Coming Public Sector Cutbacks Will Hit Economy

[blankster]

Most people in the public sector work hard, make a valuable contribution to society and are not especially well-paid. I've worked in the public sector and I know many people who do so at pesesnt.

However, there is one area where public employees have, until recently, been in a better position than private sector ones, and that is job security. But now we're seeing the likelihood of tens of thousands of redundancies in the public sector, a lot of people are worried about their futures. This will have the effect that they won't want to spend money or take on loans. If you tell 100 people that 10 of them will be made redundant, that will worry 100 people, not just 10. This is certain to hit the general economy significantly, I reckon.

[Oliver Sutton]

Most people in the public sector work hard, make a valuable contribution to society and are not especially well-paid. I've worked in the public sector and I know many people who do so at pesesnt.

However, there is one area where public employees have, until recently, been in a better position than private sector ones, and that is job security. But now we're seeing the likelihood of tens of thousands of redundancies in the public sector, a lot of people are worried about their futures. This will have the effect that they won't want to spend money or take on loans. If you tell 100 people that 10 of them will be made redundant, that will worry 100 people, not just 10. This is certain to hit the general economy significantly, I reckon.

Plus an increasing number of private sector jobs also depend on public spending.

[The Masked Tulip]

Most people in the public sector work hard, make a valuable contribution to society and are not especially well-paid. I've worked in the public sector and I know many people who do so at pesesnt.

However, there is one area where public employees have, until recently, been in a better position than private sector ones, and that is job security. But now we're seeing the likelihood of tens of thousands of redundancies in the public sector, a lot of people are worried about their futures. This will have the effect that they won't want to spend money or take on loans. If you tell 100 people that 10 of them will be made redundant, that will worry 100 people, not just 10. This is certain to hit the general economy significantly, I reckon.

Actually, just from talking to the people I know who work in the public sector the vast majority are actually in denial.

Even though they know there are talks of cuts coming, various articles about hundreds of job cuts appearing in the local papers, etc, all but one - and the one is a former private sector worker who was made redundant before going into the public sector - are under the delusion that it will be someone else, and not them, who is made redundant.

To be frank, there is a mix of arrogance and entitlement here as they assume that it is the other person, the colleague, the people in the other department, etc, who are considered expendable where they themselves are not expendable.

In short, they know that cuts are coming but believe it will not be them who is one of the many made redundant.

[Si1]

Actually, just from talking to the people I know who work in the public sector the vast majority are actually in denial.

Even though they know there are talks of cuts coming, various articles about hundreds of job cuts appearing in the local papers, etc, all but one - and the one is a former private sector worker who was made redundant before going into the public sector - are under the delusion that it will be someone else, and not them, who is made redundant.

To be frank, there is a mix of arrogance and entitlement here as they assume that it is the other person, the colleague, the people in the other department, etc, who are considered expendable where they themselves are not expendable.

In short, they know that cuts are coming but believe it will not be them who is one of the many made redundant.

+1

those I know also think they are low-paid, which they are not

[Game_Over]

Most people in the public sector work hard, make a valuable contribution to society and are not especially well-paid. I've worked in the public sector and I know many people who do so at pesesnt.

However, there is one area where public employees have, until recently, been in a better position than private sector ones, and that is job security. But now we're seeing the likelihood of tens of thousands of redundancies in the public sector, a lot of people are worried about their futures. This will have the effect that they won't want to spend money or take on loans. If you tell 100 people that 10 of them will be made redundant, that will worry 100 people, not just 10. This is certain to hit the general economy significantly, I reckon.

The fact is the money has just run out - same as last time.

Whatever is going to happen will happen - whatever anyone says or does IMHO

And the longer the inevitable is delayed the worse it will be

It's going to be grim.

Have a nice day

[Bloo Loo]

Most people in the public sector work hard, make a valuable contribution to society and are not especially well-paid. I've worked in the public sector and I know many people who do so at pesesnt.

However, there is one area where public employees have, until recently, been in a better position than private sector ones, and that is job security. But now we're seeing the likelihood of tens of thousands of redundancies in the public sector, a lot of people are worried about their futures. This will have the effect that they won't want to spend money or take on loans. If you tell 100 people that 10 of them will be made redundant, that will worry 100 people, not just 10. This is certain to hit the general economy significantly, I reckon.

yes, spoke to a friend today...his department is to cease to exist in July.

there are about 60 of them.

He says a few "consultants" have been brought in to oversee the change...He knows that of the 60, 20 are going...the rest are going to "admin" jobs....

two things....they are ALL worried as the OP suggests....and they are all bemused at the extra expense on the consultants.

As far as he knows....NO MANAGEMENT REDUNDANCIES are in the bake.

this, of course, is all to be expected.

[The Masked Tulip]

+1

those I know also think they are low-paid, which they are not

I know a nurse who works for a consultant in Cardiff - 30K a year, 6 weeks holiday plus bank holiday on top, Mon - Fri 8.30 till 4PM. No weekend working.

Basically, and she admits this herself, all she does is walk out into the waiting room, brings next patient into consulting room, is present whilst patient sees consultant and then shows patient out. The consultant does all the talking and answers questions that patient has. She is, effectively, a glorified receptionist.

However, she thinks she is hard-done by and works damn hard. She did leave her job for 6 months to work in a Welsh NHS QUANGO, partially privatised, but could not hack the pressure and so got her old job back.

Interestingly, she has a colleague who apparently has trouble swallowing and so has arranged, allegedly, to work 4 long days instead of 5 normal days - something to do with the stress making her swallowing problems worse, so I was told, and so she got the 4 long days.

Guess what she allegedly does on her now free 5th day - yes, you got it, she goes and works in the nurse bank. (That is basically nurse contracting to you non NHS types).

[Olebrum]

Public sector workers tend to be more highly qualified than their private sector equivalents, they'll just push out the

useless dross in the private sector.

[The Masked Tulip]

Public sector workers tend to be more highly qualified than their private sector equivalents, they'll just push out the

useless dross in the private sector.

[tinker]

I know someone who was 'retired' early on a nice pension, who weeks later is employed as an when in a consultancy role. (This is an admin role BTW).

Rinse and repeat all over the country.

The waste and piss-taking is scandalous. What really hacks me off here is that there are people in need of work out there, some quite desperate, yet this goes on.

The whole public sector is too big, too cosy.

[Ponzi]

Well as the excellent head of security said in Avatar, you are no longer in Kansas...welcome to the real world.

All public jobs are non-productive, that does not mean to say some are vital and necessary for society - a great many are.

But right now we have a sickening level of waste, masses of non-jobs and these are quite highly paid, and also until recently, very secure. The pensions are for those in the private sector can only dream about.

So I say bring on savage cuts of 20%.

I don't want to see a single diversity officer or equality officer in post by 2012.

[Eddie_79]

Most people in the public sector work hard, make a valuable contribution to society and are not especially well-paid. I've worked in the public sector and I know many people who do so at pesesnt.

However, there is one area where public employees have, until recently, been in a better position than private sector ones, and that is job security. But now we're seeing the likelihood of tens of thousands of redundancies in the public sector, a lot of people are worried about their futures. This will have the effect that they won't want to spend money or take on loans. If you tell 100 people that 10 of them will be made redundant, that will worry 100 people, not just 10. This is certain to hit the general economy significantly, I reckon.

A mate of mine works in the NHS and they are starting to get rumours about redundancies in their department - none of them have ever had the threat of losing their jobs and it is quite a shock to them. The front line staff in his department are already over worked and under staffed, and there are obviously going to be cuts in the level of care the patients receive if staff cuts are made.

The bosses are bringing in management consultants and having a consultancy period where the staff are asked how to improve the service. The staff will tell them what's wrong - they have to spend time filling in in a forms every time they do something, and need to write pointless portfolios to prove to someone who doesn't have a clue what their job involves that they are capable of doing something for which they have been trained and have been doing perfectly well for years. The results of the consultancy will then be ignored by the managers as it would involve reducing pointless bureaucracy and management job cuts - nobody wants to admit that sacking people in a similar job would improve efficiency and cut the wage bill as the idea might catch on! Instead the managers will make redundancies to the front line staff and when the service deteriorates they will have another consultancy period to decide what to do.......

[The Masked Tulip]

A mate of mine works in the NHS and they are starting to get rumours about redundancies in their department - none of them have ever had the threat of losing their jobs and it is quite a shock to them. The front line staff in his department are already over worked and under staffed, and there are obviously going to be cuts in the level of care the patients receive if staff cuts are made.

The bosses are bringing in management consultants and having a consultancy period where the staff are asked how to improve the service. The staff will tell them what's wrong - they have to spend time filling in in a forms every time they do something, and need to write pointless portfolios to prove to someone who doesn't have a clue what their job involves that they are capable of doing something for which they have been trained and have been doing perfectly well for years. The results of the consultancy will then be ignored by the managers as it would involve reducing pointless bureaucracy and management job cuts - nobody wants to admit that sacking people in a similar job would improve efficiency and cut the wage bill as the idea might catch on! Instead the managers will make redundancies to the front line staff and when the service deteriorates they will have another consultancy period to decide what to do.......

The BBC has more admin staff than programme-makers.

The BBC has more HR personnel, or whatever they call themselves this week, than programme-makers.

Many NHS trusts have as many admin staff as they have doctors and nurses.

I think about 1,200000 people work in the NHS but only about half a million are actually involved in patient care.

[richcrashman]

I know someone who has worked in various roles in a few Trusts. Roles were support to senior management (chief exec, etc) and more recently in a managerial role. My friend has a private sector background.

I just can not believe what i hear.

At al levels there are some staff who just take to the max. Be this perks or sick time off.

One chief Exec did hardly any work, spent most of the time dining in restaurants at our expense and used to spend loads on having his favourite flowers delivered to the office every week.

HR departments that are not interested in dealing with staff taking the P*ss. If you don't provide concrete proof to HR they are not interested and will certainly not investigate further.

I know of one person (management on 45K plus perks) who has taken 6 months off per year (the max allowed on full pay) for at least the last 3 years. It's a week for a cold here, 2 weeks stress there, 3 days the kids have a cold. (figure into this the partner only works part time), is that a snow flake? another 2 days, etc, etc. To put the cream on the cake they collect their on call bonus etc even while they are not working and of course keep the vehicle provided.

I hear that extra days off to cover school holiday child care is the norm.

I think there is a deep seated fealing of entitlement for many who work in the NHS and they are a millstone around its neck.

[Tin Foil Hat]

The BBC has more admin staff than programme-makers.

The BBC has more HR personnel, or whatever they call themselves this week, than programme-makers.

Many NHS trusts have as many admin staff as they have doctors and nurses.

I think about 1,200000 people work in the NHS but only about half a million are actually involved in patient care.

Nah there's half a million RN's so add on the medics and AHP's and unqualifieds it will be way more clinical than admin.

[ingermany]

I guess it is becoming apparent that the REAL function of the NHS is simply to provide incomes to those who work in it. For sure, 60 years of the NHS has not made the working population any healthier, or productive.

[huw]

All public jobs are non-productive, that does not mean to say some are vital and necessary for society - a great many are.

Hard to see how you can reconcile those two statements -- if a function is vital for society then it's productive; the end-of-period balance sheet looks better with the function done, than with it not done.

More broadly, a bushel of wheat produced on a collectivised farm is worth the same as a bushel of wheat produced on a private farm (yes, the collective farm might well be less productive, but that's a difference of degree, rather than an absolute value/no-value distinction).

On the thread topic: a debt-fuelled economy must inevitably shrink once the borrowing stops. Shrinking demand from the public sector will be one aspect of this; re-building of private-sector balance sheets will be another. It would be naive to expect to be able to start living within our means, while keeping demand/consumption the same as it was.

[mightytharg]

I'm not sure why the cutbacks would hit the economy,

Surely the money saved by the cutbacks will just go into the private sector instead, leading to a new dawn of opportunity, the end of the depression and a golden future for all?

[Snugglybear]

I guess it is becoming apparent that the REAL function of the NHS is simply to provide incomes to those who work in it. For sure, 60 years of the NHS has not made the working population any healthier, or productive.

Cancer survival rates?

Death rates from communicable diseases?

And that forum favourite, the number of people living for decades after retirement age?

Suggest you compare and contrast life expectancy rates and child death rates from the thirties and the noughties.

[jaynewcastle]

Many Govt depts are having to cut staff, eg HMRC, 25% staffing reduction by 2011, from 2007 staffing levels.

[Tired of Waiting]

Most people in the public sector work hard, make a valuable contribution to society and are not especially well-paid. I've worked in the public sector and I know many people who do so at pesesnt.

However, there is one area where public employees have, until recently, been in a better position than private sector ones, and that is job security. But now we're seeing the likelihood of tens of thousands of redundancies in the public sector, a lot of people are worried about their futures. This will have the effect that they won't want to spend money or take on loans. If you tell 100 people that 10 of them will be made redundant, that will worry 100 people, not just 10. This is certain to hit the general economy significantly, I reckon.

There is no more money. And the government will not have lenders either soon. And the bank of England will not be able to print more sterlings either. No choice.

[Tired of Waiting]

I guess it is becoming apparent that the REAL function of the NHS is simply to provide incomes to those who work in it. For sure, 60 years of the NHS has not made the working population any healthier, or productive.

Brave.

And essentially correct. A British GP earns twice what a French GP earns. And the service is much worse. And we have to act very gratefully when seen by them.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Tired of waiting

[tahoma]

I'm not sure why the cutbacks would hit the economy,

Surely the money saved by the cutbacks will just go into the private sector instead, leading to a new dawn of opportunity, the end of the depression and a golden future for all?

Presuming you are not just taking the pee, there is truth in this. Remember that an awful lot of most public sector work is just expensive dole, whereby people are paid more than they would otherwise get in Job Seekers Allowance to shuffle paper and tick clipboards, rather than sit watching Trisha. They then spend their allowance - which they call a salary - in the wider economy.

On the plus side, this gives GDP an artificial boost and makes unemployment look more rosy. On the other hand, this activity adds to an already nosebleedingly massive deficit despite higher taxes, which subtract from what private individuals can save and spend themselves. Believe it or not, people do not immediately go and burn surplus cash in the garden incinerator if it is not removed beforehand by the taxman. Some public sector activity also crowds out the private sector, which could do the job cheaper, quicker and better.

Whine about public sector bashing all you want, but balance will be restored somehow. Whether it is through determined action to cut taxes and government expenditure, or by IMF / bond market diktat, is yet to be seen.

[winkie]

It is not good when anyone loses their job...all we are asking for is value for money.

[MrB]

Interesting to hear a few NHS anecdotals.

When I worked for the NHS the biggest waste of money was on private conultants, and IT projects that were ill-conceived to the point of idiocy.

I wonder how many tub thumping free market types (I am one btw) depend directly / indirectly on the abysmal management and outrageous procurement in the public sector for their incomes.

Raise your hand if you do - I'm guessing it's a lot of you.