[Archived] Local Government Strike

[blue phil]

They could start amonst their own ranks , American .

Mind you the electorate will do that in a year or so and get rid of them all .....

[colin]

I think a lot of people differentiate between those public sector workers who do a useful job - such as doctors , nurses , binmen ................and those whose existence wouldn't be noticed if they were all laid off tomorrow . Quite a few of the latter knocking around I'd guess . Check out the Guardian jobs section

OK, you check out the Guardian web site and report back, then perhaps find some "whose existence wouldn't be noticed if they were all laid off tomorrow" because I think you are just, perhaps, maybe, perpetuating a myth that public sector workers are all somehow cosseted skivers.

It's simply not an accurate general attitude to take, it's just a gross & lazy generalisation which has been perpetuated over the years.

I'm not saying that there are slackers, ditherers, and layabouts in the public sector, no doubt there are those in the private sector too. Please just bear in mid that the average pension from Local Authority workers is £4000 per year.

Hardly indicative of rich living is it?

Mind you the electorate will do that in a year or so and get rid of them all

I think the electorate will get rid of the government, not the public sector workers who work for the various levels of government.

Or am I missing something?

[Bing]

OK, you check out the Guardian web site and report back, then perhaps find some "whose existence wouldn't be noticed if they were all laid off tomorrow" because I think you are just, perhaps, maybe, perpetuating a myth that public sector workers are all somehow cosseted skivers.

It's simply not an accurate general attitude to take, it's just a gross & lazy generalisation which has been perpetuated over the years.

Never one to resist a challenge:

Childrens Commissioning Manager - Leeds - c £40k

Leicester and Leicestershire Housing Market Area New Growth Point Coordinator - £36k

Technical Manager (Waste Strategy Project) - Essex - up to £50k

Head of PR - London - £65k

Extended Schools Cluster Co-ordinator - Tower Hamlets - £39k

Head of Integrated Youth Services - Newcastle - £46k

Project Director - Northamptonshire County Council and Milton Keynes Council Joint Residual Waste Treatment PFI Project - up to £73k

E-Business Executive (Lincolnshire Tourism) - £22k

Community Engagement Manager - Chelsea - £49k

Principal Policy Officer Equality - Sheffield - £33k

I got bored on page 6 of 18...

[yoda]

Never one to resist a challenge:

Childrens Commissioning Manager - Leeds - c £40k

Leicester and Leicestershire Housing Market Area New Growth Point Coordinator - £36k

Technical Manager (Waste Strategy Project) - Essex - up to £50k

Head of PR - London - £65k

Extended Schools Cluster Co-ordinator - Tower Hamlets - £39k

Head of Integrated Youth Services - Newcastle - £46k

Project Director - Northamptonshire County Council and Milton Keynes Council Joint Residual Waste Treatment PFI Project - up to £73k

E-Business Executive (Lincolnshire Tourism) - £22k

Community Engagement Manager - Chelsea - £49k

Principal Policy Officer Equality - Sheffield - £33k

I got bored on page 6 of 18...

Think you just blew Colin out of the water booom!

[Billy Castell]

Never one to resist a challenge:

Childrens Commissioning Manager - Leeds - c £40k

Leicester and Leicestershire Housing Market Area New Growth Point Coordinator - £36k

Technical Manager (Waste Strategy Project) - Essex - up to £50k

Head of PR - London - £65k

Extended Schools Cluster Co-ordinator - Tower Hamlets - £39k

Head of Integrated Youth Services - Newcastle - £46k

Project Director - Northamptonshire County Council and Milton Keynes Council Joint Residual Waste Treatment PFI Project - up to £73k

E-Business Executive (Lincolnshire Tourism) - £22k

Community Engagement Manager - Chelsea - £49k

Principal Policy Officer Equality - Sheffield - £33k

I got bored on page 6 of 18...

I bet there are such crappy jobs in the private sector too, although there probably are not as many. Those job titles are probably indicative of the inefficency of some local government structures, but that is not to say that the other people with 'real' jobs have had it easy getting jobs with daft job titles and a half decent wage.

[thenodrog]

I bet there are such crappy jobs in the private sector too, although there probably are not as many. Those job titles are probably indicative of the inefficency of some local government structures, but that is not to say that the other people with 'real' jobs have had it easy getting jobs with daft job titles and a half decent wage.

'Inefficiency'............. Something not tolerated quite as easily in the real world Billy........... err sorry 'private sector' I mean.

[Billy Castell]

I was being polite. I think there are whole sections of local government that need trimming in order to work well. For example, Bedfordshire county council is based in this big ugly modernist building that is half empty. Why have they got such a big building, when you have both parish/town councils and borough councils that have their own offices and duties? And why the hell has Bedfordshire, a small county got three layers of local government? Luton does not come under this system as it is a unitary authority. I think part of the problem highlighted by those job titles is that the current government has released so many initiatives, targets, schemes and ideas over the last ten years or so that local councils feel obliged to invent jobs such as Senior Drugs Strategy Co-Ordinator, and need to offer a good wage to attract anyone's attention. Most people would see the ad and think 'what a load of crap' unless the salary was £30,000 p/a or whatever. And these silly jobs attract the kind of silly people who think such jobs are vital.

Having said that, that youth co-ordinator in Newcastle sounds like what my dad did in Hong Kong. He was basically in charge of all the youth clubs/scouts etc. that catered for us military kids.

[colin]

Never one to resist a challenge:

Childrens Commissioning Manager - Leeds - c £40k

Leicester and Leicestershire Housing Market Area New Growth Point Coordinator - £36k

Technical Manager (Waste Strategy Project) - Essex - up to £50k

Head of PR - London - £65k

Extended Schools Cluster Co-ordinator - Tower Hamlets - £39k

Head of Integrated Youth Services - Newcastle - £46k

Project Director - Northamptonshire County Council and Milton Keynes Council Joint Residual Waste Treatment PFI Project - up to £73k

E-Business Executive (Lincolnshire Tourism) - £22k

Community Engagement Manager - Chelsea - £49k

Principal Policy Officer Equality - Sheffield - £33k

I got bored on page 6 of 18...

Whoooh, Bing

Yup, those job titles look like a load of four fingered fandango. but do you know what they involve doing?

Any idea what the jobs involve? Don't forget that some "Human Resources" monkey has gone and put the ads in the paper with the attendant jargon.

They might just be decent & responsible jobs worth doing. And needing doing. I don't know. Do you?

I'm sure that there are equally la-la job descriptions going on for the private sector too.

I think that there just might be a "Terry Pratchett-type automatic "My Dad always said that....." reaction going on here.

I'm not challenging anyones assumptions over public service jobs here. I'm just trying to get you to justify your attitudes with some facts.

Tell us about for example:

E-Business Executive (Lincolnshire Tourism) - £22k and why it's a non-job.

Cheers

Colin

[Paul Mellelieu]

Never one to resist a challenge:

Childrens Commissioning Manager - Leeds - c £40k WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROCURING CHILDREN'S SOCIAL WORK OR HEALTH CARE AND ENSURING VFM AND EFFECTIVENESS.

Leicester and Leicestershire Housing Market Area New Growth Point Coordinator - £36k I GUESS RESPONSIBLE FOR LARGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

Technical Manager (Waste Strategy Project) - Essex - up to £50k MAKING SURE YOUR AND BUSINESS WASTE IS SORTED OUT

Head of PR - London - £65k COMPARE WAGE TO HEAD OF PR IN PRIVATE SECTOR

Extended Schools Cluster Co-ordinator - Tower Hamlets - £39k RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING INVESTMENT IN NEW SCHOOLS PROGRAMME

Head of Integrated Youth Services - Newcastle - £46k A MODEST SALARY WHEN YOU CONSIDER THEY ARE RESPOSBILE FOR THESE TYPE OF SERVICES

Project Director - Northamptonshire County Council and Milton Keynes Council Joint Residual Waste Treatment PFI Project - up to £73k THE SCANDAL HERE IS THE PFI, WASTING MONEY ON PRIVATE SECTOR WIDEBOYS

E-Business Executive (Lincolnshire Tourism) - £22k DO YOU WANT COUNCLS TO BE IN THE C21ST?

Community Engagement Manager - Chelsea - £49k A WASTE OF MONEY

Principal Policy Officer Equality - Sheffield - £33k MAKING SURE COUNCIL COMPLIES WITH LEGISLATION THAT PROMOTES EQUALITY. YOU WILL FIND THESE POSTS IN THE CORPORATE SECTOR

I got bored on page 6 of 18...

Sorry Bing but you don't have a clue.

[stuwilky]

Extended Schools Cluster Co-ordinator - Tower Hamlets - £39k

I suppose that rather than working together the schools could do the extended provision individually. But it would seem silly!

[Paul Mellelieu]

Client Account Manager - London , UK , £50k - £60k

Business Analysis Commercial Finance Manager - North West , UK , £50k to £60k + Car + Bonus

Head of Marketing - London , UK , Attractive package

Sales & Marketing Director - West Midlands , United Kingdom , £95,000

Marketing Manager – Financial Services - London , UK , Salary £40,000 - £45, 000

Sales & Marketing Director - West Midlands , UK , £95k - £96k

Head of Sales & Marketing - Nationwide , UK , c£70,000 + Bonus + Package

Branding and E-Marketing Manager - Warwickshire - Rugby , UK , £40-£50k + car + benefits

Marketing Manager - London , UK , c.£65k + Car Allowance + Bonus

There you go. Very high salaries for selling stuff to us that we don't want or need I expect.

[Paul]

I feel part of the problem is government departments don't seem capable of simple everyday efficiencies. take for example Child Tax Creits which most of us will have been dealing with recently. We received, that is one each to myself and good lady, 4 pages and an envelope in each communication:

1. Summary of our claim 2007 / 2008

2. Forms to complete for our claim 2008 / 2009

3. Summary of our claim 2008 / 2009 as zero as they forgot our youngest will be in full time education

4. Still to be received - new summary of claim for 2008 / 2009 now inlcuding the youngest

I'm sure this could be streamlined and save the country billions each year. It's like the Tax Return, I get a short tax return only about 4 pages, accompanied by about 30 pages on how to complete it!!! Every letter we get from the benefits agency for Tom is accompaniued by 5 pages of information which is always the same! A lot of time, paper and trees could be saved.

[stuwilky]

I feel part of the problem is government departments don't seem capable of simple everyday efficiencies. take for example Child Tax Creits which most of us will have been dealing with recently. We received, that is one each to myself and good lady, 4 pages and an envelope in each communication:

1. Summary of our claim 2007 / 2008

2. Forms to complete for our claim 2008 / 2009

3. Summary of our claim 2008 / 2009 as zero as they forgot our youngest will be in full time education

4. Still to be received - new summary of claim for 2008 / 2009 now inlcuding the youngest

I'm sure this could be streamlined and save the country billions each year. It's like the Tax Return, I get a short tax return only about 4 pages, accompanied by about 30 pages on how to complete it!!! Every letter we get from the benefits agency for Tom is accompaniued by 5 pages of information which is always the same! A lot of time, paper and trees could be saved.

Around the end of May last year I received 41 envelopes with differing review notices, next year awards etc etc etc. All including the old green guide.

I posted it back to them as surely I only need 1!

[colin]

Paul,

I was out last night with a very charming lady & an old friend who is well versed in the intracies of the tax system. She works for Her Majesties Customs & Excise. She was dreading a meeting with some stroppy businessman who was going to complain that he was investing in businesses rather than lending them money.

Until a few months ago I was an "idiot magnet" for people who didn't want to pay their parking fines, or speeding fines.

By hell, you'd have to go a long way to meet such people in the pub.

The gist is that the paperwork is not here for you and me and everyone else. It's in there to catch the odd-balls. The ones who want to live outside the system, the ones who want to escape what they are due to pay.

This is regardless of what you think of the tax system.

So we all end up filling in forms & papers, not that most of us need to, just to catch the few who are trying to screw the system.

A bit like me taking my shoes off last time I went through a metal detector at Manchester Airport. It was pointless, but someone somewhere thought it had to be done.

[blue phil]

The gist is that the paperwork is not here for you and me and everyone else. It's in there to catch the odd-balls. The ones who want to live outside the system, the ones who want to escape what they are due to pay.

.......and to create "work" for otherwise unemployable people .

They might just be decent & responsible jobs worth doing. And needing doing. I don't know. Do you?

I'm sure that there are equally la-la job descriptions going on for the private sector too.

Cheers

Colin

Ah , so you don't know either , Colin - at least you're being honest !

As for the la - la jobs in the private sector ; well , they are (like it or not ) at least not funded directly by the tax payer .

It's a bit like footballers earning stupid wages ; at least we can opt out and not contribute .

[Paul Mellelieu]

.......and to create "work" for otherwise unemployable people .

Ah , so you don't know either , Colin - at least you're being honest !

As for the la - la jobs in the private sector ; well , they are (like it or not ) at least not funded directly by the tax payer .

It's a bit like footballers earning stupid wages ; at least we can opt out and not contribute .

Phil,

Who do you think funds the highly paid posts, the free company cars, the private health care, the five figure bonus, the first class travel and so on in the private sector? You and me and other tax payers when we buy their goods, over which we have no choice over.

You seem to turn the argument on its head, let's get ripped off by the private sector, and make sure that the people who deliver public services aren't given an inch. Silly boy.

[American]

How do you have no choice? Do you need a TV? Do you need a car?

All you need is shelter and food - you choose to purchase the rest of it, no one forces you to buy anything (as you could even forage or hunt for food).

[blue phil]

Like I said before , Paul , I don't condemn all public sector workers - jsut the ones doing useless paper pushing nothing jobs . Labour has created hundreds of thousands of them simply to keep the unemployment figures down , as well as for perverse ideological reasons .

As for the private sector ; well we all have a choice to a certain extent . I used the footballers example . If you disapprove of their wages don't buy SKY ; don't go to the games .

The same goes for many other areas ; supermarkets , banks , the BBC , consumer goods etc . Obviously you have to play the game or you'd live in a cave , but you can do your best to opt out at least .

Ever thought of moving to Cuba ?

[Paul Mellelieu]

Like I said before , Paul , I don't condemn all public sector workers - jsut the ones doing useless paper pushing nothing jobs . Labour has created hundreds of thousands of them simply to keep the unemployment figures down , as well as for perverse ideological reasons .

As for the private sector ; well we all have a choice to a certain extent . I used the footballers example . If you disapprove of their wages don't buy SKY ; don't go to the games .

The same goes for many other areas ; supermarkets , banks , the BBC , consumer goods etc . Obviously you have to play the game or you'd live in a cave , but you can do your best to opt out at least .

Ever thought of moving to Cuba ?

BBC is state sector, but that aside...

My point is that there is huge waste (if that's the right word) in the private sector. There are some people doing crap jobs in the public sector, which i know only too well. Almost all those job titles posted above by Bing are worthwhile and I suspect many of those I posted aren't as important to us all.

American, you seems to be describing how the inhabitants of New Orleans were treated by Mr Bush.

[colin]

Like I said before , Paul , I don't condemn all public sector workers - jsut the ones doing useless paper pushing nothing jobs . Labour has created hundreds of thousands of them simply to keep the unemployment figures down , as well as for perverse ideological reasons .

Sorry Phil, you are rather living a myth here. Blair & Brown have been cutting central government workers relentlessly for a number of years. It's not a cost-cutting exercise, it's number-cutting one.

Where we used to have a couple of people looking after our reprographic and printing needs we now have to farm it out to Pronto Print (like that saves money.) We used to have a couple of retired bus drivers who used to shift paper work around for us for £10 an hour. They've been paid off with redundancy packages and replaced with agency staff who cost twice as much per hour and have no idea what they are doing. We used to have an IT section who were on Civil Service rates for keeping the computer network running. It's now Fujitsu and, apart from anything else, they charge an 0844 call rate if you have a problem. It used to be someone from next door would come along and sort it out for you.

We used to have half a dozen people on low wages who knew more about planning law; listed buildings; rights of way; tree preservation orders; stopping up orders; traffic signs; restricted parking orders; & compulsory purchase orders than you would beleive. All doing stuff that was shrined in legislation. They've all gone now and it's chaos.

All of them paid off with early retirement to get them off the books, reduce the numbers & bugger the cost.

If you can justify your comment that

"Labour has created hundreds of thousands of them"

Then I'l be glad to hear it. Otherwise you need to stop beleiving the myth.

[yoda]

Sorry Phil, you are rather living a myth here. Blair & Brown have been cutting central government workers relentlessly for a number of years. It's not a cost-cutting exercise, it's number-cutting one.

Where we used to have a couple of people looking after our reprographic and printing needs we now have to farm it out to Pronto Print (like that saves money.) We used to have a couple of retired bus drivers who used to shift paper work around for us for £10 an hour. They've been paid off with redundancy packages and replaced with agency staff who cost twice as much per hour and have no idea what they are doing. We used to have an IT section who were on Civil Service rates for keeping the computer network running. It's now Fujitsu and, apart from anything else, they charge an 0844 call rate if you have a problem. It used to be someone from next door would come along and sort it out for you.

We used to have half a dozen people on low wages who knew more about planning law; listed buildings; rights of way; tree preservation orders; stopping up orders; traffic signs; restricted parking orders; & compulsory purchase orders than you would beleive. All doing stuff that was shrined in legislation. They've all gone now and it's chaos.

All of them paid off with early retirement to get them off the books, reduce the numbers & bugger the cost.

If you can justify your comment that

"Labour has created hundreds of thousands of them"

Then I'l be glad to hear it. Otherwise you need to stop beleiving the myth.

You mean cutting the number of central workers on the government employed list by sub contracting out to companies like Capita

massaging the figures more like!

[stuwilky]

By my understanding, outsourcing DOES work out cheaper - you use it only when you need to, whereas with permanent employees, you have to pay fixed annual salaries whether they're doing useful work or not. It may sound like a lot of money when outsourced companies quote hourly rates, but the total of all that compared to annual salary(s) for doing a similar thing will normally be far less.

Although I can't work out what's going on with the agency staff you mentioned...

Outsourcing rarely works out cheaper (without slashing the service level provided), certainly based on anecdotal evidence I have been privy to.

My favourite case was someone made redundant from a company and paid off, who went back as a "contractor" 6 weeks later to sit at the same desk earning twice as much but not receiving paid holiday!

All in the name of "headcount reduction".

[colin]

By my understanding, outsourcing DOES work out cheaper - you use it only when you need to, whereas with permanent employees, you have to pay fixed annual salaries whether they're doing useful work or not. It may sound like a lot of money when outsourced companies quote hourly rates, but the total of all that compared to annual salary(s) for doing a similar thing will normally be far less.

Although I can't work out what's going on with the agency staff you mentioned...

El Tombro,

I appreciate your reasoning, but it doesn't always work. For example our reprographics department was staffed by one person and she was busy looking after the needs of our organisation. She was on the premises so we could talk to her to discuss what we wanted and she could use her skills to suggest cheaper or more efficient of better ways of doing what we needed. She was an expert resource and knew what machinery the organisation needed.

There was no profit motive involved, she was paid a standard civil service wage.

If she had nothing to do, she could be temporarily transferred to somewhere else in the organisation where there was a back-log of work. It didn't happen often.

It's just head count cutting

[thenodrog]

Outsourcing rarely works out cheaper (without slashing the service level provided), certainly based on anecdotal evidence I have been privy to.

My favourite case was someone made redundant from a company and paid off, who went back as a "contractor" 6 weeks later to sit at the same desk earning twice as much but not receiving paid holiday!

All in the name of "headcount reduction".

Does when you need to get rid of em.

Anyway have you not worked it out yet Stu? The usual route seems to be to take a long term view, make em redundant, re employ at a higher rate and snatch it all back next round of contract negotiations. Workers and their unions have brought it all upon themselves by making people virtually unsackable. We are currently looking for a part time office assisitant through an employment agency. It'll cost us more on the face of it per week but we will have no worries when we have to get rid or when pregnancy and maternity / illness / holidays / sick notes crop up.

It's not nice of course but so what? It is simply a consequence of imbalanced employment rules. 'Head count reduction' on one hand is 'head ache reduction' on the other.

[colin]

....re currently looking for a part time office assisitant through an employment agency. It'll cost us more on the face of it per week but we will have no worries when we have to get rid or when pregnancy and maternity / illness / holidays / sick notes crop up.

It's not nice of course.....

You feel it's OK to get rid of someone for being pregnant or ill or wanting holiday leave?

Blimey! That's a bit Third World isn't it? Would you be happy if those terms were applied to your job? (Probably the pregnancy bit excepted I suggest.)