Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to think the Goverment is

189 replies

Blackness · 05/07/2010 08:27

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!

OP posts:
edam · 06/07/2010 16:49

Who says the average is three years? I know (some) civil servants and have never heard of that! Lots of people are on contract and will lose their jobs with no pay-off at all. (Including my friend who works for Employment trying to get people back into work - the irony is not lost on her.)

Thebride - only if you want to look at it that way. It's a complicated mishmash of money going back and forth. For instance, taxes paid by public sector workers going to the Treasury and funding other public services that support or contract with private sector companies. Big engineering or infrastructure projects are a huge money earner for the private sector. And PFI has been an opportunity to print money.

I don't think you can take any particular point of the complicated mesh and say 'it starts here'. It's all wiggling round and round.

People who work in the private sector were educated by the state in part or full (unless they didn't go to university) and survived childhood thanks to the NHS/public health provision such as a reasonably effective sewage system/ the Clean Air Act (Gawd bless the Victorians for the first, not so hot at the second.)

frogetyfrog · 06/07/2010 17:05

Cant read the whole thread but has everybody yet realised that this is not about Public sector workers and is about civil servants. Most public sector workers do not get much if any redundancy above the 1 week for each year of service UP TO 6 MONTHS PAY. Therefore for most it is way under 6 months pay.

Why does everybody think that public sector workers get so much of a better deal. Most local government offices do not have canteens, do not have great redundancy or maternity packages, do not have any form of bonuses, do not have any perks of any kind etc.

In fact there are actually very few advantages, if any, to the private sector. Even the pension is not quite as great as everybody makes out as people seem to forget that the local government workers pay in 7%+ of their salary.

GiddyPickle · 06/07/2010 18:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

EthelredOnAGoodDay · 06/07/2010 18:20

It really pisses me off that all public sector workers are lumped together as the 'civil service' when the oft quoted gold plated pensions and 3 year redundancy packages certainly don't apply to the majority of us who work in the public sector. We mainly get the minimum they can give us! Basic maternity pay, basic redundancy, slightly better pension, but nothing to go crazy about.

The problem is, like edam said above, by shelving loads of these projects, thousands of workers in the private sector will be affected. And it's not just people like manual workers. MY DH is an engineering consultant working for an international company. During the downturn, and his team have relied on work like the schools projects. It will be a massive blow to them for all these capital projects to be scrapped.

I know the governement has to make cuts, and FWIW am not too fussed about my pay being frozen as we got absolutely shite pay rises anyway, but think they are going too far.

SanctiMoanyArse · 06/07/2010 19:21

Giddy i think 'can get up to' is the key phrase there: classic jurno technique of making the extreme look like the norm

edam · 06/07/2010 19:45

before 1987? You are talking about people with 24 or more years of service. And, as Sancti says, it's up to X amount. Bet very few people will actually qualify - probably only the permanent secretaries and people just under that level.

My mother got made redundant from the civil service in the 90s and certainly did not get a fat pay off!

GiddyPickle · 06/07/2010 22:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SanctiMoanyArse · 07/07/2010 08:59

That is reporrted salaries though.

At the bottom end there are many civil serbvants on crap wages- admin clerks etc

It's the disparity between private and public overall (perks and wages) that needs to be addressed (with a firm view on a high standard of employee care) rather than targetting groups in a blanket manner

edam · 07/07/2010 11:28

And 'average' is a bit of a fiddle given previous governments have insisted on throwing the most lowly-paid workers out of the public sector by contracting out cleaning and catering and so on. Because the badly-paid people cleaning offices and hospitals are now officially 'in the private sector' that artificially inflates the 'average' wages of public sector v. private.

They are also on worse terms and conditions, so their private sector bosses can coin it in off the back of their labour, while the actual workers struggle. See any big nursing home operator. And then look at the relationship between quality of care and treatment of workers...

SanctiMoanyArse · 07/07/2010 12:09

Yep Edam

There was a lady on news today (local I think, not sure if Welsh or West though as our TV cannot make up it's mind) who is facing a reported % cut to her pension

Except that it is far from the final salary pension everyone complains about, it is likely to pay 40% out

40% of a dinner ladies wages.

Which is going to be pretty damned low I wudl imagine.

There needs to be a lot more info on who gets what and then targetted cuts rrather than blanket ones given after press calls that make the entire sector cound as if it laughing all the way to the

Strix · 07/07/2010 13:53

The only thing I have seen is capping it at 12 or 15 months - depending on whether the redundancy is compulsory or voluntary. Anyone who is upset by that surely has a cushy deal and does not warrant my sympathy.

SanctiMoanyArse · 07/07/2010 15:11

That's redundancy surely Strix; it was pensions I was talking about.

12 - 15 montsh is luxury of course but I have a funny feeling certain people (OK the governemnt ) want us tightly focussed on the people at the top who get silly amounts that in our ire we forget the normal average people at the bottom who scarpe by like the rest of us/.

Such cynicysm. Again.

Strix · 07/07/2010 15:22

Oh, conversation has moved on. I didn't read. Thread used to be about redundancy. sorry.

SanctiMoanyArse · 07/07/2010 15:45

LOL Strix: happens to everyone!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread