Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009
Finally UK starts to pay the price....
BBC News: 'Huge job cuts' for public sector
As many as 350,000 public sector jobs could be lost over the next five years, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) is warning.
Posted by hpwatcher @ 06:08 AM (1080 views) Add Comment
17 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. tudorian said...
I can't see why those, whose pay is funded by the taxpayer should be able to escape the same percentage loss of jobs as those employed in the private sector. The tax raised money pot must be looking a little bare by now...surely
2. paul said...
I know where they could start. There must be quite a few BTL portfolio-owning editors on the BBC News Website team.
3. it_is_going_with_a_bang said...
Public sector pensions is what needs to be taken control of.
I see no reason why everyone else has one rule and public sector workers have another.
There has been a huge expansion of public sector workers in this labour government - it is not sustainable in the long term. I doubt it will be 350k but certainly some will need to go. Because I have intention of paying for them.
4. it_is_going_with_a_bang said...
no intention ...
5. Carrera5 said...
I would have thought the cull would be more like 400-500k ... some councils are still recruiting like they have a budget to spend ..oh wait .. they do ...
6. voiceofreason said...
Having recently just moved from private to public sector, I can say definitively that a 10% cut across the board wouldn't hurt a jot.
I now work for a university.
Everywhere I look, there are between 2 to 5 times more support staff than my old employer.
HR, payroll, estates, car parking, rooming, accounts etc etc - masses and masses of inefficiencies.
Only major difference is bargaining power. International company says do it or I will move your work to India (then does it anyway).
7. japanese uncle said...
Restructuring of private corporations is to their shareholders scrutiny what control of public expenditure is to global investors buying UK gilt. If these redundancies were not duly cut off, IR should rise into two digits. 'Strong well-positioned economy' supported by the non-existent wealth created in association with the fictitiously rigged house prices and the employment of brigades after brigades of public sector non-job workers. What a con of the grandest scale!! People must be reminded that Crash G was lionized as the 'Greatest Chancellor in decades' just until two years ago.
I should like to repost the following:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Brown has been praised even by the Tories as the most successful Chancellor in generations, and I knew that was rubbish all the while. He created an artificial boom simply by scrapping incentives for savings one after another, (e.g. PEP being replaced by less attractive ISA), while the market is inundated with excessive liquidity by the BOE keeping lower base rates when higher rates were badly needed to tame the housing bubble.
Feel good factor created by the housing bubble on top of the silly "equity release" relying on the illusion that house prices should go up forever, accelerated personal expenditure, which is obviously a good thing for an economy to grow for the moment, but for how long.
Actually people ought to have saved a lot more not least for their lives after retirement as state pension and the company pension schemes are reportedly full of "black halls".(Why did they not advertise these bad news much earlier before the mad spending spree & housing bubble went out of control?)
You really cannot eat your cake and have it! British economy has been thriving on the spending of the money that really should have been put aside for a rainy day. Or worse, they spent the money that did not exist, i.e. borrowed money. Consumers will have to pay dearly for it in their retirement. An octopus is known to eat its tentacles when starved. What Brown did was simply to transform the British economy into an "octopus economy".
Japan's housing bubble collapsed in 1990 and the property prices kept going down for as long as 14 years to follow, knocking off 60% of the value of properties (in some extreme cases 80%). It may be worth while to remember a typical Japanese household has 20,000 pounds cash savings (75,000 pounds including life policies, securities, etc), so they have reasonable financial buffer in the event of an economic contingency such as job loss. Still such was the scale of the collapse of the housing bubble.
I cannot imagine what would happen in the UK economy where people tend to save much less. Typical house owners might well be forced to sell out their houses fairly quickly in the face of any financial distress. And employers in this market can make people redundant fairly easily, indeed.
Sunday, October 23, 2005 9:48:19 AM
8. 51ck-6-51x said...
Is that all? 350,000?
The number of employees in the public sector is around 5,800,000.
6% is hardly in line with the private sector over the last year - and this is predicted cuts over the next five years. I would not call that huge, they need to trim that fat NOW.
9. hpwatcher said...
He created an artificial boom simply by scrapping incentives for savings one after another, (e.g. PEP being replaced by less attractive ISA), while the market is inundated with excessive liquidity by the BOE keeping lower base rates when higher rates were badly needed to tame the housing bubble.
I can't help thinking that after a serious bout of hyperinflation - after which people savings will be worth nothing - Gordon Brown will suffer no guilt and blame those stupid enough to save for their own foolishness.
An absolute disgrace of a prime minister; he will go on to join that very select group of politicians, which currently includes such luminaries as Neville Chamberlain....
10. will said...
Most of that figure will be normal retirement and reduced recruitment. Don't expect many redundancies.
11. stillthinking said...
On the plus side, there was a big risk that the government would successfully push an expansion of the state sector using unemployment as an excuse, leading us into an old-style eastern european planned economy. At least this risk seems to have disappeared.
12. the number cruncher said...
I note form this discusion that no one has actually mentioned the benefit that public sector workers do for our economy and standard of life.
Try to get a little balence. I know of many dedicated public servants, who could have had far better rewarded private sector jobs, but have chosen public service as an aim in life and do a fantastic job for the public good. These more than balence the shiftless footresters who give public service a bad name.
Most public servants are hampared by a risk averse culture imbued by our media, politicians and ourselves punishing mistakes but not recognising achievement. So we only have ourselves to blame
Back to house prices. the slow reduction in public sector jobs will mean a long drawn out recesion and house price decline - unless 'Dave' decides on a big axe when he gets in power next year, but i doubt he has the backbone for that. They will probably reduce numbers gradually by wastege as 'will' pionted out then cut thier pay in real terms as the public sector jobs become more attractive compared to the private sector.
13. george monsoon said...
I have to be careful how I word this, for fear that my employer is reading but...
I work in an environment where I am on a private sector contract, and work along side others who have migrated over from public sector contracts, and have kept their pensions and other benefits.
In the likely event that the company needs to make people redundant, it is far easier for them to lay off the publis sector people, because they don't have to honour any of the legacy pensiions promises, because we don't have any.
Fair? I think not.... ~Am I bitter about this.. Absolutely. I believe as someone stated earlier that these massive public funded pensions should be revoked, although I cannot see this getting past the front door of any board room.
14. george monsoon said...
should say " it is far easier for them to lay off the PRIVATE sector people"
sorry about that, but my anxiety got the better of my touch typing skills.
15. andrew said...
This is just a headline, and these cuts were promised 2 years ago and again last year, it hasn't happened and it will not happen before an election. Public sector pay, bonus and pensions are not fair on the rest of us, but unfortunately this issue will not be tackled while Labour is in power.
16. shipbuilder said...
I was really annoyed about the government handing trillions of public money to private business. So annoyed that I used forceful language in an internet forum.
But it's done now, so the solution is definitely to sack as many people as possible - it's the ONLY way that 'our' economy can be saved.
Really, I read it on the news and in a newspaper, neither of which have ANYTHING to to with the government or private business.
Really.
17. shipbuilder said...
I'm curious to know when we stop making sacrifices for 'our' economy and those who have more money that they can spend in multiple lifetimes step in to help?