for economy. So when are the MPs going to do their bit?

It one rule for one....

Its going to end up with riots in the strreets again, and i wouldnt be surprised. for my personally this is the straw thats broken the camels back.

they dont fecking give a flying duck about 'were all in this together' us.

Kerala the question isn't about how much MPs are paid, it is about whether they should have a massive pay rise when the rest of the public sector and the private sector too have had either 1) pay cuts. 2) nothing at all, or 3) pay rises so small that inflation has swallowed them up.

Clearly you do not think we are all in this together.

Police officers have been subject to review after review for the last few years . First Hutton , which has buggered my pension , so much so that I've now decided to leave early and take a smaller pension rather than chase and fight 18 year old robbers when I'm 60 . Then Winsor , which , much in the way of the justification for the pay rise for MP's went on and on about attracting 'the best and most talented ' to do the job . He then recommended CUTTING the starting wage for probationers to 19k . Which isn't going to attract anyone with a degree for a start . In the last 3 years , I've had NO pay rises . None . I have however lost 3.5k in allowances , which apparently were to reward me for being one of the most experienced and hardworking officers . And taking a second job is nigh on impossible due to the ridiculous shift pattern which means the only thing you can do on rest days is sleep .

Oh and we had our pay award recommended as a rise by an independent pay body too . The government ignored it and gave us fuck all , so it's not as if there's no precedent for going against an independent pay review , is there ?

So , if my talent and skills aren't recognised , if my hard work isn't recognised , if the fact that I too could earn much much more in the private sector using the same skills I've used much to the police service's advantage, then what the fuck makes them so different ? Apart from a subsidised canteen , a truly truly platinum plated pension and a free seat in first class on the last surviving gravy train .

Plomino beautifully put, well done shooting the pay rise apologists down in flames.

plomino my dh is the same and me too as I'm sw.
We will either retire early and lose loads of money or as you say be chasing baddies/being responsible fir children's safety when we are in our sixties

Could their pay be means tested ? therefore the independently wealthy get bugger all and those who are not get a decent wage ? That sounds fair .

Someone upthread mentioned performance related pay. I still think that's the best idea mentioned so far.

I agree wholeheartedly with Kerala.

Worth an 11 % pay rise? Really???!!!

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/09/iain-duncan-smith-welfare-policies

Well said Plomino

These people run the country. You might not agree with how they do so, but that's what, y'know, your vote is for. Or, you can run for election yourselves if you think you can do a better job.

Perhaps an 11% rise is excessive (however, let's not forget they aren't the ones who actually decide the amount), but saying they should get minimum wage or the average wage or not get expenses is clearly fucking stupid.

This is going to sound offensive, but ...

£74k in the City is not a whole heap of money. It really is not. You are comparing what you earn outside London with what someone earns inside London. There is a metrobubble effect. You might ask why these people are paid so little. That's actually a reasonable question (and why their expenses are so gross). Remember that these folk are on short-term contracts.

Very few of them have transferable skills. Remember those desperate appearances on reality TV shows? That's because they are well nigh unemployable anywhere else. There isn't much around for unskilled middle management.