Civil servants vote for strike ballot over cuts

[Simster]

Wise words.

I'm not sure about it myself, as it's really just a guess based on the fact that most public services are contracted out to private companies in my area.

 

[bhaexpress]

Badly run businesses? Where to start......

The half of all catering start ups that fold within two years.
Plymouth Argyle and plenty of other football clubs....
A long list of travel operators/ airlines that fail every summer
THE BANKS THAT NEEDED BAILING OUT BY GOVERNMENT
Every British car manufacturer..... ever.
All the empty shops on the high street, ie woolworths
Equitable Life and every other insurer currently in run off
British Airways..... need any more?

As for the debt- that was caused by a succession of chancellors of the exchequer dating back 200 years, not civil servants.

With the exception of some banks does the government have no part in this ? Anyway, you haven't answered as to why we now have a huge national debt, going to blame the private sector for that as well ? And of course the various chancellors get advised by who exactly ?

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I merely corrected your post, you , as usual were bereft of a plausible response, resorting instead to playground style name calling.

You think that juvenilely editing a post is worthy of any kind of plausible reponse? Grind on.

 

[DerbyGull]

Do you work for the Civil Service by some freak off chance ? The eloquence of your post would seem to suggest that you do. No one is suggesting that Civil Servants 'sponge off the state' any more than anybody else. However a lot of people feel with good reason that the Civil Service is riddled with dead beats who should be on the dole.

I used to work for the civil service. And I agree there are alot of dead beats, I used to see it every day. But I hate the hypocracy, we want as many people in work as possible and if they start getting shat on by management and asked to do more for less then they have every right to feel aggrieved. And don't come back with 'they're lucky to have a job' nonsense. If you really want to make it farer then you make it 'performance related', that way the people who do work hard are rewarded and the ones who sit on their arses (in 5 years i was alot of that) get found out.

 

[Mammoth]

You asked

So you think that the people who've saddled us with a huge national debt are any better ? Let me see now, aren't they civil servants ? Which private sector businesses are badly run then ? Care to give some examples ?

This may come as a surprise to you, but some private ventures do run at a loss, or have to close down due to poor management, or a business model which has never worked/ does not work now. My earlier reply included specific and general examples of companies/ sectors where this has been notable.

Why are todays civil servants responsible for 200 years of government debt? The ministerial responsibility and decision making is and always has been the chancellor of the exchequer. If it is the chancellor's decision to spend x amount on DWP staff for example, it is not the fault of the staff they have filled those vacant positions!!!!!!

Major infrastructure does not build/maintain itself for nothing (unless you are a creationist- on the seventh day god created the olympic stadium and saw that it was good- ha)

 

[Seagull on the wing]

And? Does that mean they shouldn't take whatever action they legally can to protect their job, like anyone would? If "regular people" had these wonderful jobs, wouldn't they also fight to keep them?

Surely taking such efforts to protect their jobs is indicative that they are fully aware of what the "real world" is like and they want to avoid it.

So going on strike will protect their jobs then...less production...less jobs needed.

 

[DerbyGull]

Well to be fair in many cases they are sponging off the state in both instances. Streamline the public sector and I will change my mind. Why shouldn't these people lose their jobs? What divine right do they have to employment that workers in the private sector do not have? If the jobs do not exists, or the tax payer cannot afford them then why are they being paid? The axeman cometh and about time too.

What's your answer then? privatise the police, probation service, prison service, schools, nhs etc ?

 

[blue'n'white]

I've worked in various civil service departments over the years. For a start they are very union orientated to a point that it is very similar to that of tube and train drivers, dockers, miners and anybody else who thinks they can hold the country to ransom. It's fair to say that there are more than a few career personnel there. A lot of them seem to think that they are not subject to the financial restraints that workers in commerce are subject too, after all it's not their money or their livelihood that will be affected, or so many of them think. To be honest little short of murder will get you fired from the Civil Service. However you will have a nice fat pension to retire on. There's little in the way of incentive for staff that's true but neither is there any serious performance evaluation either. At a time when the country has to tighten it's belt why do they think they are any different ? I could be very tedious and mention just a few of the incidences of total jobworthiness I have experienced whilst working with them let alone as a tax payer but I would imagine most of us have some experience of this in any case.

They want to take industrial action ? For a lot of them merely trying to be industrious would be a good start.

You really ARE talking out of your arse aren't you - the "nice fat pension" you refer to will only apply to the very top civil servants - those currently on loads of money per year. The vast majority of us civil servants are on poor wages and a poor pension.
Don't forget that in times of plenty those in industry etc will get big or biggish pay rises - I know of people who've been on 10% rises and civil servants get a max of about 3% if we're lucky.
And the bollocks up above about "You can have months and months off if you're a civil servant" is also shite as well - we're "allowed" 5 days off a year

You've been reading far too many Daily Mail and Daily Express headlines pal

 

[bhaexpress]

Comes as no surprise at all but having worked in both the public and private sector in the last forty years I can definitely say that level of incompetence that is permitted in the public sector would not be tolerated in most of the private sector. As I have already said, the Civil Service needs over hauling and rationalising in exactly the same way that the private sector is.

 

[bhaexpress]

Ypu really ARE talking out of your arse aren't you - the "nice fat pension" you refer to will only apply to the very top civil servants - those currently on loads of money per year. The vast majority of us civil servants are on poor wages and a poor pension.
Don't forget that in times of plenty those in industry etc will get big or biggish pay rises - I know of people who've been on 10% rises and civil servants get a max of about 3% if we're lucky.
And the bollocks up above about "You can have months and months off if you're a civil servant" is also shite as well - we're "allowed" 5 days off a year

You've been reading far too many Daily Mail and Daily Express headlines pal

Read above you and then crawl back into your cupboard, as I've worked in both the public and private sector for forty years I am basing what I say on what I have seen first hand, can you say the same ?

I should add that if things are that bad in the Civil Service why stay ? Nice pension ? Not much work or responsibility ? I would say the same to anybody, if you don't like what you're doing don't whine about it do something else, they'll soon find some mug to replace you.

 

[DerbyGull]

...the existance of those jobs are the reason for a £140billion deficit.....

£76bn buying shares in RBS and Lloyds

£200bn set aside for Bank of England against losses incurred

£250bn set aside for borrowing by banks to strengthen liquidity

£40bn of loans to Bradford & Bingley and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme

Insurance of bank assets £280bn


P.S. Admittedly B & B were sold since that article but how do you account for the rest?
Total= £986bn

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/163850bn-official-cost-of-the-bank-bailout-1833830.html

Pretty obvious what's really causing the deficit eh?

 

[bhaexpress]

£76bn buying shares in RBS and Lloyds

£200bn set aside for Bank of England against losses incurred

£250bn set aside for borrowing by banks to strengthen liquidity

£40bn of loans to Bradford & Bingley and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme

Insurance of bank assets £280bn

Total= £986bn

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/163850bn-official-cost-of-the-bank-bailout-1833830.html

Pretty obvious what's really causing the deficit eh?

Don't know about that but I do wonder how much the Civil Service costs the tax payers in salaries, pensions, sick pay, perks and so on. What many Civil Servants don't seem to realise is that if the private sector has to cut jobs why shouldn't the public sector ?

 

[DerbyGull]

Don't know about that but I do wonder how much the Civil Service costs the tax payers in salaries, pensions, sick pay, perks and so on. What many Civil Servants don't seem to realise is that if the private sector has to cut jobs why shouldn't the public sector ?

I'm with you on the efficiency of some of the PUBLIC sector, as I say I've seen with my own eyes how they haemorrhage money and so have you.

I know about 6 months ago that the NHS pensions were brought more or less in line with private, so anyone new starting will be on the 'new deal'.

I don't know figures for how much the public sector costs in those areas you've mentioned, I'll fish for information.

But it's no secret that the deficit could be wiped overnight if all the banks were sold on. Obviously the government has to get ALL its money back including a small profit to make it worth while, that means lloyds share price being 70p or more (currently 53p).

 

[blue'n'white]

Read above you and then crawl back into your cupboard, as I've worked in both the public and private sector for forty years I am basing what I say on what I have seen first hand, can you say the same ?

I should add that if things are that bad in the Civil Service why stay ? Nice pension ? Not much work or responsibility ? I would say the same to anybody, if you don't like what you're doing don't whine about it do something else, they'll soon find some mug to replace you.

Can you not read ?
I referred to "us" civil servants so fairly obviously yes I am a civil servant and I can base what i say on first hand experience as I have been in the civil service for well over 30 years.
I have plenty of work to do and probably more responsibility than many but the pay is nowhere near as good as you would like everybody to believe and the pension is crap now
"Why stay in the civil service" - well you need a job don't you and I feel I am trapped in this one. I would happily leave and work locally but there's sod all around for someone of my age (50s) and believe me I have been looking.
So I suggest that YOU crawl back into YOUR cupboard

 

[BLOCK F]

BBC News - Civil servants vote for strike ballot over cuts

Do civil servants in this country live in a different reality from the rest of us mere mortals? Do they not read the papers or watch the news? Why should they be exempt from the tough economic conditions that the rest of us have to struggle with? Why should they be guaranteed jobs for life and bumper pension deals when the rest of us face job uncertainty and in most cases zero pension contributions from our employers? These pampered fuckers need a massive reality check. When they generate wealth for this country, maybe then they will be in a position to justify their unrealistic demands.

"Mr Serwotka urged his members to "fight like never before".
"National action with other unions is key to our strategy, which is designed to escalate and put pressure on the Government before it is too late," he said."

Too late for what exactly? Dragging you into the real world? Wanker.

La -LA LAND is where many of them live!!!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Members of the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) have agreed to ballot for a national strike over government cuts to the public sector.
So the ballot hasn't been held yet. It has been agreed to ballot members who might vote against strike action, but it seems as though the members have all been written off as nothing better than parasites.

 

[drew]

Amazing how anecdotal stories are used to create stereotypes for those that work in the Public sector. Firstly, I have never worked in the public sector but many of my family have. Having worked in insurance both in london and Haywards Heath, I can assure those flying the private sector flag that there are numerous examples of lightweights and slackers in that sector. As for the public sector, my wife is in charge of an intensive care unit and responsible for about 36 staff. She gets considerably less than my former boss who was responsible for less than half that number and, as far as I am aware, he didn't have to deal with death in the dept on a regular basis. He also had a far better pension being a director.

It seems that those that want to pay less tax and attack the public sector are very good at citing the the top level of earners and portraying them as the norm.

The NHS is far better now than it was in 1997 but it can still be improved. That will not happen with the changes this Government are introducing and which are driven by ideology rather than economics.

There are more police now than in 1997 but they now face 20% cuts which will reduce their numbers and effectiveness. The government say they will cut back office staff so the frontline will not be affected but I don't think one Police force has endorsed this thinking. Take out the back office staff, and who performs those roles. Are qualified police going to back office jobs? Today we have had the Ken Clarke issue about rape and he is going to cut the time served by rapists if they own up by half. Why? He says because he wants to try and prevent to the harrowing experience of victims giving evidence. Nothing to do then with saving money in the prison sector. CDM's response at PMQs was that more rapists should be caught and prosecuted. How are they going to achieve that with fewer Police and victims knowing that the rapists can spend only a few months behind bars.

I go back to one of my previous posts which none of the tory boys have answered. We have a deficit that needs to be cut but why does that have to be done within 5 years and not 10?

The way out of this situation is to stimulate demand to expand the economy, something that the Government don't seem interested to do. They are just using the economic situation to justify implementing their market force ideology on everything and as someone else said, they know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

 

[DerbyGull]

...Today we have had the Ken Clarke issue about rape and he is going to cut the time served by rapists if they own up by half. Why? He says because he wants to try and prevent to the harrowing experience of victims giving evidence. Nothing to do then with saving money in the prison sector....

We've had sentence discounts on early guilty pleas since Labour brought it in with the Criminal Justice Act 2003, but now what Ken Clarke is proposing is even worse. They're encouraging people to confess at the police station (even if they're innocent) in exchange for even bigger discounts in sentencing.

 

[beorhthelm]

£76bn buying shares in RBS and Lloyds

£200bn set aside for Bank of England against losses incurred

£250bn set aside for borrowing by banks to strengthen liquidity

£40bn of loans to Bradford & Bingley and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme

Insurance of bank assets £280bn


P.S. Admittedly B & B were sold since that article but how do you account for the rest?
Total= £986bn

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/163850bn-official-cost-of-the-bank-bailout-1833830.html

Pretty obvious what's really causing the deficit eh?

first lets be clear what the deficit is. its the yearly overdraft, money borrowed to make up the difference between tax revenues and government spending. tax - spending = surplus or deficit.

£76bn bail out cost on RBS and Lloyds was made in 2008, once. it wasn't paid again in 2009, 2010, nor this year (though there is a interest cost in the deficit). the £200bn Indemnity, £250bn Guarantee and £280bn insurance were just that, imdemnity , guarantees and insurance. it wasnt/hasnt been spent. so where is the deficit last year and this year from? tax - spending = -£140bn. there was always going to be a deficit, there was already questions on how they planned to reduce spending as the economic cycle went down, before the buble burst.

btw, if you did sell RBS & Lloyds tomorrow, they wouldnt even cover half the deficit (todays market cap combined ~60bn). it might help this year, but what would you sell off to decrease the deficit next year? and the year after?

 

[beorhthelm]

You really ARE talking out of your arse aren't you - the "nice fat pension" you refer to will only apply to the very top civil servants - those currently on loads of money per year. ...
And the bollocks up above about "You can have months and months off if you're a civil servant" is also shite as well - we're "allowed" 5 days off a year

you really need to put things into context, relative to private pension, ordinary public pensions are pretty podgy. and most people in private dont get 10% pay rises, they usually have to change jobs or roles to get a substantial increase.

but what i really want to know is what do you mean about your "allowed" 5 days off? everyone gets statutory, then most get bank hols on top, then many get extra days for years service. whats this 5 days?