davieG Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 "Dear ColleagueFirst of all we want to thank you. Whether your job is nursing in a hospital, working in a government department, teaching our children or one of the other key roles in the public sector, you keep our country running. People who work in the public sector don’t get enough credit for what they do, so thank you. As well as our thanks, we want to give you more trust and more responsibility. For years you’ve been undermined by targets and rules set from on high. Bit by bit we’re going to end that culture. We’ll set you free to use your professionalism, commitment and good ideas to make life better for everyone. But let us be clear. The biggest challenge our country faces is dealing with our huge debts – and that means we have to reduce public spending. You will have heard in this week’s Budget that we have had to take difficult decisions on public sector salaries for the next two years, while taking steps to protect those on lower salaries. Like many private sector organisations, we have chosen to control salaries rather than see higher job losses. The more we can find savings, the more flexibility we will have to avoid job losses and wage cuts. We want you to help us find those savings, so we can cut public spending in a way that is fair and responsible. You work on the frontline of public services. You know where things are working well, where the waste is, and where we can re-think things so that we get better services for less money. So this is why we’re writing to you today. We’re asking you to go to this website – www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/spendingchallenge – and tell us your ideas about getting more for less. Don’t hold back. Be innovative, be radical, challenge the way things are done. Every serious idea will be considered: by government departments, by the Treasury, by our teams in Number 10 and the Cabinet Office – and passed to Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee to make sure we don’t miss anything. So please, play your part. Let us know your ideas. We’re all in this together – and we’ll get through this together to better days ahead. Yours sincerely Rt Hon David Cameron MP Rt Hon Nick Clegg MP" Perhaps they should look in these places and government itself. What suggestions for savings would you make?
Webbo Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 What suggestions for savings would you make? Sack the Lord Mayor.
Webbo Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 that's very un-christian of you He hasn't got a prayer.
Babylon Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 Sack the Lord Mayor. Actually a good shout, how much council money is spent on pointless functions so some buck toothed goober and dess up and wear Mr T chains. You could flog his car and the number plate for a few 100k. Stop all the pointless twinning of places and all the jollies that are involved. I mean who really gives a shit if Wigston is twinned with Maromme and Norderstedt, apart from those who get funded trips over there.
davieG Posted 24 June 2010 Author Posted 24 June 2010 Actually a good shout, how much council money is spent on pointless functions so some buck toothed goober and dess up and wear Mr T chains. You could flog his car and the number plate for a few 100k. Stop all the pointless twinning of places and all the jollies that are involved. I mean who really gives a shit if Wigston is twinned with Maromme and Norderstedt, apart from those who get funded trips over there. Now you're not thinking of all the business it generates.
Babylon Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 Now you're not thinking of all the trumped up self righteous tossers it generates. True.
Phube Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 Charge patients for DNA'ing (Did Not Attend). At least £50 per missed appointment. Some of our tests a patient just not turning up can cost us about £500! That's one tiny imaging department in one hospital one one day!
davieG Posted 24 June 2010 Author Posted 24 June 2010 True. You've been judging everyone on Ultra's picture
Jon the Hat Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 Charge patients for DNA'ing (Did Not Attend). At least £50 per missed appointment. Some of our tests a patient just not turning up can cost us about £500! That's one tiny imaging department in one hospital one one day! Charge them for the appointment full stop... And in fact I am guessing the "cost" you are talking about is incurred whether they turn up or not, so actually maybe youcharge full price for the second appointment. People need to realise the cost of what they are recieving. Might make them more appreciaitive, and also more demanding, both of which are a good thing. I mean If I go and get treated like shite and am sitting in a grotty waiting room which is not clean then I am more likely to complain if I know it is costing £500 for my appointment. And the NHS needs people to act as if they are paying.
Jon the Hat Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 Local government needs to address the cost of it's pension more than anything else. But the very very first thing they need to recognise is that people are NOT going to get rid of themselves. This means that the people who manage the spending (decision makers not accountants) are going to cut frontline services if they are allowed to get away with it, becuase they will not cut their own jobs. This will require external input.
Bellend Sebastian Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 Charge patients for DNA'ing (Did Not Attend). At least £50 per missed appointment. Some of our tests a patient just not turning up can cost us about £500! That's one tiny imaging department in one hospital one one day! Go for it. I missed an appointment once because I forgot, and I felt ridiculously guilty - I'd be more than happy to cover the costs of the waste. I wonder if those that that cheerily miss them because they decide they cannot be arsed would cough up so readily? I personally favour raising funds by penalising people that are being cvnts, and think it's entirely morally right to do so. If litter laws and stuff like that were properly enforced you could raise a fortune
FoxyPV Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 Pensions should be based on average earnings not final salary - that would save an absolute fortune.
breadandcheese Posted 24 June 2010 Posted 24 June 2010 Public sector pensions should have an upper limit of say £25,000 per year. Anyone in the public sector earning an amount that means they can draw a yearly pension of £25,000+ when they retire, should have a public guarantee for the portion up to £25,000, and the rest should be based on contributions into a private pension akin to the rest of us taxpaying folk who are at the mercy of the market. Now I know this means there would be accountants and actuaries having to work out how much is paid into a public sector pension and how much into a private pension, but it would stop some of these huge pension pots being built up that are ring-fenced and guaranteed by future generations of taxpayers. Why should some head of some marketing and delivery services receive a guaranteed final salary when they are on a huge £50/60,000+ salary already? You don't get final salary pensions in the private sector. Fair enough a nurse or fireman should have a guaranteed public sector pension, but not those on a high income.
davieG Posted 24 June 2010 Author Posted 24 June 2010 Perhaps they could sort out Network Rail, a supposedly private company who's debts are covered by the government and appears to be private in name only. Yet it's directors can pay themselves £2.5 mill in bonuses and I'm sure have lucrative pensions and other perks.
davieG Posted 25 June 2010 Author Posted 25 June 2010 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10403255.stm
Babylon Posted 25 June 2010 Posted 25 June 2010 Scrap all public sector pensions... let them all sort their own ****er out like I have to.
Phube Posted 25 June 2010 Posted 25 June 2010 Scrap all public sector pensions... let them all sort their own ****er out like I have to. You do realise that we do actually pay into our own pension! It's not just given away to us. I pay 6.5% of my salary in every month. Yes the government pays an extra 6%, but a lot of companies do similar now. Yes we do get a good deal, but then we don't get as high a salary as the private sector, and my Christmas bonus (prevalent in private companies) is a Free Christmas dinner in the canteen (worth a wopping £5!). So pro's in summary: Private: Higher wage for similar jobs Chance of bonuses Can get a promotion/pay rise at any time If there is parking it's free (I pay £300 a year to park at work - a 10 minute walk away!) Free nights out - i.e. Christmas party. NHS: Better terms and conditions - sick pay, annual leave, pension.
Babylon Posted 25 June 2010 Posted 25 June 2010 You do realise that we do actually pay into our own pension! It's not just given away to us. I pay 6.5% of my salary in every month. Yes the government pays an extra 6%, but a lot of companies do similar now. I'm aware you pay in, but some facts I saw recently said to get the equivalent pension in the private sector you'd have to pay in around 37% of your wages. my Christmas bonus (prevalent in private companies) is a Free Christmas dinner in the canteen (worth a wopping £5!). My Christmas bonus was a christmas card with "thanks" inside. Private: Higher wage for similar jobs Chance of bonuses Can get a promotion/pay rise at any time If there is parking it's free (I pay £300 a year to park at work - a 10 minute walk away!) Free nights out - i.e. Christmas party. Someone working at the council doing my job will get paid almost identical to me. I don't get bonuses and many I know don't either In the same article I mentioned earlier it said wages rise at a faster rate in the public section than they do private. I've gone four years without a pay rise before, has anyone in the public sector, ever? I get no free nights out. Whilst that's just my job and I know there will be many that aren't like that in the private sector. It just really pisses me off with the constantly bleating you get from public sector workers like they have it hard, like they are entitled to more constantly. If my company is having a hard time, I don't stamp my feet and complain about not getting a pay rise. If the money isn't there what can they do? Many in the public sector seem to think they shouldn't have to face the same problems just because their boss is the government.
Jon the Hat Posted 25 June 2010 Posted 25 June 2010 You do realise that we do actually pay into our own pension! It's not just given away to us. I pay 6.5% of my salary in every month. Yes the government pays an extra 6%, but a lot of companies do similar now. Yes we do get a good deal, but then we don't get as high a salary as the private sector, and my Christmas bonus (prevalent in private companies) is a Free Christmas dinner in the canteen (worth a wopping £5!). So pro's in summary: Private: Higher wage for similar jobs Chance of bonuses Can get a promotion/pay rise at any time If there is parking it's free (I pay £300 a year to park at work - a 10 minute walk away!) Free nights out - i.e. Christmas party. NHS: Better terms and conditions - sick pay, annual leave, pension. In general Public sector pay has increased beyond Private sector pay in the last 10 years. It is a fact. Of course there are many examples where that is not the case, but more examples where it is. The difference on Pension is that what you pay in is NOT what you get out again. The gap is paid for by future taxpayers, and is not a sustainable position. There is no reason whatsoever why those in the Public sector should have final salary or any other type of guaranteed pensions. The make up of the overall package is key. Salary can be cut by making someone redundant. Bonuses cut when things are tough. Christmas parties are discretionary. Payrises are in general at discretion of management, and when someone leaves, roles can be removed from the organisation and people not replaced. All of this in commonplace in the private sector. The package in the public sector however means that the costs keep on coming. The commitement to a guaranteed pension, whether final or average salary, is an ongoing burden on the taxpayer, and it has to go.
Phube Posted 25 June 2010 Posted 25 June 2010 I'm aware you pay in, but some facts I saw recently said to get the equivalent pension in the private sector you'd have to pay in around 37% of your wages. My Christmas bonus was a christmas card with "thanks" inside. Someone working at the council doing my job will get paid almost identical to me. I don't get bonuses and many I know don't either In the same article I mentioned earlier it said wages rise at a faster rate in the public section than they do private. I've gone four years without a pay rise before, has anyone in the public sector, ever? I get no free nights out. Whilst that's just my job and I know there will be many that aren't like that in the private sector. It just really pisses me off with the constantly bleating you get from public sector workers like they have it hard, like they are entitled to more constantly. If my company is having a hard time, I don't stamp my feet and complain about not getting a pay rise. If the money isn't there what can they do? Many in the public sector seem to think they shouldn't have to face the same problems just because their boss is the government. If you have such a crap deal, which it sounds that you do... move jobs, that is your prerogative. Ahhh... councils do over pay. My wife was on about £21k for her admin job, a similar job in the NHS would have been paid ~£15-18k And I have no problem with the pay freeze... I'm certainly no Union member (check my posts I'm Tory through and through).
Phube Posted 25 June 2010 Posted 25 June 2010 In general Public sector pay has increased beyond Private sector pay in the last 10 years. It is a fact. Of course there are many examples where that is not the case, but more examples where it is. The difference on Pension is that what you pay in is NOT what you get out again. The gap is paid for by future taxpayers, and is not a sustainable position. There is no reason whatsoever why those in the Public sector should have final salary or any other type of guaranteed pensions. The make up of the overall package is key. Salary can be cut by making someone redundant. Bonuses cut when things are tough. Christmas parties are discretionary. Payrises are in general at discretion of management, and when someone leaves, roles can be removed from the organisation and people not replaced. All of this in commonplace in the private sector. The package in the public sector however means that the costs keep on coming. The commitement to a guaranteed pension, whether final or average salary, is an ongoing burden on the taxpayer, and it has to go. There has been a wide ranging job freeze in the NHS for the last 4 years... almost no jobs have been backfilled in my department. In fact 3 years ago we weren't even allowed to buy paperclips, pens etc... without going through the Divisional head.
Babylon Posted 25 June 2010 Posted 25 June 2010 If you have such a crap deal, which it sounds that you do... move jobs, that is your prerogative. Ahhh... councils do over pay. My wife was on about £21k for her admin job, a similar job in the NHS would have been paid ~£15-18k And I have no problem with the pay freeze... I'm certainly no Union member (check my posts I'm Tory through and through). It's also the prerogative of a public sector worker to go private. It seems fine for one to moan about getting a bad deal and not the others. I don't think I get a crap deal, It's pretty average compared to others I know in my industry. I just don't think it's my god given right to get a pay rise every 5 minutes, no matter how well the business is doing. Unlike the chumps we'll no doubt see on their picket lines in the next year or so. I also know that the public sector isn't some amazing place with freebies galore, big pay rises and giant bonuses that public sector workers seem to think it is. There are millions of people who work for small companies like I do that tick over from day to day without seeing any of it. I should say although i'm talking to you, the comments are not about you. Obviously I don't know your situation and your views on everything.
breadandcheese Posted 25 June 2010 Posted 25 June 2010 The difference on Pension is that what you pay in is NOT what you get out again. The gap is paid for by future taxpayers, and is not a sustainable position. There is no reason whatsoever why those in the Public sector should have final salary or any other type of guaranteed pensions. I think this is key and it's shameful that the previous government, with 3 terms in power shirked making decisions to make public sector pensions sustainable. Talk about political opportunism. As I say, I advocate a cap, at which point public sector pensions are guaranteed. With nurses and firemen on low wages, it is difficult for them to save for a pension, on top of paying a mortgage, having a family, etc. As a taxpayer, i'm happy to keep a contract with them that they will be looked after in old age with a guaranteed pension based on their wage. I appreciate the difficult work they do, work that I could not do and work that if provided solely by the private sector would ensure they receive much higher wages. Where I am not happy as a taxpayer is keeping a contract to pay a guaranteed final salary pension to someone who has worked in the public sector building up a huge taxpayer guaranteed accruel, when the wage they are earning is comparable to the private sector.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.