Thousands to join walkout in protest against attacks on pay, pensions and workloads

DISRUPTION: County Hall in Dorchester

DISRUPTION: County Hall in Dorchester

First published in News
Last updated
by

DORSET is set to be crippled by a huge public sector strike which will see thousands of workers stage a walkout.

Teachers, council staff, and civil servants in Dorset will be among more than a million nationally joining the strike next Thursday, July 10, which is being supported by a range of unions in protest against attacks on pay, pensions and workloads.

At least two local schools will be closed. There is likely to be disruption at County Hall and other local authorities but councils are unable to say what other services would be affected.

Members of the Fire Brigades Union in Dorset are supporting the action as part of a long-running dispute over pensions. Dorset Fire and Rescue Service, which will be providing a reduced emergency response, is urging people to take care.

Members of unions locally, including GMB, National Union of Teachers (NUT), Public and Commercial Services (PCS), UNISON and Unite will join the strike which will see rallies organised and picket lines drawn up.

Public sector workers in Weymouth, Portland and Dorchester, including those in schools, councils and other public offices will take part in the one-day walkout.

Union bosses say the NUT dispute is about pay, pensions and workloads, while members of the other unions are taking action over pay. They added that public sector workers have not had a pay rise in three years and the government’s offer of a one per cent increase this year represents a cut in real terms due to inflation – the offer was rejected.

Strike action was a last resort, union bosses said, adding that they regretted any disruption to local services but felt they had no option.

The majority of Weymouth Land Registry workers will be walking out as they are members of the PCS union.

Branch chairman Andy Woodgate said while protests have been made in the past about the privatisation threat to the Land Registry, this dispute was about pay.

Dorset divisional secretary of the NUT, Geoff Cooke said: “Members of the NUT in Dorset are taking strike action for the third time this school year. This is unprecedented and reflects teachers’ anger over the refusal of the Secretary of State Michael Gove to have proper discussions about his divisive reforms. “This time we are joined by employees who work as support staff in schools. Hundreds of teachers are expected to be involved, affecting scores of schools locally.

“The general issues for schools and education are of concern to all teachers and parents.”

Mr Cooke said that areas of concern for members included increasing class sizes, redundancies, competition for school places and the move to ditch technical and creative subjects.

Former Unison representative and borough councillor Paul Kimber said: “The vote for strike action has been pretty overwhelming.

“As far as I know all councils in Dorset will be taking industrial action.”

DORSET Fire and Rescue Service is asking for residents to help protect themselves from the risks of fire during FBU strike action which is from 10am to 7pm on Thursday, July 10.

Chief fire officer Darran Gunter said: “While the industrial action is ongoing we will still be responding to 999 calls. Our priority will be to respond to those calls where lives may be at risk or someone needs to be rescued. If we respond to non-emergency calls then those most in need, could be at risk, so please only ring 999 if a fire engine is really needed.”

He added: “We are urging members of the public to take extra care to reduce the risk of a fire breaking out in their home or on our heathland. Fires can start for a variety of reasons, from cooking being left unattended, to electrical faults. The best advice we can give is for everyone to ensure they have a smoke alarm in their home and to check the battery is working at least once a week.”

SCHOOLS AFFECTED

OPEN: Wey Valley – unsure how many staff members will be striking, school will be open.
Conifers Primary school – will be open for the majority.

St Osmunds;
Wyke Regis Junior School;
All Saints School;
St Mary's Middle School, Puddletown;
St John’s Primary School;
St Augustine’s Catholic Primary, Puddletown First School;
Radipole Primary School;
Buckland Newton Primary School;
St Nicholas and St Laurence;
Sunninghill Prep;
Thorners Primary School;
Greenford C of E Primary School;
Kingston Maurward College;
Salway Ash Primary School;
Woodroffe School

CLOSED: Bridport Primary School;
Southill Primary School.

Thomas Hardye School will be closed to students in Year 9 and 10 but OPEN to the Sixth Form

NO DECISION YET: Dorchester Middle School;
Damers First School;
Westfield Arts College;
St George’s Primary School, Portland;
Holy Trinity Primary School.

Comments (37)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:20am Thu 3 Jul 14

Weymouth Ex-pat says...

No, Dorset is not set to be 'crippled': it's a one-day strike, so the effect on services will be no more noticeable than when services are affected by bad weather. And for Paul Kimber's information the vote in the local government strike ballot was not 'overwhelming'. If the Echo reporters had bothered to look for the information rather than just repeating the unions' line they would have found the voting figures courtesy of the LGA:

The LGA's 2013 Earnings Survey showed local government workforce figure of 1,500,140 headcount (excl firefighters and teachers).

Unions' membership balloted (according to their campaign materials):
UNISON: 600,000
GMB: 150,000
Unite: 32,000
Total: 782,000 (52.1% of workforce)

Total votes in favour of strike:
UNISON: 49,836
GMB: 26,281
Unite: 4,267
Total: 80,384 (5.3% of total workforce) and (10.3% of total union membership)
No, Dorset is not set to be 'crippled': it's a one-day strike, so the effect on services will be no more noticeable than when services are affected by bad weather. And for Paul Kimber's information the vote in the local government strike ballot was not 'overwhelming'. If the Echo reporters had bothered to look for the information rather than just repeating the unions' line they would have found the voting figures courtesy of the LGA: The LGA's 2013 Earnings Survey showed local government workforce figure of 1,500,140 headcount (excl firefighters and teachers). Unions' membership balloted (according to their campaign materials): UNISON: 600,000 GMB: 150,000 Unite: 32,000 Total: 782,000 (52.1% of workforce) Total votes in favour of strike: UNISON: 49,836 GMB: 26,281 Unite: 4,267 Total: 80,384 (5.3% of total workforce) and (10.3% of total union membership) Weymouth Ex-pat
  • Score: 32

6:53am Thu 3 Jul 14

rosew60 says...

They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.
They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out. rosew60
  • Score: -3

7:29am Thu 3 Jul 14

arlbergbahn says...

"Members of unions locally, including GMB, National Union of Teachers (NUT), Public and Commercial Services (PCS), UNISON and Unite will join the strike which will see rallies organised and picket lines drawn up" in "protest against attacks on pay, pensions and workloads."
Truly the Public sector is the last refuge of the dinosaurs, isn't it. It really hasn't changed since the 70s. How many Unions do they need in any case, for heaven's sake? It all looks like a giant job creation scheme for that otherwise almost extinct species, the Union leader.
"Members of unions locally, including GMB, National Union of Teachers (NUT), Public and Commercial Services (PCS), UNISON and Unite will join the strike which will see rallies organised and picket lines drawn up" in "protest against attacks on pay, pensions and workloads." Truly the Public sector is the last refuge of the dinosaurs, isn't it. It really hasn't changed since the 70s. How many Unions do they need in any case, for heaven's sake? It all looks like a giant job creation scheme for that otherwise almost extinct species, the Union leader. arlbergbahn
  • Score: 5

7:46am Thu 3 Jul 14

Rocksalt says...

Weymouth Ex-pat wrote:
No, Dorset is not set to be 'crippled': it's a one-day strike, so the effect on services will be no more noticeable than when services are affected by bad weather. And for Paul Kimber's information the vote in the local government strike ballot was not 'overwhelming'. If the Echo reporters had bothered to look for the information rather than just repeating the unions' line they would have found the voting figures courtesy of the LGA:

The LGA's 2013 Earnings Survey showed local government workforce figure of 1,500,140 headcount (excl firefighters and teachers).

Unions' membership balloted (according to their campaign materials):
UNISON: 600,000
GMB: 150,000
Unite: 32,000
Total: 782,000 (52.1% of workforce)

Total votes in favour of strike:
UNISON: 49,836
GMB: 26,281
Unite: 4,267
Total: 80,384 (5.3% of total workforce) and (10.3% of total union membership)
The figure quoted on the radio this morning was 23% voting for a strike. This was across all organisations, not local government. Perhaps the Echo could go back to Mr Limber and ask him to qualify his remarks. On face value he is either being highly selective ( e.g. picking on one workplace), lying or just making it up. As someone who voted for him recently I am disappointed to hear him saying such apparent nonsense.

Incidentally, in the unlikely event that this campaign is successful, please can Mr Kimber confirm that he is happy to support a significant increase in council tax to pay for any increase for DCC and WPBC employees.
[quote][p][bold]Weymouth Ex-pat[/bold] wrote: No, Dorset is not set to be 'crippled': it's a one-day strike, so the effect on services will be no more noticeable than when services are affected by bad weather. And for Paul Kimber's information the vote in the local government strike ballot was not 'overwhelming'. If the Echo reporters had bothered to look for the information rather than just repeating the unions' line they would have found the voting figures courtesy of the LGA: The LGA's 2013 Earnings Survey showed local government workforce figure of 1,500,140 headcount (excl firefighters and teachers). Unions' membership balloted (according to their campaign materials): UNISON: 600,000 GMB: 150,000 Unite: 32,000 Total: 782,000 (52.1% of workforce) Total votes in favour of strike: UNISON: 49,836 GMB: 26,281 Unite: 4,267 Total: 80,384 (5.3% of total workforce) and (10.3% of total union membership)[/p][/quote]The figure quoted on the radio this morning was 23% voting for a strike. This was across all organisations, not local government. Perhaps the Echo could go back to Mr Limber and ask him to qualify his remarks. On face value he is either being highly selective ( e.g. picking on one workplace), lying or just making it up. As someone who voted for him recently I am disappointed to hear him saying such apparent nonsense. Incidentally, in the unlikely event that this campaign is successful, please can Mr Kimber confirm that he is happy to support a significant increase in council tax to pay for any increase for DCC and WPBC employees. Rocksalt
  • Score: 6

7:48am Thu 3 Jul 14

southwellman says...

Have you ever met a union official who has no money? This is nothing more that the unions trying to up their pay packets by making people strike.. The public sector have better pay and pensions than many more people in the private sector (Fact)
Have you ever met a union official who has no money? This is nothing more that the unions trying to up their pay packets by making people strike.. The public sector have better pay and pensions than many more people in the private sector (Fact) southwellman
  • Score: -4

8:59am Thu 3 Jul 14

K9 says...

Apart from school closures, I don't suppose we'll notice. And on the bright side, it cuts the wage bill. I think they should "all" vote again, this time for a four-day week.
Apart from school closures, I don't suppose we'll notice. And on the bright side, it cuts the wage bill. I think they should "all" vote again, this time for a four-day week. K9
  • Score: 7

9:27am Thu 3 Jul 14

pitgirl says...

I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label.
I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label. pitgirl
  • Score: 53

9:30am Thu 3 Jul 14

Naturalised southerner says...

These people are reportedly striking for a pay rise yet can't even make a decision if the schools will be closed or not. Do they really think they deserve a pay rise?
Also, is 23% a majority decision?
These people are reportedly striking for a pay rise yet can't even make a decision if the schools will be closed or not. Do they really think they deserve a pay rise? Also, is 23% a majority decision? Naturalised southerner
  • Score: -13

9:54am Thu 3 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

pitgirl wrote:
I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label.
The problem that i think most people have is that it should be clear to everybody that Britain is in a serious position economically.
When a public sector worker is given a pay rise, 100% of the cost of that has to come from the private sector. That means from three avenues - increased taxes, service cuts elsewhere, or debt.
Under the Tories, Osborne has pushed up the amount Britain owes by £417bn in just three years.
He just can't keep doing this.
Sadly, i don't think we've seen anything yet. My personal belief is that within 5 years - and probably just after the next election - we will see a property crash and a sustained recession. I think the consequence of that will be that at least 25% will need to be shaved off the cost of the public sector over the next decade.
I agree that its wrong that inflation level pay rises are not being offered, but I also think it is wrong for the Unions to behave in this manner since they would be better off campaigning for change OUTSIDE of the public sector. That is to say, boycotting companies like Amazon, Starbucks, etc, who are not paying their fair share. Campaigning for changes in the law to tax people who are asset rich. Heavily taxing overseas buyers of residential property. In other words, campaigning for the government to put the people of this country first, rather than allowing overseas companies and individuals to steal everything from taxes to housing.
[quote][p][bold]pitgirl[/bold] wrote: I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label.[/p][/quote]The problem that i think most people have is that it should be clear to everybody that Britain is in a serious position economically. When a public sector worker is given a pay rise, 100% of the cost of that has to come from the private sector. That means from three avenues - increased taxes, service cuts elsewhere, or debt. Under the Tories, Osborne has pushed up the amount Britain owes by £417bn in just three years. He just can't keep doing this. Sadly, i don't think we've seen anything yet. My personal belief is that within 5 years - and probably just after the next election - we will see a property crash and a sustained recession. I think the consequence of that will be that at least 25% will need to be shaved off the cost of the public sector over the next decade. I agree that its wrong that inflation level pay rises are not being offered, but I also think it is wrong for the Unions to behave in this manner since they would be better off campaigning for change OUTSIDE of the public sector. That is to say, boycotting companies like Amazon, Starbucks, etc, who are not paying their fair share. Campaigning for changes in the law to tax people who are asset rich. Heavily taxing overseas buyers of residential property. In other words, campaigning for the government to put the people of this country first, rather than allowing overseas companies and individuals to steal everything from taxes to housing. JamesYoung
  • Score: 17

9:56am Thu 3 Jul 14

JonnyT says...

rosew60 wrote:
They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.
That would be why people join a union, to be proactive about their work conditions instead of bloody whining about what they haven't got!
[quote][p][bold]rosew60[/bold] wrote: They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.[/p][/quote]That would be why people join a union, to be proactive about their work conditions instead of bloody whining about what they haven't got! JonnyT
  • Score: 10

10:49am Thu 3 Jul 14

February1948 says...

rosew60 wrote:
They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.
When will these people realise that there are millions of people like me who get to my age (68) and have to continue working full time in a demanding job because they have never been able to afford a private pension and will never be able to afford to retire? Have they no concept (no, they don't) of what it's like in the real world? Can't they just for once think to themselves "I'll be able to retire one day but there's a lot of people who will never be able to but will continue to pay their taxes, some of which are subsidising my retirement?"
Have I sympathy for them? Have I hell! Bitter, moi? Yes!
[quote][p][bold]rosew60[/bold] wrote: They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.[/p][/quote]When will these people realise that there are millions of people like me who get to my age (68) and have to continue working full time in a demanding job because they have never been able to afford a private pension and will never be able to afford to retire? Have they no concept (no, they don't) of what it's like in the real world? Can't they just for once think to themselves "I'll be able to retire one day but there's a lot of people who will never be able to but will continue to pay their taxes, some of which are subsidising my retirement?" Have I sympathy for them? Have I hell! Bitter, moi? Yes! February1948
  • Score: -6

10:52am Thu 3 Jul 14

banknote says...

Time for the unions to wake-up and smell the coffee.

What a small numbers of members voting for a strike.

Don't they realise that their salaries and pensions are paid by the rest of us and we are tired of their constant demands.

And if they are thinking about a "demonstration" through the streets of Dorchester - just remember that the flags, shouting etc; remind everyone of a far -right rally. It's counter-productive.

No council workers; get back to work like the rest of us and be thankful you have a job and a good pension.
Time for the unions to wake-up and smell the coffee. What a small numbers of members voting for a strike. Don't they realise that their salaries and pensions are paid by the rest of us and we are tired of their constant demands. And if they are thinking about a "demonstration" through the streets of Dorchester - just remember that the flags, shouting etc; remind everyone of a far -right rally. It's counter-productive. No council workers; get back to work like the rest of us and be thankful you have a job and a good pension. banknote
  • Score: -14

12:49pm Thu 3 Jul 14

codlips says...

February1948 wrote:
rosew60 wrote:
They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.
When will these people realise that there are millions of people like me who get to my age (68) and have to continue working full time in a demanding job because they have never been able to afford a private pension and will never be able to afford to retire? Have they no concept (no, they don't) of what it's like in the real world? Can't they just for once think to themselves "I'll be able to retire one day but there's a lot of people who will never be able to but will continue to pay their taxes, some of which are subsidising my retirement?"
Have I sympathy for them? Have I hell! Bitter, moi? Yes!
Who's fault is it you didn't budget for a pension?
[quote][p][bold]February1948[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rosew60[/bold] wrote: They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.[/p][/quote]When will these people realise that there are millions of people like me who get to my age (68) and have to continue working full time in a demanding job because they have never been able to afford a private pension and will never be able to afford to retire? Have they no concept (no, they don't) of what it's like in the real world? Can't they just for once think to themselves "I'll be able to retire one day but there's a lot of people who will never be able to but will continue to pay their taxes, some of which are subsidising my retirement?" Have I sympathy for them? Have I hell! Bitter, moi? Yes![/p][/quote]Who's fault is it you didn't budget for a pension? codlips
  • Score: 15

1:05pm Thu 3 Jul 14

monkeydog says...

JamesYoung wrote:
pitgirl wrote:
I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label.
The problem that i think most people have is that it should be clear to everybody that Britain is in a serious position economically.
When a public sector worker is given a pay rise, 100% of the cost of that has to come from the private sector. That means from three avenues - increased taxes, service cuts elsewhere, or debt.
Under the Tories, Osborne has pushed up the amount Britain owes by £417bn in just three years.
He just can't keep doing this.
Sadly, i don't think we've seen anything yet. My personal belief is that within 5 years - and probably just after the next election - we will see a property crash and a sustained recession. I think the consequence of that will be that at least 25% will need to be shaved off the cost of the public sector over the next decade.
I agree that its wrong that inflation level pay rises are not being offered, but I also think it is wrong for the Unions to behave in this manner since they would be better off campaigning for change OUTSIDE of the public sector. That is to say, boycotting companies like Amazon, Starbucks, etc, who are not paying their fair share. Campaigning for changes in the law to tax people who are asset rich. Heavily taxing overseas buyers of residential property. In other words, campaigning for the government to put the people of this country first, rather than allowing overseas companies and individuals to steal everything from taxes to housing.
Quite right. Having people blaming each other is music to the tories' ears. Until we do direct our attention to the real causes of our problems, which you refer to, and stop being manipulated like puppets we'll never get out of this mess.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pitgirl[/bold] wrote: I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label.[/p][/quote]The problem that i think most people have is that it should be clear to everybody that Britain is in a serious position economically. When a public sector worker is given a pay rise, 100% of the cost of that has to come from the private sector. That means from three avenues - increased taxes, service cuts elsewhere, or debt. Under the Tories, Osborne has pushed up the amount Britain owes by £417bn in just three years. He just can't keep doing this. Sadly, i don't think we've seen anything yet. My personal belief is that within 5 years - and probably just after the next election - we will see a property crash and a sustained recession. I think the consequence of that will be that at least 25% will need to be shaved off the cost of the public sector over the next decade. I agree that its wrong that inflation level pay rises are not being offered, but I also think it is wrong for the Unions to behave in this manner since they would be better off campaigning for change OUTSIDE of the public sector. That is to say, boycotting companies like Amazon, Starbucks, etc, who are not paying their fair share. Campaigning for changes in the law to tax people who are asset rich. Heavily taxing overseas buyers of residential property. In other words, campaigning for the government to put the people of this country first, rather than allowing overseas companies and individuals to steal everything from taxes to housing.[/p][/quote]Quite right. Having people blaming each other is music to the tories' ears. Until we do direct our attention to the real causes of our problems, which you refer to, and stop being manipulated like puppets we'll never get out of this mess. monkeydog
  • Score: 16

1:24pm Thu 3 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

codlips wrote:
February1948 wrote:
rosew60 wrote:
They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.
When will these people realise that there are millions of people like me who get to my age (68) and have to continue working full time in a demanding job because they have never been able to afford a private pension and will never be able to afford to retire? Have they no concept (no, they don't) of what it's like in the real world? Can't they just for once think to themselves "I'll be able to retire one day but there's a lot of people who will never be able to but will continue to pay their taxes, some of which are subsidising my retirement?"
Have I sympathy for them? Have I hell! Bitter, moi? Yes!
Who's fault is it you didn't budget for a pension?
I think that's a pretty unfair question.
Many people in the private sector do not earn enough to "budget" for a pension, but they were promised one (state pension + SERPS) which has been eroded over time.
Don't forget that the full cost of public sector pension provision comes from private sector workers*, so a better question might be why he didn't budget for paying both his pension and theirs.
(This is not well understood, but its an important point. A public sector worker essentially pays no tax and nor does he or she pay into his or her pension because all of that worker's salary, including the tax that she pays, has come from private sector taxes in the first place).
We are, however, all in this together and we should all be working together to force the government to act against large scale tax evasion and costly government interventions such as Help to Buy and Funding for Lending, which are portrayed as being for the benefit of "working families" (HTB) and "small companies starved of lending" (FFL), but which have actually done nothing but transfer hundreds of billions of pounds into the pockets of property developers and speculators, not working families or companies.
[quote][p][bold]codlips[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]February1948[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rosew60[/bold] wrote: They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.[/p][/quote]When will these people realise that there are millions of people like me who get to my age (68) and have to continue working full time in a demanding job because they have never been able to afford a private pension and will never be able to afford to retire? Have they no concept (no, they don't) of what it's like in the real world? Can't they just for once think to themselves "I'll be able to retire one day but there's a lot of people who will never be able to but will continue to pay their taxes, some of which are subsidising my retirement?" Have I sympathy for them? Have I hell! Bitter, moi? Yes![/p][/quote]Who's fault is it you didn't budget for a pension?[/p][/quote]I think that's a pretty unfair question. Many people in the private sector do not earn enough to "budget" for a pension, but they were promised one (state pension + SERPS) which has been eroded over time. Don't forget that the full cost of public sector pension provision comes from private sector workers*, so a better question might be why he didn't budget for paying both his pension and theirs. (This is not well understood, but its an important point. A public sector worker essentially pays no tax and nor does he or she pay into his or her pension because all of that worker's salary, including the tax that she pays, has come from private sector taxes in the first place). We are, however, all in this together and we should all be working together to force the government to act against large scale tax evasion and costly government interventions such as Help to Buy and Funding for Lending, which are portrayed as being for the benefit of "working families" (HTB) and "small companies starved of lending" (FFL), but which have actually done nothing but transfer hundreds of billions of pounds into the pockets of property developers and speculators, not working families or companies. JamesYoung
  • Score: 8

2:18pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Sidney Hall says...

JamesYoung wrote:
pitgirl wrote:
I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label.
The problem that i think most people have is that it should be clear to everybody that Britain is in a serious position economically.
When a public sector worker is given a pay rise, 100% of the cost of that has to come from the private sector. That means from three avenues - increased taxes, service cuts elsewhere, or debt.
Under the Tories, Osborne has pushed up the amount Britain owes by £417bn in just three years.
He just can't keep doing this.
Sadly, i don't think we've seen anything yet. My personal belief is that within 5 years - and probably just after the next election - we will see a property crash and a sustained recession. I think the consequence of that will be that at least 25% will need to be shaved off the cost of the public sector over the next decade.
I agree that its wrong that inflation level pay rises are not being offered, but I also think it is wrong for the Unions to behave in this manner since they would be better off campaigning for change OUTSIDE of the public sector. That is to say, boycotting companies like Amazon, Starbucks, etc, who are not paying their fair share. Campaigning for changes in the law to tax people who are asset rich. Heavily taxing overseas buyers of residential property. In other words, campaigning for the government to put the people of this country first, rather than allowing overseas companies and individuals to steal everything from taxes to housing.
Wholeheartedly agree, the current (weak) perception of slight economic improvement is based on consumerism, which in turn is based on borrowing. We cannot afford to increase our direct income-based taxes, we cannot afford to cut more services and stress the staff further. Its time to hit some other areas of tax they may not be that popular, combined with letting a recession happen to re-adjust the market value of items in our lives.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pitgirl[/bold] wrote: I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label.[/p][/quote]The problem that i think most people have is that it should be clear to everybody that Britain is in a serious position economically. When a public sector worker is given a pay rise, 100% of the cost of that has to come from the private sector. That means from three avenues - increased taxes, service cuts elsewhere, or debt. Under the Tories, Osborne has pushed up the amount Britain owes by £417bn in just three years. He just can't keep doing this. Sadly, i don't think we've seen anything yet. My personal belief is that within 5 years - and probably just after the next election - we will see a property crash and a sustained recession. I think the consequence of that will be that at least 25% will need to be shaved off the cost of the public sector over the next decade. I agree that its wrong that inflation level pay rises are not being offered, but I also think it is wrong for the Unions to behave in this manner since they would be better off campaigning for change OUTSIDE of the public sector. That is to say, boycotting companies like Amazon, Starbucks, etc, who are not paying their fair share. Campaigning for changes in the law to tax people who are asset rich. Heavily taxing overseas buyers of residential property. In other words, campaigning for the government to put the people of this country first, rather than allowing overseas companies and individuals to steal everything from taxes to housing.[/p][/quote]Wholeheartedly agree, the current (weak) perception of slight economic improvement is based on consumerism, which in turn is based on borrowing. We cannot afford to increase our direct income-based taxes, we cannot afford to cut more services and stress the staff further. Its time to hit some other areas of tax they may not be that popular, combined with letting a recession happen to re-adjust the market value of items in our lives. Sidney Hall
  • Score: 8

3:57pm Thu 3 Jul 14

February1948 says...

codlips wrote:
February1948 wrote:
rosew60 wrote: They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.
When will these people realise that there are millions of people like me who get to my age (68) and have to continue working full time in a demanding job because they have never been able to afford a private pension and will never be able to afford to retire? Have they no concept (no, they don't) of what it's like in the real world? Can't they just for once think to themselves "I'll be able to retire one day but there's a lot of people who will never be able to but will continue to pay their taxes, some of which are subsidising my retirement?" Have I sympathy for them? Have I hell! Bitter, moi? Yes!
Who's fault is it you didn't budget for a pension?
If only I had earned enough, and had enough left each month, I most certainly would have done. There were other circumstances, too, so please do not be too hasty in your criticism!
[quote][p][bold]codlips[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]February1948[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rosew60[/bold] wrote: They should be greatful they have got a job, and not be so greedy lots of other work places do not get pay rises but still get on and do the job and have no pension scheme, oh yeah lets disrupt the schools again but when parents want to take kids on holiday they get told you will get FINED, perhaps you lot should get fined for walking out.[/p][/quote]When will these people realise that there are millions of people like me who get to my age (68) and have to continue working full time in a demanding job because they have never been able to afford a private pension and will never be able to afford to retire? Have they no concept (no, they don't) of what it's like in the real world? Can't they just for once think to themselves "I'll be able to retire one day but there's a lot of people who will never be able to but will continue to pay their taxes, some of which are subsidising my retirement?" Have I sympathy for them? Have I hell! Bitter, moi? Yes![/p][/quote]Who's fault is it you didn't budget for a pension?[/p][/quote]If only I had earned enough, and had enough left each month, I most certainly would have done. There were other circumstances, too, so please do not be too hasty in your criticism! February1948
  • Score: 8

4:58pm Thu 3 Jul 14

oldbrock says...

as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame
as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame oldbrock
  • Score: 9

6:39pm Thu 3 Jul 14

pitgirl says...

I see what February 1948 is saying, but, both me and my husband have two jobs each just ,live.We do not,and never will,earn enough money to own our own home despite both being in our fifties.My husband has always paid into a pension just so we can have a little extra,(ha,ha) in our retirement,(again, along way off).Again, stop blaming the worker and get to the route of the problem,and if that means striking, so be it.
I see what February 1948 is saying, but, both me and my husband have two jobs each just ,live.We do not,and never will,earn enough money to own our own home despite both being in our fifties.My husband has always paid into a pension just so we can have a little extra,(ha,ha) in our retirement,(again, along way off).Again, stop blaming the worker and get to the route of the problem,and if that means striking, so be it. pitgirl
  • Score: 11

7:30pm Thu 3 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

Sidney Hall wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
pitgirl wrote:
I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label.
The problem that i think most people have is that it should be clear to everybody that Britain is in a serious position economically.
When a public sector worker is given a pay rise, 100% of the cost of that has to come from the private sector. That means from three avenues - increased taxes, service cuts elsewhere, or debt.
Under the Tories, Osborne has pushed up the amount Britain owes by £417bn in just three years.
He just can't keep doing this.
Sadly, i don't think we've seen anything yet. My personal belief is that within 5 years - and probably just after the next election - we will see a property crash and a sustained recession. I think the consequence of that will be that at least 25% will need to be shaved off the cost of the public sector over the next decade.
I agree that its wrong that inflation level pay rises are not being offered, but I also think it is wrong for the Unions to behave in this manner since they would be better off campaigning for change OUTSIDE of the public sector. That is to say, boycotting companies like Amazon, Starbucks, etc, who are not paying their fair share. Campaigning for changes in the law to tax people who are asset rich. Heavily taxing overseas buyers of residential property. In other words, campaigning for the government to put the people of this country first, rather than allowing overseas companies and individuals to steal everything from taxes to housing.
Wholeheartedly agree, the current (weak) perception of slight economic improvement is based on consumerism, which in turn is based on borrowing. We cannot afford to increase our direct income-based taxes, we cannot afford to cut more services and stress the staff further. Its time to hit some other areas of tax they may not be that popular, combined with letting a recession happen to re-adjust the market value of items in our lives.
You said something very interesting : "letting a recession happen to readjust the market value of items in our lives".
I wish more people understood this. Britain isn't some miracle child with a property market that survived a recession.
In a free market there is something called "price discovery". It's generally considered healthy since consumers effectively set the price for something.
However, we don't live in a free market, since the government has spent billions on "Funding for Lending", crying out that it was greasing the wheels for business lending and the creation of jobs. In reality, over 95% of the FLS money went straight into residential lending. The government claimed to be helping business while actually doing everything in its power to prevent price discovery.
Instead we were told that prices were rising in line with inflation. But wages were not rising in line with inflation so that measure was misleading.
Now we are told that we need more homes. But why? Prices fell after 2008, but the population didn't. Building more homes will help nobody if developers just hike prices, as they have done.
The relevance of this comment to the original storyline? Housing Benefit.
As rents increase, so does the housing benefit bill.
So you've got this crazy cycle where the government is underwriting mortgage lending but, despite HTB, first time buyer residential mortgage approvals have fallen off a cliff. What we seeing, though, is a continued increase in buy to let mortgage applications. These mortgages are being approved on property that is more and more expensive and therefore repayments are higher. Which means the housing benefit bill is higher.
So, cheap money siphoned (ultimately from you and i) to BTL mortgage investors, who are subsidised at the other end too by housing benefit.
And whatever you spend on housing benefit (£23.8bn or 30% of the entire welfare bill) cannot be spent on council services.
This government, and the one before, should be held accountable for their profligacy. It has destroyed the aspirations of a generation and condemned several others to lifetimes of austerity.
[quote][p][bold]Sidney Hall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pitgirl[/bold] wrote: I am tired of reading the anti council employee tirade. My husband has worked as a manual worker for the council for nearly thirty years . He works very hard in all weathers and has not had a pay increase in over four years, actually having a lowering of his workplace grading resulting in a pay decrease.They do not all have a cushy pension, what he will get eventually will not reflect what he has paid in.He is grateful to have a job,he knows he's one of the lucky ones, but please stop digging at the workers who already have to put up with the "lucky council worker" label.[/p][/quote]The problem that i think most people have is that it should be clear to everybody that Britain is in a serious position economically. When a public sector worker is given a pay rise, 100% of the cost of that has to come from the private sector. That means from three avenues - increased taxes, service cuts elsewhere, or debt. Under the Tories, Osborne has pushed up the amount Britain owes by £417bn in just three years. He just can't keep doing this. Sadly, i don't think we've seen anything yet. My personal belief is that within 5 years - and probably just after the next election - we will see a property crash and a sustained recession. I think the consequence of that will be that at least 25% will need to be shaved off the cost of the public sector over the next decade. I agree that its wrong that inflation level pay rises are not being offered, but I also think it is wrong for the Unions to behave in this manner since they would be better off campaigning for change OUTSIDE of the public sector. That is to say, boycotting companies like Amazon, Starbucks, etc, who are not paying their fair share. Campaigning for changes in the law to tax people who are asset rich. Heavily taxing overseas buyers of residential property. In other words, campaigning for the government to put the people of this country first, rather than allowing overseas companies and individuals to steal everything from taxes to housing.[/p][/quote]Wholeheartedly agree, the current (weak) perception of slight economic improvement is based on consumerism, which in turn is based on borrowing. We cannot afford to increase our direct income-based taxes, we cannot afford to cut more services and stress the staff further. Its time to hit some other areas of tax they may not be that popular, combined with letting a recession happen to re-adjust the market value of items in our lives.[/p][/quote]You said something very interesting : "letting a recession happen to readjust the market value of items in our lives". I wish more people understood this. Britain isn't some miracle child with a property market that survived a recession. In a free market there is something called "price discovery". It's generally considered healthy since consumers effectively set the price for something. However, we don't live in a free market, since the government has spent billions on "Funding for Lending", crying out that it was greasing the wheels for business lending and the creation of jobs. In reality, over 95% of the FLS money went straight into residential lending. The government claimed to be helping business while actually doing everything in its power to prevent price discovery. Instead we were told that prices were rising in line with inflation. But wages were not rising in line with inflation so that measure was misleading. Now we are told that we need more homes. But why? Prices fell after 2008, but the population didn't. Building more homes will help nobody if developers just hike prices, as they have done. The relevance of this comment to the original storyline? Housing Benefit. As rents increase, so does the housing benefit bill. So you've got this crazy cycle where the government is underwriting mortgage lending but, despite HTB, first time buyer residential mortgage approvals have fallen off a cliff. What we seeing, though, is a continued increase in buy to let mortgage applications. These mortgages are being approved on property that is more and more expensive and therefore repayments are higher. Which means the housing benefit bill is higher. So, cheap money siphoned (ultimately from you and i) to BTL mortgage investors, who are subsidised at the other end too by housing benefit. And whatever you spend on housing benefit (£23.8bn or 30% of the entire welfare bill) cannot be spent on council services. This government, and the one before, should be held accountable for their profligacy. It has destroyed the aspirations of a generation and condemned several others to lifetimes of austerity. JamesYoung
  • Score: 6

7:33pm Thu 3 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

oldbrock wrote:
as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame
Fine words, but this strike action will do nothing to deal with the problem. All that will happen is services will be cut elsewhere, taxes raised, or debt incurred (and that WILL come back to bite us when capital markets start demanding higher interest rates).
Here's an interesting little factoid. The return on capital is about 5%. Average wage growth is about 1%.
So if you have £100,000 in the bank, each year you get £5k richer.
Meanwhile, the guy earning £14,000 in a factory job with no savings gets just £140 richer.
The gap will keep growing until the whole country - not just the public sector - marches up Whitehall with a portable guillotine.
[quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame[/p][/quote]Fine words, but this strike action will do nothing to deal with the problem. All that will happen is services will be cut elsewhere, taxes raised, or debt incurred (and that WILL come back to bite us when capital markets start demanding higher interest rates). Here's an interesting little factoid. The return on capital is about 5%. Average wage growth is about 1%. So if you have £100,000 in the bank, each year you get £5k richer. Meanwhile, the guy earning £14,000 in a factory job with no savings gets just £140 richer. The gap will keep growing until the whole country - not just the public sector - marches up Whitehall with a portable guillotine. JamesYoung
  • Score: 3

7:38pm Thu 3 Jul 14

goodmorningcanary says...

Perhaps if taxpayers money hadn't been wasted on buying land in the middle of Dorchester to build a monster of a new building on had been spent more wisely....
I wonder who owned that land? Anyone who had a say in whether there should be a new Council building when there was already a perfectly good one?

It's this type of misuse (imo) of public funds that wastes so much of OUR money and ends in strike action by essential workers.
Perhaps if taxpayers money hadn't been wasted on buying land in the middle of Dorchester to build a monster of a new building on had been spent more wisely.... I wonder who owned that land? Anyone who had a say in whether there should be a new Council building when there was already a perfectly good one? It's this type of misuse (imo) of public funds that wastes so much of OUR money and ends in strike action by essential workers. goodmorningcanary
  • Score: 1

9:06pm Thu 3 Jul 14

arlbergbahn says...

I notice many of the comments that don't wholeheartedly support the poor underpaid & overworked Publick Sector Workers have been voted thumbs down. I suppose this is those poor overworked Workers sitting at the computer with nothing to do since they've gone to lunch already and now they have all afternoon stretching out in front of them ...
I notice many of the comments that don't wholeheartedly support the poor underpaid & overworked Publick Sector Workers have been voted thumbs down. I suppose this is those poor overworked Workers sitting at the computer with nothing to do since they've gone to lunch already and now they have all afternoon stretching out in front of them ... arlbergbahn
  • Score: -10

9:31pm Thu 3 Jul 14

N E Juan says...

There is an argument in the City that you have to pay high salaries and big bonuses to attract top talent. This argument seems to have been accepted by all parties so why does it not apply elsewhere? Surely if you pay rubbish wages in the public sector you get crap staff? If you are a good accountant, solicitor, teacher or manager and your salary is constantly eroded in the public sector you will shift to a public sector job with higher wages and better conditions.
There is an argument in the City that you have to pay high salaries and big bonuses to attract top talent. This argument seems to have been accepted by all parties so why does it not apply elsewhere? Surely if you pay rubbish wages in the public sector you get crap staff? If you are a good accountant, solicitor, teacher or manager and your salary is constantly eroded in the public sector you will shift to a public sector job with higher wages and better conditions. N E Juan
  • Score: 1

12:06am Fri 4 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

N E Juan wrote:
There is an argument in the City that you have to pay high salaries and big bonuses to attract top talent. This argument seems to have been accepted by all parties so why does it not apply elsewhere? Surely if you pay rubbish wages in the public sector you get crap staff? If you are a good accountant, solicitor, teacher or manager and your salary is constantly eroded in the public sector you will shift to a public sector job with higher wages and better conditions.
If you are a good accountant or manager, you will probably choose to remain in the private sector, because you can earn better money there. I suspect the same is true for teachers.
If you mean people moving from the public sector to the private sector, i am sure that well qualified council staff do it all the time.
However, it is at the middle levels, rather than professionals, that income and terms and conditions disparities occur. You've got people earning £20-25k a year getting 33 days paid holiday (plus bank holidays) who would probably earn no more than £18k in the private sector. And then you have teachers working double the hours and only earning the same as an overpaid PA.
I have never quite understood how council recruitment works. I once went for a job with one of the councils in Dorset with ten years experience in working in my field and for some massive multinational companies. You would think they'd be interested. I did get an offer, at the lowest grade point on the scale, because i didn't have a piece of paper that i could, quite literally, have qualified for in an afternoon. The implication of that is that they would rather have a tick-in-the-box qualification than people with real experience.
My suspicion is the reason that they are struggling to turn things around is because the organisation is full of middle managers who were poorly recruited and lack the ability to drive change. If you get poor middle level leaders you get poor lower staff. I suspect the leaders of DCC are tearing their hair out trying to get this supertanker to change course!
[quote][p][bold]N E Juan[/bold] wrote: There is an argument in the City that you have to pay high salaries and big bonuses to attract top talent. This argument seems to have been accepted by all parties so why does it not apply elsewhere? Surely if you pay rubbish wages in the public sector you get crap staff? If you are a good accountant, solicitor, teacher or manager and your salary is constantly eroded in the public sector you will shift to a public sector job with higher wages and better conditions.[/p][/quote]If you are a good accountant or manager, you will probably choose to remain in the private sector, because you can earn better money there. I suspect the same is true for teachers. If you mean people moving from the public sector to the private sector, i am sure that well qualified council staff do it all the time. However, it is at the middle levels, rather than professionals, that income and terms and conditions disparities occur. You've got people earning £20-25k a year getting 33 days paid holiday (plus bank holidays) who would probably earn no more than £18k in the private sector. And then you have teachers working double the hours and only earning the same as an overpaid PA. I have never quite understood how council recruitment works. I once went for a job with one of the councils in Dorset with ten years experience in working in my field and for some massive multinational companies. You would think they'd be interested. I did get an offer, at the lowest grade point on the scale, because i didn't have a piece of paper that i could, quite literally, have qualified for in an afternoon. The implication of that is that they would rather have a tick-in-the-box qualification than people with real experience. My suspicion is the reason that they are struggling to turn things around is because the organisation is full of middle managers who were poorly recruited and lack the ability to drive change. If you get poor middle level leaders you get poor lower staff. I suspect the leaders of DCC are tearing their hair out trying to get this supertanker to change course! JamesYoung
  • Score: 2

7:38am Fri 4 Jul 14

N E Juan says...

Establish a Unitary authority, saving approximately £20million per annum and removing a lot of duplicate managers and councillors. Then pay a decent wage to the people who actually do something and attract good candidates ... its not that hard is it???

For the figures on savings made by Unitary authorities see the recent report commissioned by Leicester Council here: http://www.leics.gov
.uk/leics_unitary_ca
se_2014-02-10_vfinal
.pdf
Establish a Unitary authority, saving approximately £20million per annum and removing a lot of duplicate managers and councillors. Then pay a decent wage to the people who actually do something and attract good candidates ... its not that hard is it??? For the figures on savings made by Unitary authorities see the recent report commissioned by Leicester Council here: http://www.leics.gov .uk/leics_unitary_ca se_2014-02-10_vfinal .pdf N E Juan
  • Score: 5

9:58am Fri 4 Jul 14

banknote says...

The Echo should look very carefully at the voting figures on here.

Any criticism of the unions actions seem to have suddenly gained a mas of minus votes, after votes agreeing with anti-union comments.

Is someone trying to influence the voting??
The Echo should look very carefully at the voting figures on here. Any criticism of the unions actions seem to have suddenly gained a mas of minus votes, after votes agreeing with anti-union comments. Is someone trying to influence the voting?? banknote
  • Score: -1

10:24am Fri 4 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

N E Juan wrote:
Establish a Unitary authority, saving approximately £20million per annum and removing a lot of duplicate managers and councillors. Then pay a decent wage to the people who actually do something and attract good candidates ... its not that hard is it???

For the figures on savings made by Unitary authorities see the recent report commissioned by Leicester Council here: http://www.leics.gov

.uk/leics_unitary_ca

se_2014-02-10_vfinal

.pdf
I think it IS that hard :-).
The main reason being that the public sector always has to be seen to play fair, so it is not so easy to get rid of individual poor performers. At a macro level, every step of progress is resisted by the Unions, who claim to be defenders of services (ingenuous, because their interest is in their own jobs).
So the good people - and i genuinely believe that is the majority - eventually give up and go along with whatever sentiment is in force at the time.
[quote][p][bold]N E Juan[/bold] wrote: Establish a Unitary authority, saving approximately £20million per annum and removing a lot of duplicate managers and councillors. Then pay a decent wage to the people who actually do something and attract good candidates ... its not that hard is it??? For the figures on savings made by Unitary authorities see the recent report commissioned by Leicester Council here: http://www.leics.gov .uk/leics_unitary_ca se_2014-02-10_vfinal .pdf[/p][/quote]I think it IS that hard :-). The main reason being that the public sector always has to be seen to play fair, so it is not so easy to get rid of individual poor performers. At a macro level, every step of progress is resisted by the Unions, who claim to be defenders of services (ingenuous, because their interest is in their own jobs). So the good people - and i genuinely believe that is the majority - eventually give up and go along with whatever sentiment is in force at the time. JamesYoung
  • Score: 3

10:08pm Fri 4 Jul 14

luffy22 says...

oldbrock wrote:
as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame
So my wife and I both having a jobs, paying our taxes to pay teachers a wage (yes teachers would not have jobs it it was not for us having kids) planning our holidays working around what we believe is the school terms and then because 3 months holiday is not enough for the teachers they have to strike in term time and put unfair pressure on the parent, and the economy, because businesses will suffer due to less staff to do the work.
And you say were wrong for having children as we can't afford to not have jobs!!!

I don't know what type of drugs your taking but you should take it easy as your doing yourself harm
[quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame[/p][/quote]So my wife and I both having a jobs, paying our taxes to pay teachers a wage (yes teachers would not have jobs it it was not for us having kids) planning our holidays working around what we believe is the school terms and then because 3 months holiday is not enough for the teachers they have to strike in term time and put unfair pressure on the parent, and the economy, because businesses will suffer due to less staff to do the work. And you say were wrong for having children as we can't afford to not have jobs!!! I don't know what type of drugs your taking but you should take it easy as your doing yourself harm luffy22
  • Score: -6

10:25pm Fri 4 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

luffy22 wrote:
oldbrock wrote:
as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame
So my wife and I both having a jobs, paying our taxes to pay teachers a wage (yes teachers would not have jobs it it was not for us having kids) planning our holidays working around what we believe is the school terms and then because 3 months holiday is not enough for the teachers they have to strike in term time and put unfair pressure on the parent, and the economy, because businesses will suffer due to less staff to do the work.
And you say were wrong for having children as we can't afford to not have jobs!!!

I don't know what type of drugs your taking but you should take it easy as your doing yourself harm
It's an important point. Everybody is suffering, but large scale public sector strikes make life very difficult for the man on the street.
There's rarely any sympathy shown in the public sector for the people who are paying their wages, yet when they strike, they expect sympathy.
It's a shame that they cannot see this, and focus their efforts on bringing down the capitalist system that we are all slaves to.
[quote][p][bold]luffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame[/p][/quote]So my wife and I both having a jobs, paying our taxes to pay teachers a wage (yes teachers would not have jobs it it was not for us having kids) planning our holidays working around what we believe is the school terms and then because 3 months holiday is not enough for the teachers they have to strike in term time and put unfair pressure on the parent, and the economy, because businesses will suffer due to less staff to do the work. And you say were wrong for having children as we can't afford to not have jobs!!! I don't know what type of drugs your taking but you should take it easy as your doing yourself harm[/p][/quote]It's an important point. Everybody is suffering, but large scale public sector strikes make life very difficult for the man on the street. There's rarely any sympathy shown in the public sector for the people who are paying their wages, yet when they strike, they expect sympathy. It's a shame that they cannot see this, and focus their efforts on bringing down the capitalist system that we are all slaves to. JamesYoung
  • Score: -2

9:43pm Sun 6 Jul 14

cj07589 says...

Stop whinging you lot and be grateful you've got employment! If you don't like the employment conditions you could always look for another more fulfilling job.
Stop whinging you lot and be grateful you've got employment! If you don't like the employment conditions you could always look for another more fulfilling job. cj07589
  • Score: -7

6:51am Mon 7 Jul 14

mark@greenhill says...

The problem with the dinosaurs in the unions is they have never learnt that striking will never, and has never, won them anything but hatred from the rest of the working population.
Unions wishing to bring workers out on strike, causing disruption etc, are just as guilty of manipulation of the workers as some employers. Their aims are rarely for the benefit of the workers, and more about trying to prove how powerful they are, and to drum up support.
They need strikes and disruption to justify their tax on their members pay packets.
Remember in a strike, the only people who retain their full salary are the union management!
They are a long outdated and unwanted burden on the workers them selves, and anyone who is gullible enough to pay their union part of their wages, really needs to wake up.
The problem with the dinosaurs in the unions is they have never learnt that striking will never, and has never, won them anything but hatred from the rest of the working population. Unions wishing to bring workers out on strike, causing disruption etc, are just as guilty of manipulation of the workers as some employers. Their aims are rarely for the benefit of the workers, and more about trying to prove how powerful they are, and to drum up support. They need strikes and disruption to justify their tax on their members pay packets. Remember in a strike, the only people who retain their full salary are the union management! They are a long outdated and unwanted burden on the workers them selves, and anyone who is gullible enough to pay their union part of their wages, really needs to wake up. mark@greenhill
  • Score: -2

3:06pm Mon 7 Jul 14

mr commonsense says...

Could James Young let us know what he would replace the capitalist system with?
Is he going mad or writing from North Korea?
Could James Young let us know what he would replace the capitalist system with? Is he going mad or writing from North Korea? mr commonsense
  • Score: 1

2:39pm Tue 8 Jul 14

ksmain says...

JamesYoung wrote:
luffy22 wrote:
oldbrock wrote:
as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame
So my wife and I both having a jobs, paying our taxes to pay teachers a wage (yes teachers would not have jobs it it was not for us having kids) planning our holidays working around what we believe is the school terms and then because 3 months holiday is not enough for the teachers they have to strike in term time and put unfair pressure on the parent, and the economy, because businesses will suffer due to less staff to do the work.
And you say were wrong for having children as we can't afford to not have jobs!!!

I don't know what type of drugs your taking but you should take it easy as your doing yourself harm
It's an important point. Everybody is suffering, but large scale public sector strikes make life very difficult for the man on the street.
There's rarely any sympathy shown in the public sector for the people who are paying their wages, yet when they strike, they expect sympathy.
It's a shame that they cannot see this, and focus their efforts on bringing down the capitalist system that we are all slaves to.
Well I work in the Public Sector and have NEVER been on strike or are ever likely to. Reason being - if I don't like what I have I look elsewhere for a better one or I get myself to a qualification level to get one. I have worked 32 years in the Public Sector and have had 10 different roles in that time. To those on strike - your choice really. Do I think it will improve your lot by doing so? No - because the government of the day will always find some why of making you pay for it in the short and long term, and there are plenty unemployed and foreign born labour just waiting to take your jobs. Welcome to reality!
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]luffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: as a redundantretired exfactoryclone I support the actions 100%, bankers and MPs rob us blind and virtually get away with it, the bottom of the pile are treated like the serfs of old, enough of this ridiculous class entrenched society with its inequalities, anybody who does not support a fair living wage for everybody is arrogant, greedy and very shortsighted, all the moaning about kids in schools etc, who asked you to have the childen? you cannot afford it or cannot look after the without the backup of people who cannot get a living wage and are under pressure at work, you should have thought about it more carefully before having them, you may say all sorts about their responsibilities to YOU but if you have bred without the resources to back you up, then YOU have shirked YOUR responsibility and are seeking scapegoats to blame[/p][/quote]So my wife and I both having a jobs, paying our taxes to pay teachers a wage (yes teachers would not have jobs it it was not for us having kids) planning our holidays working around what we believe is the school terms and then because 3 months holiday is not enough for the teachers they have to strike in term time and put unfair pressure on the parent, and the economy, because businesses will suffer due to less staff to do the work. And you say were wrong for having children as we can't afford to not have jobs!!! I don't know what type of drugs your taking but you should take it easy as your doing yourself harm[/p][/quote]It's an important point. Everybody is suffering, but large scale public sector strikes make life very difficult for the man on the street. There's rarely any sympathy shown in the public sector for the people who are paying their wages, yet when they strike, they expect sympathy. It's a shame that they cannot see this, and focus their efforts on bringing down the capitalist system that we are all slaves to.[/p][/quote]Well I work in the Public Sector and have NEVER been on strike or are ever likely to. Reason being - if I don't like what I have I look elsewhere for a better one or I get myself to a qualification level to get one. I have worked 32 years in the Public Sector and have had 10 different roles in that time. To those on strike - your choice really. Do I think it will improve your lot by doing so? No - because the government of the day will always find some why of making you pay for it in the short and long term, and there are plenty unemployed and foreign born labour just waiting to take your jobs. Welcome to reality! ksmain
  • Score: 1

1:23pm Wed 9 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

mr commonsense wrote:
Could James Young let us know what he would replace the capitalist system with?
Is he going mad or writing from North Korea?
Well, as Winston Churchill said, Capitalism is the worst system ever invented, apart from the others.
Did you see the article this week announcing that the Apple manufacturing partner FoxConn is going to replace 1,000,000 of its Chinese workers with robots?
Capitalism is supposed to reward people who took risks and benefited from that risk. So in that sense, we don't really live in a capitalist society because of moral hazard: the people taking the biggest risks are risking other people's money, not their own. The government is complicit in this, taking money from the asset poor (through government created inflation) to underwrite house prices for the asset rich.
What we need is a society that shares rewards. I'm not sure that has a label, but if you want one, you could call it "morality".
You might start by ensuring that banks lose the power to create money, and only risk money that they have been given the rights to risk.
You might be interested to learn that the IMF has proposed/recommended the introduction of a one off global wealth tax to pay off sovereign debt.
By global wealth tax, they mean stealing cash from people's bank accounts.
So if you've been frugal and saved £200k to buy a house, you could lose the lot. The fellow who owns his house but has no savings escapes.
Is that capitalism?
[quote][p][bold]mr commonsense[/bold] wrote: Could James Young let us know what he would replace the capitalist system with? Is he going mad or writing from North Korea?[/p][/quote]Well, as Winston Churchill said, Capitalism is the worst system ever invented, apart from the others. Did you see the article this week announcing that the Apple manufacturing partner FoxConn is going to replace 1,000,000 of its Chinese workers with robots? Capitalism is supposed to reward people who took risks and benefited from that risk. So in that sense, we don't really live in a capitalist society because of moral hazard: the people taking the biggest risks are risking other people's money, not their own. The government is complicit in this, taking money from the asset poor (through government created inflation) to underwrite house prices for the asset rich. What we need is a society that shares rewards. I'm not sure that has a label, but if you want one, you could call it "morality". You might start by ensuring that banks lose the power to create money, and only risk money that they have been given the rights to risk. You might be interested to learn that the IMF has proposed/recommended the introduction of a one off global wealth tax to pay off sovereign debt. By global wealth tax, they mean stealing cash from people's bank accounts. So if you've been frugal and saved £200k to buy a house, you could lose the lot. The fellow who owns his house but has no savings escapes. Is that capitalism? JamesYoung
  • Score: 1

1:38pm Wed 9 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

JamesYoung wrote:
mr commonsense wrote:
Could James Young let us know what he would replace the capitalist system with?
Is he going mad or writing from North Korea?
Well, as Winston Churchill said, Capitalism is the worst system ever invented, apart from the others.
Did you see the article this week announcing that the Apple manufacturing partner FoxConn is going to replace 1,000,000 of its Chinese workers with robots?
Capitalism is supposed to reward people who took risks and benefited from that risk. So in that sense, we don't really live in a capitalist society because of moral hazard: the people taking the biggest risks are risking other people's money, not their own. The government is complicit in this, taking money from the asset poor (through government created inflation) to underwrite house prices for the asset rich.
What we need is a society that shares rewards. I'm not sure that has a label, but if you want one, you could call it "morality".
You might start by ensuring that banks lose the power to create money, and only risk money that they have been given the rights to risk.
You might be interested to learn that the IMF has proposed/recommended the introduction of a one off global wealth tax to pay off sovereign debt.
By global wealth tax, they mean stealing cash from people's bank accounts.
So if you've been frugal and saved £200k to buy a house, you could lose the lot. The fellow who owns his house but has no savings escapes.
Is that capitalism?
Sorry, never finished the point about robots.
I do not believe we will ever see a true recovery in this country in the sense that most people expect. Jobs are being replaced by technology - or rather, skills are being devalued by technology. I suspect that you will see an increase in technology over the past 7 years for a simple reason - when interest rates are low, it makes sense for businesses to invest in expensive technology with long pay backs. When interest rates are high, those businesses just carry on paying staff.
So capitalism is reaching an implosion point. Workers earning less, but the system requires them to consume more. A downward spiral unless those workers borrow to spend....
I think you can see this in the way that the government has acted over the last decade. Freer lending, higher income multiples, now pensions opened up to withdrawal....
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mr commonsense[/bold] wrote: Could James Young let us know what he would replace the capitalist system with? Is he going mad or writing from North Korea?[/p][/quote]Well, as Winston Churchill said, Capitalism is the worst system ever invented, apart from the others. Did you see the article this week announcing that the Apple manufacturing partner FoxConn is going to replace 1,000,000 of its Chinese workers with robots? Capitalism is supposed to reward people who took risks and benefited from that risk. So in that sense, we don't really live in a capitalist society because of moral hazard: the people taking the biggest risks are risking other people's money, not their own. The government is complicit in this, taking money from the asset poor (through government created inflation) to underwrite house prices for the asset rich. What we need is a society that shares rewards. I'm not sure that has a label, but if you want one, you could call it "morality". You might start by ensuring that banks lose the power to create money, and only risk money that they have been given the rights to risk. You might be interested to learn that the IMF has proposed/recommended the introduction of a one off global wealth tax to pay off sovereign debt. By global wealth tax, they mean stealing cash from people's bank accounts. So if you've been frugal and saved £200k to buy a house, you could lose the lot. The fellow who owns his house but has no savings escapes. Is that capitalism?[/p][/quote]Sorry, never finished the point about robots. I do not believe we will ever see a true recovery in this country in the sense that most people expect. Jobs are being replaced by technology - or rather, skills are being devalued by technology. I suspect that you will see an increase in technology over the past 7 years for a simple reason - when interest rates are low, it makes sense for businesses to invest in expensive technology with long pay backs. When interest rates are high, those businesses just carry on paying staff. So capitalism is reaching an implosion point. Workers earning less, but the system requires them to consume more. A downward spiral unless those workers borrow to spend.... I think you can see this in the way that the government has acted over the last decade. Freer lending, higher income multiples, now pensions opened up to withdrawal.... JamesYoung
  • Score: 1

1:38pm Wed 9 Jul 14

JamesYoung says...

JamesYoung wrote:
mr commonsense wrote:
Could James Young let us know what he would replace the capitalist system with?
Is he going mad or writing from North Korea?
Well, as Winston Churchill said, Capitalism is the worst system ever invented, apart from the others.
Did you see the article this week announcing that the Apple manufacturing partner FoxConn is going to replace 1,000,000 of its Chinese workers with robots?
Capitalism is supposed to reward people who took risks and benefited from that risk. So in that sense, we don't really live in a capitalist society because of moral hazard: the people taking the biggest risks are risking other people's money, not their own. The government is complicit in this, taking money from the asset poor (through government created inflation) to underwrite house prices for the asset rich.
What we need is a society that shares rewards. I'm not sure that has a label, but if you want one, you could call it "morality".
You might start by ensuring that banks lose the power to create money, and only risk money that they have been given the rights to risk.
You might be interested to learn that the IMF has proposed/recommended the introduction of a one off global wealth tax to pay off sovereign debt.
By global wealth tax, they mean stealing cash from people's bank accounts.
So if you've been frugal and saved £200k to buy a house, you could lose the lot. The fellow who owns his house but has no savings escapes.
Is that capitalism?
Sorry, never finished the point about robots.
I do not believe we will ever see a true recovery in this country in the sense that most people expect. Jobs are being replaced by technology - or rather, skills are being devalued by technology. I suspect that you will see an increase in technology over the past 7 years for a simple reason - when interest rates are low, it makes sense for businesses to invest in expensive technology with long pay backs. When interest rates are high, those businesses just carry on paying staff.
So capitalism is reaching an implosion point. Workers earning less, but the system requires them to consume more. A downward spiral unless those workers borrow to spend....
I think you can see this in the way that the government has acted over the last decade. Freer lending, higher income multiples, now pensions opened up to withdrawal....
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mr commonsense[/bold] wrote: Could James Young let us know what he would replace the capitalist system with? Is he going mad or writing from North Korea?[/p][/quote]Well, as Winston Churchill said, Capitalism is the worst system ever invented, apart from the others. Did you see the article this week announcing that the Apple manufacturing partner FoxConn is going to replace 1,000,000 of its Chinese workers with robots? Capitalism is supposed to reward people who took risks and benefited from that risk. So in that sense, we don't really live in a capitalist society because of moral hazard: the people taking the biggest risks are risking other people's money, not their own. The government is complicit in this, taking money from the asset poor (through government created inflation) to underwrite house prices for the asset rich. What we need is a society that shares rewards. I'm not sure that has a label, but if you want one, you could call it "morality". You might start by ensuring that banks lose the power to create money, and only risk money that they have been given the rights to risk. You might be interested to learn that the IMF has proposed/recommended the introduction of a one off global wealth tax to pay off sovereign debt. By global wealth tax, they mean stealing cash from people's bank accounts. So if you've been frugal and saved £200k to buy a house, you could lose the lot. The fellow who owns his house but has no savings escapes. Is that capitalism?[/p][/quote]Sorry, never finished the point about robots. I do not believe we will ever see a true recovery in this country in the sense that most people expect. Jobs are being replaced by technology - or rather, skills are being devalued by technology. I suspect that you will see an increase in technology over the past 7 years for a simple reason - when interest rates are low, it makes sense for businesses to invest in expensive technology with long pay backs. When interest rates are high, those businesses just carry on paying staff. So capitalism is reaching an implosion point. Workers earning less, but the system requires them to consume more. A downward spiral unless those workers borrow to spend.... I think you can see this in the way that the government has acted over the last decade. Freer lending, higher income multiples, now pensions opened up to withdrawal.... JamesYoung
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree