AIBU to think the Goverment is

[Blackness]

Bang out of order to be planning on changing the law on redundancy packages and striking rules, just so they can force through their new cuts.

Labour tried to do it the right way, by getting the Unions to agree, and they didn't. So the Conservaties think Fuck you we will simply do it the underhanded way.

Just like reducing the tax credits to £23k a year despite telling us 40k.

regret my Tory vote now....

Democracy...... What Democracy Mr Cameroon. Goverment loses in court, so you change the law instead.

You Sir quite frankly Stink!

obviously didn't think that post through shame!

this is redundancey packages in the public sector - not the private sector though and they are trying to reduce the term to the same as the private sector whereby you get weeks for the years you have worked not years pay for each year you have worked - i.e. worked 10 years at 30k per year then get 10 x 30k If you think my taxes are going to pay redundancey at that rate you are having a laugh - why should public sector get more? why not a sensible package like the private sector get

you could be on to something there thesecondcomming !.
Bit like toll charges , but for airpots /ferryports/eurotunnel ? .

Ten years of benefits = £240 k ?
OMG ! DH couldnt earn that in 10 years !

There is this very misconceived idea about unions and trade unionism in general. Many many public sector unions have had to agree to wage cuts, loss of benefits and agree to less than ideal terms for their members.

Lots of instances when the unions agree cut backs with management aren't publicized. Look at the agreement between BA and Unite when they had to cut loads of jobs post 9/11.

It is a bit difficult though if working class people are being asked to take a cut in pay, and being sold the line 'we're all in this together' when the man at the top gets a huge bonus.

Blimey - hope my DW gets offered a package like this would give up the teaching very quickly indeed.

The redundancy should be equal though to what is 'typical in private sectors' which is usually around a month of salary per year.

Doubt it expat didn't seem to be in a hurry to do that when they were in power.

I worked in financial services for 20 years and I'm afraid it's tosh to say that public sector workers have a monopoly on perks and benefits.

Most financial sector posts include a good pension scheme (many final salary), PMI, PHI, life insurance, generous holiday entitlements, luncheon vouchers/subsidised canteens, travel discounts etc.

When I was made redundant I received the equivalent of a year's net salary and the professional support to find employment.

I worked for a very large company who didn't pay the highest salaries in the field. They took the view that retaining good staff by rewarding them with service related benefits made financial sense. Perhaps that is the thinking in the public sector too?

yes but your financial services company probably had a hard-working culture and generated a lot of productivity per worker. Unlike the public sector.

Sooo Public Sector workers dont work hard?

'Guaranteed pension- I pay into it & no final salary one
Enhanced maternity pay- only smp
Enhanced redundancy pay- 1 week per year
Subsidised canteens- nope
Subsidies on travel or even free travel (DH and I both have free oyster cards so that's worth £3K a year)- essential user so get milage (30p per mile)& £50 a month
Long holidays-5.6 weeks
Flexible working conditions- but if you don't use within a month the flexi hours are gone
DH gets vouchers for loads of random- nope

That's with 12 years service & frontline working. I get 2 m full pay for sick then 2 m half pay. High levels of stress mean most people use that each year and we get no cover so the rest of the staff get stressed & go sick. No maternity or secondment cover either.

gross generalisation, but probably not.

This whole problem is part of a much bigger picture. UK workers (and others) are reduced to a commodity in the global marketplace. It is lovely to think you have a big redundancy package to fall back on, mandated by worker's rights enshrined in law, but that cost burden makes it less likely that private sector companies will hire you over a worker in another country with fewer rights (and therefore cheaper to fire).

I cannot see how the current rate of perks in the civil service can remain static whilst the world around it has changed so much. It would be great if private sector redundancy rights could be brought up to civil service levels but I think it's completely unrealistic, sadly.

Look, would you rather all just moan about the tories and stick your heads in the sand about the realities?

boiledegg1, I do rather enjoy moaning about the tories, 'tis true

However, as far as the realities go, there is not total agreement on the best way to deal with the deficit.

There are many who believe that the proposed 25% public sector cuts are unneccesarily harsh. I do wonder, if there is an alternative to such severe cuts, whether or not that should at least be explored? After all, we are talking here about peoples lives, jobs and vital services like police, education, social work and probation and prison services etc.

This article covers some of the various views.

The 'realities ' have very to do with what the Cons are doing...so yes I would like to moan thanks...as I've said before I do tend to get upset when I'm being shafted

'Mumcentreplus Public sector workers pay tax but they do not actually generate tax.

wanna bet?

Actually that's quite a blanket statement anyway: if your job is getting people into work after illness or unemployment, supporting disabled to work, enabling business start up, promoting your area to relocating businesses.... lots of ways the public sector can enable tax generation. Not even starting with the great many private sector jobs based around the public sector- sandwich delviersies, stationeryt supplies, electrical contractors, gyms near offices, Pubs (or was that just where I worked?)......... it's very interdependent

Yes, it's all pretty shite really, I'm with you there

But the issues go beyond political parties IMO. I have watched jobs in my industry being moved abroad to countries where workers have fewer rights and certainly no job security. Having all these benefits such as a year of maternity leave and redundancy rights is good on an individual level but it isn't helpful if the cost of it encourages your company to make you redundant when you return from your maternity leave and rehire someone in the US to do the same job that you did, as happened with me. I have seen this happen on a large scale. If a tory government had been in power instead of labour, I might have had fewer rights but maybe I would have had a job to return to as I would have been cheaper to pay and easier / cheaper to make redundant.

The private sector has changed so much in the past 5 years - I just don't think the generous benefits that still exist in parts of the public sector are sustainable when you consider the bigger picture. I'm not happy about it but there it is. Does anyone agree?

Dh got a month per year when he was made redundant last year, private sector, not a single perk I can think of unless you are a masochist and like being sworn at or threatened!

AS for the gap between rich and poor: whilst I know that's related to crime etc the reality IMO (and that's of someone raised on a big deprivation index who ahs gfone on to post grad study adn work in charitable sector with struggling famillies)
I do beleive the more important stat is the baseline for poverty and survival- if people ahve enough to have a life of sorts then it's not as important if the boss earns silly amounts. If youc an't pay the heating and the boss does however then it's a huge bother.

Right now we're veering towards baseline poverty dropping; the SN threads are filling up with people who are carers worrying about incomes dropping below sustainable level when they are not in a position to do anything much about it (we're one of those famillies and we know we probably face losing the (rented, we lost our owned one years ago) house unless we can find a solution). That's when things get very scary indeed and that's what sensible cuts have to avoid: sharing the pain is all well and good but when you have no roof or money to buy food then you won't feel as if you are sharing anything much at all, more being used as a whipping horse, and seen as disposable / collaterel damage. Actually those two things pretty much sum up how a lot of people in the disability community are feeling atm. (I will never know why they started with the benefit with reportedly the lowest level of fraudulent claims- DLA- it's as if they knew the disabled annd carers are too exhausted to fight, and too duty bound to strike...)

Not easy to change party allegiances though; I have resigned formally in writing and teh buggers are still sending me membership cards. They have enough cash for that then. Funny, because I would actually struggle to find the price of a stamp today.

Companies, whether public or private, use vouchers as a tax dodge. If they just gave people the equivalent extra salary, they'd have to pay tax and NI. So they are defrauding the exchequer and expecting every ordinary taxpayer/other companies to pick up the bill.

As for UK workers being too expensive, actually not compared to practically any other country in Europe. The Germans seem to have had a flourishing economy for decades despite much better protection for workers, and as far as I've seen they aren't in any more shit than us now. (I imagine they may well be cutting those rights now, but am prepared to bet they won't be any worse than UK statutory rights.

You could argue decent redundancy pay benefits the economy because people are able to spend more money on housing, utilities, food etc. etc. etc. than they would if they were on £65 a week state benefits.

GiddyPickle, I don't know anyone who has taken a 25% paycut!

My DH and a few friends haven't received a payrise this year, but no pay cuts.

As for perks, I mentioned above the perks that come with most financial services posts. In addition, the last government improved maternity rights/paternity rights/holiday entitlements for all. So the gap in perks has been closed and rightly so.

I'm also not convinced that the pay gap has narrowed as you claim. As I understand it, the lowest paid public sector staff do earn more that an equivalent private sector employee doing the same work, but the same does not apply as you progress up the ladder.