Public sector strikes

[matthew_w100]

Well, yes, that's the point really isn't it? Reduce money out? Increase money in?

...

When, as is the case in Germany, the public sector earns about 2/3 of the equivalent in the private sector, there may be cause to give some extra benefits in the long run. But when the public sector pays 15% more than the private sector (in some parts of the country anyway) then I don't think they have any more cause for complaint than we did.

You see - I carefully avoided mentioning public or private sector. I've never seen anything but carefully spin-doctored comparisons between the two, skewed to support whoever is making the point. I think the spectrum of activity and reward within each sector is far wider than between them. Are we comparing crofters in Shetland (private) with mandarins in Whitehall (public), or cleaners in Rotherham Town Hall (public) with the board of Barclays? It's just utterly meaningless so I don't do it. My point is that anyone whose pay is cut is perfectly rational to complain about it.

Where are these jobs with gym membership?! Having said that, we got to use the local gym/pool in Stockholm (Kista) when I was working out there.

Well I had it in my last job (private) and my present (public). My private pension was worth about 50% more than my present one though. And I had private health, a car allowance and a bonus. Oh - and a higher salary. And cheaper lunch. Had to work in Essex though, but not as hard as I do now.

[Vince C]

or cleaners in Rotherham Town Hall (public) with the board of Barclays?

Your town hall cleaners these days will probably be private sector contractor employees. Miniumum wage and no pension at all (except state pension) more than likely.

Many private sector employees have no pension with their jobs. Something to consider when a public sector employee moans that their pension 'is not gold plated'.

[Paul_Sengupta]

Had to work in Essex though.

Noooooooooo!

The salary comparisons were on a like for like basis.

Last time we had this discussion, there was a council job advertised for a records manager, requirements were for A level filing and data entry or something, and the salary was the same as my salary after 20 years in the "highly paid" tech (telecomms) private sector after getting an engineering degree. If said manager gets to retire at 65 on a final salary pension too and gets cost of living pay rises, then I too, would have cause for complaint and would wish to do so as it's me (and you) who's paying the wages and pension!

[Steve D]

Last time we had this discussion, there was a council job advertised for a records manager, requirements were for A level filing and data entry or something, and the salary was the same as my salary after 20 years in the "highly paid" tech (telecomms) private sector after getting an engineering degree.

Records management, since the advent of the Freedom of Information Act, has become a much more important and demanding role in any public sector body. It's quite a complex and responsible position, arguably just as crucial as a telecomms or IT specialist, and certainly having the same sort of organisation-wide impact.

It's not just a filing clerk's job.

[mo0g]

My point is that anyone whose pay is cut is perfectly rational to complain about it.

First point, their pay is not being cut. The value of their remuneration package is being reduced. Just like the rest of us have been dealing with for the last 7 years.

Second point, they of course can complain, as could someone complain who only got a 15% bonus instead of a 20% bonus. But by publicy doing so shows how utterly out of touch with reality they are.

As previously mentioned, and this is the salient point, public sector workers used to be given overly generous pension terms, along with other remunerative perks like 30 days holiday, queens birthday holiday etc etc, because they got paid less than people doing the same jobs in the private sector. That situation ended a long time ago. The world has changed. We are all feeling the pain, and I'm not quite sure who the hell public sector workers think they are thinking they deserve to be immune from that pain.

And aside from the general economic/deficit hole we are in, there was a pensions crisis before then, so even if we werent subject to austerity measures, the public sector pension situation needed to be addressed anyway.

It just reinforces the view that public sector workers are selfish beyond measure. Ironic since most profess to be socialists.

And for the record, I was a civil servant for 6 years (late 80s and 90s), and my wife worked for local government for about 8 years up until last year, and my sister-in-law is a nurse, so I am well aware of the perks, the waste, the incompetence etc that is rife.

Just to add, I am sure there are exceptions to the above, in sectors of which I have no experience of, but they must be as rare as hens teeth, or a gold plated/final salary private pension in 2012.

[Steve D]

Just a couple of points.

Strikes are called by unions, not by workers.

I realise that a strike won't be called unless and until a vote supports one, but I'd suggest it would be more reasonable (and logical/justifiable) to claim that the parties which are out of touch are the unions (and, by extension perhaps, their membership).

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but during the BA cabin crew strike, and the tanker drivers' threatened strikes, the criticism was levelled at those particular bodies. HGV drivers as a whole, or cabin crew generally, were not lambasted.

Oddly though, when a small proportion of the public sector goes on strike, it is the entire public sector which is out of touch.

funny, that.

[Vince C]

Just a couple of points.

Strikes are called by unions, not by workers.

I realise that a strike won't be called unless and until a vote supports one, but I'd suggest it would be more reasonable (and logical/justifiable) to claim that the parties which are out of touch are the unions (and, by extension perhaps, their membership).

Their membership... Yes. Public Sector workers. So what's your point here. Steve?

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but during the BA cabin crew strike, and the tanker drivers' threatened strikes, the criticism was levelled at those particular bodies. HGV drivers as a whole, or cabin crew generally, were not lambasted.

Oddly though, when a small proportion of the public sector goes on strike, it is the entire public sector which is out of touch.

Not really. If LGOs, Teachers, Nurses, immigration staff etc all strike.... that's the public sector innit? Do you expect the news crews to sift it and list all the individual jobs that are striking and those that are not every time they address the issue?

The big difference with BA of course is that by striking they might be alienating their customers (who can walk to the opposition) in a competitive market and therefore risking their jobs. They therefore have 'skin in the game'. I know that wasn't your point, but it's one that should perhaps be made.

[Steve D]

Well, I understand that Thursday's strike was for members of the PCS union. Teachers and nurses are, by and large, members of other unions for starters.

Secondly, I understand that the strikers numbered in the tens of thousands, nationally. Forgive me, but weren't we talking quite recently about how bloated the public sector had become, with millions of people employed in it?

Even leaving aside those public sector workers, like nurses and teachers, not eligible to be in PCS, I believe the actual strikers probably numbered somewhat less than 5% of the public sector. Personally, I don't consider that a representative enough sample to allow anybody to go from the particular to the general, as has been done in this thread.

[mo0g]

I thought it went without saying that our anger/ire is aimed at the unions who suggest the strike, the workers who vote for the strike, the protesters who go on the strike and the other public workers who support the strike.

I am sure there are sectors and workers who are more than happy with their lot, know they are on to a (relatively) good thing, or like most of the rest of us just happy to have a job.

[matthew_w100]

or cleaners in Rotherham Town Hall (public) with the board of Barclays?

Your town hall cleaners these days will probably be private sector contractor employees. Miniumum wage and no pension at all (except state pension) more than likely.

True. So pick a different low-paid group of public sector employees and slot it into my example. It doesn't alter the point. Which, to repeat, is that there is a great deal more difference *within* either sector than between them and that comparisons are pointless and should be left to the Daily Mail.

Many private sector employees have no pension with their jobs. Something to consider when a public sector employee moans that their pension 'is not gold plated'.

Many unemployed people have no income. Something to consider when a private sector employee moans that their income 'is not very high'.

[Vince C]

It doesn't alter the point. Which, to repeat, is that there is a great deal more difference *within* either sector than between them and that comparisons are pointless and should be left to the Daily Mail.

The private sector isn't going on strike against inevitable reductions in pension benefits. That is THE point. The public sector seem to think not only should they be protected against this, but that that protection should be paid for by the private sector, the very people who swallowed the unavoidable reform of their own pensions!

Many unemployed people have no income. Something to consider when a private sector employee moans that their income 'is not very high'.

So we have the selfish public sector looking to be protected against pension reform, the resigned private sector who don't like pension reform but realise there is no alternative, and the unemployed who are unfortunate.

You'll be telling me next what bears do in the woods, and what religion the Pope is.

[matthew_w100]

You'll be telling me next what bears do in the woods, and what religion the Pope is.

Nope. I'm saying that, apart from two people in the world, *everyone* is worse off than someone but better off than someone else. And the only thing more childish than moaning about being worse off is moaning about other people moaning about it.

[rustle]

...the only thing more childish than moaning about being worse off is moaning about other people moaning about it.

Interesting view, however misguided.

The main reason the public sector get so much flak for their petulance is because we (tax payers) have no choice but to fund them. As it is our [my] money they insist on claiming, I have every right to question them and moan about them if I so choose.

There simply is no comparison between public sector strikers and private enterprise strikers because of the unique way they're funded.

[matthew_w100]

Interesting view, however misguided.

The main reason the public sector get so much flak for their petulance is because we (tax payers) have no choice but to fund them. As it is our [my] money they insist on claiming, I have every right to question them and moan about them if I so choose.

There simply is no comparison between public sector strikers and private enterprise strikers because of the unique way they're funded.

Right back at you - interesting view, however misguided.

You think a council gardener or a care assistant or a nurse should think "I'm being shafted by my employer and would like to resist. But no, wait a minute, my employer is publicly funded. Therefore I must roll over and take it willingly." ? No one thinks like that - your employer is just another employer.

You have no right to question and moan about public sector employEES. You have every right to moan about public sector employERS. And you get a regular opportunity to do that, every time you vote.

[bar shaker]

You have no right to question and moan about public sector employEES. You have every right to moan about public sector employERS. And you get a regular opportunity to do that, every time you vote.

That is perhaps true. The point that you miss is that the majority of the country* think that the employers are right to reform public sector employee pensions... And that is the difference.


61% of UK voters are in favour of the current austerity measures.