Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
cashinmattress

Huge Public Sector Job Cuts On The Cards Over The Next Five Years, Says The Cipd

Recommended Posts

Huge public sector job cuts on the cards over the next five years, says the CIPD

The public-sector jobs market has yet to feel the full impact of the recession, but around 350,000 jobs could be slashed in the next five years, according to predictions by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

The CIPD's current estimate is that government fiscal plans will result in 350,000 job cuts between 2010 and 2011 and between 2014 and 2015. This will be preceded by around 30,000 jobs cuts in local authorities in the next year.

John Philpott, chief economist and director of public policy at the CIPD, commented: "Cuts on this scale would still leave the public sector workforce bigger that it was when Gordon Brown became chancellor of the Exchequer in 1997, leaving ample scope for a new government of whatever hue to take an even bigger axe to public-sector jobs after the general election."

Cuts in public spending will also have an indirect impact on private sector jobs, Philpott warned, although from 2011 onward it is hoped the economy will be strong enough to see renewed job creation. He added: "However, the jobs recovery will need to be robust to prevent public-sector job losses adding to what by then will be an already large unemployment pool. And either way the impending ‘age of austerity' means that the greater job security and relative generous pay and pensions packages enjoyed by public sector workers will soon be a thing of the past."

How many of these folks finding themselves in dole queues will recognize the irony?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So instead of being on the Govt payroll they'll just shift to the dole payroll (no difference really).

I hope all these people find private sector jobs but there's more chance of Newcastle getting promoted back to the premier AND winning the champions league + FA cup + another trophy of choice the year after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good, will be a pleasure seeing how they enjoy working for their wage. No more full sick pay, No more industrial injury full pay, Less holidays, Less flexi time, No more 37.5 hour week :lol:

Welcome to the real work, no more security, your be on the same level playing field as me :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don’t need to fire a single person.

They could get rid of the 350k by simply putting a hiring freeze on as some 150-200,000 people retire from government jobs pa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So instead of being on the Govt payroll they'll just shift to the dole payroll (no difference really).

Once unemployed they will be a much smaller burden on the taxpayer both now and in the future since they won't be accruing any more unfunded pension entitlement. In addition there may well be a reduction in the bureaucractic costs they impose on others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
although from 2011 onward it is hoped the economy will be strong enough to see renewed job creation. He added: "However, the jobs recovery will need to be robust to prevent public-sector job losses adding to what by then will be an already large unemployment pool.

:blink:

So the public sector structure has to be in place - (rebuilt or never left) - before any thought of private sector (re)-employment?!

He is not really saying that is he? - Tell me i'm just being an ageing paranoid cynic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huge public sector job cuts on the cards over the next five years, says the CIPD

Let's hope they include one I saw quoted in one of the weekend papers: some council or other willing to pay £35K pa for someone (forget the daft job title) to 'represent our interests in Europe.'

As the article said, haven't they just elected two MEPs to do precisely that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the difference is on average about 20k a year

edit to add............plus benefits.

make it a million and we might jsut be getting near to the sort of cuts that are needed.tax receipts are going to plummet,the amount of people needing help is going to skyrocket,there is no way we can carry this level of public pay roll through a deep recession/depression.

nah - people on the dole do less harm, many public sector jobs offer negative productivity...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember before the usual assumptions start coming thick and fast:

Not all public sector jobs are worthless non-jobs.

Not all private sector jobs are a benefit to society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just remember before the usual assumptions start coming thick and fast:

Not all public sector jobs are worthless non-jobs.

Not all private sector jobs are a benefit to society.

I hope my compulsory 3-day Communications Skills for Consultants Course ( yes really) next week doesn't get cancelled. I pencilled in a good sleep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huge public sector job cuts on the cards over the next five years, says the CIPD

How many of these folks finding themselves in dole queues will recognize the irony?

Great news.. I do feel sorry for those being made unemployed but we just cannot afford the bloated public service we have... 350,000 would be a good slug to take out (probably something like £25bn in total overhead or about 4% of expenditure... next up final salsry pensions..... add those to things like quangos, badger preservation and innecessary overseas aid, the odd £bn IT project being cancelled, ID card scapping etc etc and we should be well on the road to having our actual expenditure falling by 10% which is a good start. Hopefully some progress will have also been made on reforming the welfare state as well by then and we would have found a way to stop collecting taxes which cost is more to collect than we earn, to cut out a great deal of the fraud, and to try and halt payments to those not in need... everyone from people "pretending " to be too sick to work to the richer end of society who would put up little fuss if their winter fuel allowance and child benefit went.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good, will be a pleasure seeing how they enjoy working for their wage. No more full sick pay, No more industrial injury full pay, Less holidays, Less flexi time, No more 37.5 hour week :lol:

Welcome to the real work, no more security, your be on the same level playing field as me :lol:

Why on earth do you work in the private sector if it's that cruddy and the public sector is so feather-bedded? :huh: Surely with that list of advantages anyone with any smarts would have jumped to the public sector long ago?

It's something I always ask when teachers / firemen / police / GPs are in the firing line - I never get a straight answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a public sector worker myself I am of course a VI, but I feel like someone should stick up for the other side of the economy. Of course we are not heroic wealth producers in the way that people who sell bubblegum on ebay are - after all, knee operations and an education for your kids and firemen are free aren't they, so that means they don't count as economic activity? The deal is that you pay us taxes, and we give you these services in return. If you think the country doesn't need these things, or that the private sector could provide these services in a more efficient and equitable way, then you need your head examined. Yes maybe there are a few lesbian community co-ordinators out there that everybody shouts about, but how many are there really and how many non-jobs are there hidden away in big companies?

In my own part of the public sector (medical research at a university) there are maybe 5 admin staff in a building of 80 people, a 1:8 ratio of managers to people in the laboratory, and we have two 1 hour meetings a week and spend the rest of the time doing research. Most people are on 1-3 year fixed contracts and have to apply for a grant from the funding agency for more money if they want more time, meaning they need to produce experimental data and research publications to justify their position. There is a great deal of competition for funding and most applications are rejected. The pay scale (including London weighting) goes from 15-20k for non-degree technicians, 20-25k for junior staff (BSc's in their early 20s) to 30-40k for PhD level scientists (aged 25-40+) to 50-55k for a professor. The money is enough to be happy (although of course not enough to buy a house at mental peak prices) and the work is interesting and emotionally satisfying. It seems to me that there is not a lot of fat to be cut, so cuts will mean fewer scientists and less progress in medical research. If that's what society wants then by all means go ahead, but don't come crying to me about nobody producing anything real in the UK. The research we are doing is not the kind of thing private companies would invest in, for the simple reason that basic medical research is by nature unpredictable, our main product is knowledge which is unfeasible to price and control, and any advances made will only bear fruit in 15, 20, or more years down the line, so is not usually attractive to investors.

No doubt there are plenty of office non-jobs in local government, the NHS, IT procurement etc which represent poor value for money and should be cut. My concern is that sweeping 10% public sector cuts across the board will not fall on those people, especially since they are the ones who administer the budgets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest absolutezero
Why on earth do you work in the private sector if it's that cruddy and the public sector is so feather-bedded? :huh: Surely with that list of advantages anyone with any smarts would have jumped to the public sector long ago?

It's something I always ask when teachers / firemen / police / GPs are in the firing line - I never get a straight answer.

They usually claim to not want to be a drain on the economy.

"I couldn't be a parasite like that".

What they really mean is they couldn't get an interview, never mind the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest absolutezero
As a public sector worker myself I am of course a VI, but I feel like someone should stick up for the other side of the economy. Of course we are not heroic wealth producers in the way that people who sell bubblegum on ebay are - after all, knee operations and an education for your kids and firemen are free aren't they, so that means they don't count as economic activity? The deal is that you pay us taxes, and we give you these services in return. If you think the country doesn't need these things, or that the private sector could provide these services in a more efficient and equitable way, then you need your head examined. Yes maybe there are a few lesbian community co-ordinators out there that everybody shouts about, but how many are there really and how many non-jobs are there hidden away in big companies?

In my own part of the public sector (medical research at a university) there are maybe 5 admin staff in a building of 80 people, a 1:8 ratio of managers to people in the laboratory, and we have two 1 hour meetings a week and spend the rest of the time doing research. Most people are on 1-3 year fixed contracts and have to apply for a grant from the funding agency for more money if they want more time, meaning they need to produce experimental data and research publications to justify their position. There is a great deal of competition for funding and most applications are rejected. The pay scale (including London weighting) goes from 15-20k for non-degree technicians, 20-25k for junior staff (BSc's in their early 20s) to 30-40k for PhD level scientists (aged 25-40+) to 50-55k for a professor. The money is enough to be happy (although of course not enough to buy a house at mental peak prices) and the work is interesting and emotionally satisfying. It seems to me that there is not a lot of fat to be cut, so cuts will mean fewer scientists and less progress in medical research. If that's what society wants then by all means go ahead, but don't come crying to me about nobody producing anything real in the UK. The research we are doing is not the kind of thing private companies would invest in, for the simple reason that basic medical research is by nature unpredictable, our main product is knowledge which is unfeasible to price and control, and any advances made will only bear fruit in 15, 20, or more years down the line, so is not usually attractive to investors.

No doubt there are plenty of office non-jobs in local government, the NHS, IT procurement etc which represent poor value for money and should be cut. My concern is that sweeping 10% public sector cuts across the board will not fall on those people, especially since they are the ones who administer the budgets.

Thanks for that but expect:

-the private sector could do it cheaper/better/more efficiently

-you're a parasite.

Most people on here seem to think all private sector workers are salts of the Earth and all public sector employees are scum. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for that but expect:

-the private sector could do it cheaper/better/more efficiently

-you're a parasite.

Most people on here seem to think all private sector workers are salts of the Earth and all public sector employees are scum. :rolleyes:

+1

Agree with Bearly Legal - plenty of non productive jobs in the private sector. Plenty of wealth creating or supporting jobs in the public sector. And vice versa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for that but expect:

-the private sector could do it cheaper/better/more efficiently

-you're a parasite.

Most people on here seem to think all private sector workers are salts of the Earth and all public sector employees are scum. :rolleyes:

You forgot that being a medical researcher he has no useful, productive skills and it will be impossible for him to work anywhere else or in any other country. After all, what has medical research ever done for us and when has it ever made anyone any money? If only he'd studied selling people double glazing, personalised number plates or advertising instead of taking the non-productive easy option. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You forgot that being a medical researcher he has no useful, productive skills and it will be impossible for him to work anywhere else or in any other country. After all, what has medical research ever done for us and when has it ever made anyone any money? If only he'd studied selling people double glazing, personalised number plates or advertising instead of taking the non-productive easy option. :rolleyes:

Hmmm, sadly she'd probably make more per hour in any of those other 'jobs'.

And that's with her fat cat clinical pay scale.

;)

Edited by apr400

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So instead of being on the Govt payroll they'll just shift to the dole payroll (no difference really).

You think benefits are going to continue at their current level? :blink:

Agree with those who say there are productive public sector jobs - we need to move beyond the definitions of "public" and "private" and instead define in terms of "contributor to society" and "parasite".

So firemen, nurses, engineers and tradesmen are "contributors"

Diversity outreach co-ordinators, management consultants, estate agents and lawyers are "parasites"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm, sadly she'd probably make more per hour in any of those other 'jobs'.

And that's with her fat cat clinical pay scale.

;)

Medical research is undoubtedly dominated by women, but I'm not one of them!

And scientists are not on clinical pay scales... As an aside, hospital doctors are not as well paid as people think they are. GPs on the other hand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
because public sector workers don't pay tax, right? :blink:

It could be argued that public sectors do not actually pay tax in the sense that they are merely returning government money from where their salary came.

Private capital pays for everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   285 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.