PDA

View Full Version : Public sector unions



bekarovka
9th October 2009, 13:18
Well, the NASUWT to be precise. Just been listening to an interview on local radio with a Ms. Christine Blower, the union's general secretary, and her reaction to the Tories' proposed freeze on public sector pay. Basically this would mean reneging on a 2.5% (I think) deal over 3 years & she was not very happy about it and wouldn't rule out industrial action if it came to pass because "we are a frontline service and the recession is the fault of greedy bankers not us" etc etc.

Well, I've been out of work for 4 months now and I don't seem to recall the recession being my doing either but I'm certainly bearing my brunt of the pain as are plenty of others, mainly in the private sector & to hear her bleating on like that really stuck in my craw. Rant over.

Scary
9th October 2009, 13:23
Sounds like you need to rally your peers, show some solidarity, and stick it to the greedy bosses...

minestrone
9th October 2009, 13:26
My mate is a teacher and said they would walk out if they never got a rise, I told him he might have to take it as I have had a, now, 20% drop in income. He can't understand that.

The nation has to gear up for industrial action. My MP was Education secretary during the 80s so they picked on our schools and we had 2 days a week for over a year.

I might be thick now but I won't give into the unions.

JoJoGabor
9th October 2009, 13:26
In my opinion if many public sector orgs went on strike, the output would only be marginally lower than when they run full service.

Twits

Muttley08
9th October 2009, 13:29
In my opinion if many public sector orgs went on strike, the output would only be marginally lower than when they run full service.

Twits

Completely agree - they could halve the number of civil servants and output would go up!

Welcome to the real world lazy feckers!!!

TheFaQQer
9th October 2009, 13:29
Well, the NASUWT to be precise. Just been listening to an interview on local radio with a Ms. Christine Blower, the union's general secretary, and her reaction to the Tories' proposed freeze on public sector pay. Basically this would mean reneging on a 2.5% (I think) deal over 3 years & she was not very happy about it and wouldn't rule out industrial action if it came to pass because "we are a frontline service and the recession is the fault of greedy bankers not us" etc etc.

Well, I've been out of work for 4 months now and I don't seem to recall the recession being my doing either but I'm certainly bearing my brunt of the pain as are plenty of others, mainly in the private sector & to hear her bleating on like that really stuck in my craw. Rant over.

The difference is that no-one agreed your pay rise over the next three years, which the government did with teachers, who are already underpaid for the work that they do and the crap that they have to deal with.

bogeyman
9th October 2009, 13:30
My mate is a teacher and said they would walk out if they never got a rise, I told him he might have to take it as I have had a, now, 20% drop in income. He can't understand that.

The nation has to gear up for industrial action. My MP was Education secretary during the 80s so they picked on our schools and we had 2 days a week for over a year.

I might be thick now but I won't give into the unions.

Teachers were always mostly winkers.

The faculty at my school should have been imprisoned, or at least sectioned under the Mental Health Act.

Jeebo72
9th October 2009, 13:30
Need a return of Thatcher ...

Sysman
9th October 2009, 13:34
In my opinion if many public sector orgs went on strike, the output would only be marginally lower than when they run full service.

Twits

You can be sure they'll make a strike high profile so that the public does notice.

I know from personal experience that public sector workers go absolutely bonkers if they have to take a pay cut, and totally don't understand the concept of not being paid on time.

minestrone
9th October 2009, 13:35
Teachers were always mostly winkers.

The faculty at my school should have been imprisoned, or at least sectioned under the Mental Health Act.

Detest teachers, self righteous arses.

Nobody should be allowed to teach without some time in the private sector.

Moscow Mule
9th October 2009, 13:37
Detest teachers, self righteous arses.

Nobody should be allowed to teach without some time in the private sector.

Yes, that would be totally workable....

PorkPie
9th October 2009, 13:40
Need a return of Thatcher ...

Would have to be Carol or Mark this time though...maybe we need a poll...

bekarovka
9th October 2009, 13:40
The difference is that no-one agreed your pay rise over the next three years, which the government did with teachers, who are already underpaid for the work that they do and the crap that they have to deal with.

No, but I feel that compared to the pain that a lot of us and other people in the wider private sector are experiencing, this is a drop in the ocean.

bogeyman
9th October 2009, 13:43
Detest teachers, self righteous arses.

Nobody should be allowed to teach without some time in the private sector.

I know a few teachers (oddly, all married couples - teachers marry teachers, it seems). They mostly go from school straight to uni and then on to teaching.

The one's I know, know diddly-squat about work, or business, and are mostly financially independent (through inherited money). They take teaching as an 'easy' career option (personally I would hate it).

They also tend to keep dirty, smelly, chaotic houses.

Mich the Tester
9th October 2009, 13:50
Perhaps they should take a look at the thousands of people who've lost their jobs in private businesses since the start of all this mess and the thousands of others who've seen their pay cut by significant percentages and just be glad that their own income is ensured for the next few years.

Doggy Styles
9th October 2009, 13:52
"... wouldn't rule out industrial action if it came to pass because "we are a frontline service and the recession is the fault of greedy bankers not us" etc etc."

The recession is the fault of everyone. We were already running a growing deficit before the banking problems came to light.

Mich the Tester
9th October 2009, 13:55
"... wouldn't rule out industrial action if it came to pass because "we are a frontline service and the recession is the fault of greedy bankers not us" etc etc."

The recession is the fault of everyone. We were already running a growing deficit before the banking problems came to light.Yes, but interesting to note that the unions don't name Labour's policies as one cause of the recession.

SuperZ
9th October 2009, 13:58
Unions can break a company yet in the Public Sector just waste more of the taxpayers cash.

Many pubby sector services won`t go on strike. I`ve heard from a source at the Met Office that they had considered striking a few times in the past but know the public would laugh their ar**s off at them if they did.

Unions - ban them. Postal services striking around christmas, luggage handlers at Summer hols, it just pi$$es people off.

TheFaQQer
9th October 2009, 14:04
No, but I feel that compared to the pain that a lot of us and other people in the wider private sector are experiencing, this is a drop in the ocean.

Compared to the overall income that a lot of us in the private sector are experiencing, theirs is a drop in the ocean.

TheFaQQer
9th October 2009, 14:07
Postal services striking around christmas, luggage handlers at Summer hols, it just pi$$es people off.

I may be missing something, but isn't that the point of striking? It makes people more aware of the issues, hoping that this in turn will put pressure on the employers to settle. There is no point in striking if nobody notices, is there?

bekarovka
9th October 2009, 14:07
Compared to the overall income that a lot of us in the private sector are experiencing, theirs is a drop in the ocean.

Really? I've brought in about 10k so far this year. Had no idea teachers were paid that badly.

Scary
9th October 2009, 14:13
http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6000186

Looks like about 21-30k/year outside London.

TheFaQQer
9th October 2009, 14:15
Really? I've brought in about 10k so far this year. Had no idea teachers were paid that badly.

If your daily rate is so poor that you can only bring in 10k over the course of the year, then you might need to consider changing occupation, market sector, demands, etc.

gingerjedi
9th October 2009, 14:16
I'd be happy with a pay freeze for 12 months, my income has been in freefall for the past 2 years. How many public sector workers would take a 50% pay cut followed by no income at all for 3 months?

I can't see the Tories following through on a 25% cull across the MoD, not when they realise how much it will cost to get rid of the lazy feckers.:rolleyes:

Sysman
9th October 2009, 14:17
The difference is that no-one agreed your pay rise over the next three years, which the government did with teachers, who are already underpaid for the work that they do and the crap that they have to deal with.

Ahem. How about agreeing a pay cut on the grounds that your new contract is "for a year", only to find that:


It's only for three months
If you get an extension after those three months, there's a further pay cut


Even the premies felt sorry for us on that one.

Sorry, times are tough for us all. Why should the public sector get special treatment?

SuperZ
9th October 2009, 14:18
I may be missing something, but isn't that the point of striking? It makes people more aware of the issues, hoping that this in turn will put pressure on the employers to settle. There is no point in striking if nobody notices, is there?

Morals?
There`s a part of me that thinks someome shouldn`t be working as a baggage handler/postal service employee (and many other positions) if they want to disrupt that imporant service for their own selfish gain. And unions encouraging it.......

Do you think the public really gives a toss about their pay, no, we just get mad over these fools disrupting our services.

If someone wants more money, find a better job. SImples. If theyre not happy with the pay increase, make the point by leaving for something better and give someone else the opportunity who might actually do the job for less.

Given that I`ve had to file constant complaints locally about my mail being put through other peoples boxes and vice versa, these people deserve to be paid peanuts.

As for the Civvie Service, I know quite a few civil servant who complain about the money (when all things considered it isn`t bad at all- pretty good in fact), yet they would never leave the service. WHy would the government pay them more, knowing they won`t leave if they don`t?

Moscow Mule
9th October 2009, 14:19
Really? I've brought in about 10k so far this year. Had no idea teachers were paid that badly.

You should be a permie if you don't accept the risks of contracting.

NQT will pull in about £20-25k a year. For a minimum 1800 hours work.

How many hours was your £10k?

Scary
9th October 2009, 14:20
I'd be happy with a pay freeze for 12 months

At 21k?

Scary
9th October 2009, 14:22
I wouldn't stand in a classroom in front of 35 screaming little shits for 7 hours a day, 9 months a year (plus all the prep and marking and other paperwork) for 21k.

PorkPie
9th October 2009, 14:29
Morals?
There`s a part of me that thinks someome shouldn`t be working as a baggage handler/postal service employee (and many other positions) if they want to disrupt that imporant service for their own selfish gain. And unions encouraging it.......

Do you think the public really gives a toss about their pay, no, we just get mad over these fools disrupting our services.

If someone wants more money, find a better job. SImples. If theyre not happy with the pay increase, make the point by leaving for something better and give someone else the opportunity who might actually do the job for less.

Given that I`ve had to file constant complaints locally about my mail being put through other peoples boxes and vice versa, these people deserve to be paid peanuts.

Sounds like there's at least one pro-immigration poster on this board then :rolleyes:

gingerjedi
9th October 2009, 14:30
At 21k?

I've gone from £30 to £12.50ph with none of the benefits of perm employment let alone the gold plated nonsense the public sector gets.

In answer to your question yes, tell me why you think a non productive public sector employee should get a rise when the productive private sector is taking massive and painful cuts?

bogeyman
9th October 2009, 14:31
I wouldn't stand in a classroom in front of 35 screaming little tulips for 7 hours a day, 9 months a year (plus all the prep and marking and other paperwork) for 21k.

WHS

A friend of mine, retired from an investment bank, has just completed his teacher training and has had to work as a supply teacher to get up his teaching hours.

He told me that nothing could prepare him for the utter awfulness, and sheer bloody-mindedness of the kids (he teaches in Bristol - not that it makes any difference I suppose).

Teaching is hard work. You need to prepare 'Lesson Plans' for each and every teaching session. You need to control and manage the class. You need to prove that you have actually inculcated the bloody little sods with the information.

Teaching is not an easy option.

I think I'd rather sweep the streets than stand up in a classroom.

Moscow Mule
9th October 2009, 14:32
I think I'd rather sweep the streets than stand up in a classroom.

What is NMW as a salary?

Moscow Mule
9th October 2009, 14:35
I've gone from £30 to £12.50ph with none of the benefits of perm employment let alone the gold plated nonsense the public sector gets.

In answer to your question yes, tell me why you think a non productive public sector employee should get a rise when the productive private sector is taking massive and painful cuts?

Don't extrapolate the vagaries of contracting to permanent employment. It doesn't work.

And are you seriously suggesting that every teacher in the land is non-productive? Could you imagine the feral wasteland we'd live in if they didn't exist?

bogeyman
9th October 2009, 14:37
Don't extrapolate the vagaries of contracting to permanent employment. It doesn't work.

And are you seriously suggesting that every teacher in the land is non-productive? Could you imagine the feral wasteland we'd live in if they didn't exist?

I don't think you have to imagine it in some parts of the country.

Moscow Mule
9th October 2009, 14:37
I don't think you have to imagine it in some parts of the country.

I don't know why, but Croydon springs to mind...

Mich the Tester
9th October 2009, 14:39
Could you imagine the feral wasteland we'd live in if they didn't exist?Well, I left for Holland 15 years ago and I was forgetting it until I went to Liverpool last year.

bogeyman
9th October 2009, 14:44
Well, I left for Holland 15 years ago and I was forgetting it until I went to Liverpool last year.

Indeed.

The UK is a complete social disaster, and it's just getting worse.

bekarovka
9th October 2009, 14:52
Listen people, this was never a rant against teachers per se, I appreciate that it's often a lowly paid, stressful job. It was more about the union rep who wanted to absolve all her members from shouldering any of the pain of this recession for the reasons I mentioned in the op. Don't see why they should be immune, that's all.

Mich the Tester
9th October 2009, 15:05
My mum was a teacher, then became a university lecturer and then retired, still on the old 80% final salary scheme, while on the salary of a university dean. She also has a state pension and her own private pension. She now spends her mornings gardening and her afternoons drinking chardonnay and earns nearly twice as much as she did when she was working. Can't be bad.

Moscow Mule
9th October 2009, 15:16
My mum was a teacher, then became a university lecturer and then retired, still on the old 80% final salary scheme, while on the salary of a university dean. She also has a state pension and her own private pension. She now spends her mornings gardening and her afternoons drinking chardonnay and earns nearly twice as much as she did when she was working. Can't be bad.

My wife is a teacher. She's not going to get a pension as somebody will undoubtedly nick it off her in the next 25 years. Can't be good.

JoJoGabor
9th October 2009, 15:42
I think teaching is one of the public sector professions that I dont have a gripe with, along with the police, hospital staffe etc. Its the useless beurocratic pointless organisations that I have had dealings with that really get my goat. The ones where they serve some purpose but could be done with a handful of staff instead of the several hundred that do nothing all day, raking in an absolute fortune, letting projects overrun and go massively over budget becasue fundamentally there is no P+L at all. You need more money, just pull more from tax revenues.

Moscow Mule
9th October 2009, 15:44
I think teaching is one of the public sector professions that I dont have a gripe with, along with the police, hospital staffe etc. Its the useless beurocratic pointless organisations that I have had dealings with that really get my goat. The ones where they serve some purpose but could be done with a handful of staff instead of the several hundred that do nothing all day, raking in an absolute fortune, letting projects overrun and go massively over budget becasue fundamentally there is no P+L at all. You need more money, just pull more from tax revenues.

Guy I know worked for the "Office of the Deputy Prime Minister". When Prescott left, they all kept their jobs (doing **** all) but just changed the name of the department - **** knows what it's called now...

mrdonuts
9th October 2009, 19:23
they dont mention that as well as the non performance related pay rise of say 2.5% they are also getting a nice little increase every year as they move up the payscale

not linked to them doing anything at all

:tantrum: