Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
The Masked Tulip

These Public Sector Job Cuts

Recommended Posts

Apart from the fact that they keep talking about public sector job cuts but few actually appear to have been cut - lots of annoucements about proposed cuts of several hundred here, several hundred there, but no actual cuts happening as far as I can see...

I was chatting with a friend over the weekend and he was of the opinion that they will simply freeze public sector hiring - making it cr*ap for any job-seekers out there - but few of those in public sector jobs will actually lose their jobs.

Just listening to Mickey Clarke on Fivelive now and he was pointing out that the savers are being punished by low IRs and the people who have been greedy with mortgages are benefitting... I just wonder whether it is going to be a case, also, of those in public sector jobs beneftting and those currently out of work being left on the scrap-heap?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from the fact that they keep talking about public sector job cuts but few actually appear to have been cut - lots of annoucements about proposed cuts of several hundred here, several hundred there, but no actual cuts happening as far as I can see...

I was chatting with a friend over the weekend and he was of the opinion that they will simply freeze public sector hiring - making it cr*ap for any job-seekers out there - but few of those in public sector jobs will actually lose their jobs.

Just listening to Mickey Clarke on Fivelive now and he was pointing out that the savers are being punished by low IRs and the people who have been greedy with mortgages are benefitting... I just wonder whether it is going to be a case, also, of those in public sector jobs beneftting and those currently out of work being left on the scrap-heap?

I don't think any govt aims to put and keep people on the scrap heap.. it makes no sense.

But that to one side I would be surprised if most of the job cuts don't go through natural wastage. I also think depts will find a lot of efficiencies within themselves, it wouldn't surprise me after 12 years of very fat years under labour if pretty much every dept couldn't do essentailly the same job delivering pretty much the saem service on perhaps 5%-10% less money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any govt aims to put and keep people on the scrap heap.. it makes no sense.

But that to one side I would be surprised if most of the job cuts don't go through natural wastage. I also think depts will find a lot of efficiencies within themselves, it wouldn't surprise me after 12 years of very fat years under labour if pretty much every dept couldn't do essentailly the same job delivering pretty much the saem service on perhaps 5%-10% less money

....master of understatement...?....probably more like 20% to 30% minimum ...and some quangos we know will be 100%....what was Gordon Browns skill set for finance and common sense combined.... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anecdotal, but my dad was in the pub yesterday when a man came in shouting and going on about how his wife had just been made redundant. He was going on about the qualifications that she had and how much training she had gone through while doing this job. She 'worked' for the civil service and he was moaning about government cutbacks. The team of eight that she worked with has now been reduced down to three. She came in about 5 minutes later and they put £40 behind the bar. Hic.

So what have the other five been doing for the last 13 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be cuts. I work in the public sector myself and fully expect it. I don't expect to see massive rounds of sackings yet but a combination of recruitment cuts/natural wastage, maybe early retirement offers, nominal wage freezes for probably quite some years, and of course some fair-sized cuts, will go a long way. The public sector consulting work that my wife does will be even harder hit.

On the bright side though I cleaned the decking in my back garden today, I expect that's added at least five grand onto the value of my pwoperdee, so several weeks' wages. I'll make two or three times that if I can shift those last few green/algae bits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be cuts. I work in the public sector myself and fully expect it. I don't expect to see massive rounds of sackings yet but a combination of recruitment cuts/natural wastage, maybe early retirement offers, nominal wage freezes for probably quite some years, and of course some fair-sized cuts, will go a long way. The public sector consulting work that my wife does will be even harder hit.

On the bright side though I cleaned the decking in my back garden today, I expect that's added at least five grand onto the value of my pwoperdee, so several weeks' wages. I'll make two or three times that if I can shift those last few green/algae bits.

You make an interessting point about many of the cost cuts potentially hitting the private secotor harder than the public sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You make an interessting point about many of the cost cuts potentially hitting the private secotor harder than the public sector.

...that element of the private sector needs to turn their skills to enterprise...instead of feeding from a golden 'Brown' hen.... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what have the other five been doing for the last 13 years?

the right thing to help hard working families?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any govt aims to put and keep people on the scrap heap.. it makes no sense.

But that to one side I would be surprised if most of the job cuts don't go through natural wastage. I also think depts will find a lot of efficiencies within themselves, it wouldn't surprise me after 12 years of very fat years under labour if pretty much every dept couldn't do essentailly the same job delivering pretty much the saem service on perhaps 5%-10% less money

There are hugh disparities between authorities and individual departments. A few years ago I worked for a rural local authority and in a six year period it went from 600 FTE to 300 FTE, some depts. ended up only part staffed.

At the coal face there was little money for anything, however the chief exec and head of HR managed to make the infamous list for earning more than the PM, so there was cash about for some.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262692/1-250-council-chiefs-100k-plus-31-earn-PM.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any govt aims to put and keep people on the scrap heap.. it makes no sense.

But that to one side I would be surprised if most of the job cuts don't go through natural wastage. I also think depts will find a lot of efficiencies within themselves, it wouldn't surprise me after 12 years of very fat years under labour if pretty much every dept couldn't do essentailly the same job delivering pretty much the saem service on perhaps 5%-10% less money

There are hugh disparities between authorities and individual departments. A few years ago I worked for a rural local authority and in a six year period it went from 600 FTE to 300 FTE, some depts. ended up only part staffed.

At the coal face there was little money for anything, however the chief exec and head of HR managed to make the infamous list for earning more than the PM, so there was cash about for some.

http://www.dailymail...31-earn-PM.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be cuts. I work in the public sector myself and fully expect it. I don't expect to see massive rounds of sackings yet but a combination of recruitment cuts/natural wastage, maybe early retirement offers, nominal wage freezes for probably quite some years, and of course some fair-sized cuts, will go a long way. The public sector consulting work that my wife does will be even harder hit.

On the bright side though I cleaned the decking in my back garden today, I expect that's added at least five grand onto the value of my pwoperdee, so several weeks' wages. I'll make two or three times that if I can shift those last few green/algae bits.

Public sector employee turnover is a bit higher than people imagine and in recent years many new clerical worker hires have been on temporary fixed term contracts particularly in the Civil service (something many of the public sector haters on this site are completely oblivious about as they are all trapped in some 1970s time warp). Add in the fact that even under the supposedly benevolent Brown regime many departments had head count cuts built into their projections I think the number of state sector workers will fall quite fast. People also need to remember that cuts are going to hit that hidden public sector workforce of private consultants and out sourcing companies who have taken an ever larger share of public expenditure in recent years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People also need to remember that cuts are going to hit that hidden public sector workforce of private consultants and out sourcing companies who have taken an ever larger share of public expenditure in recent years.

....yeah ....time this was cut ....per diem rates ...astronomical ...just because the Nuliebour Government did not have a financial brain ....easy to outsource to vulture consultants ....projects which should have been covered from within ....the brainless Nuliebour wonders..... :rolleyes:

Edited by South Lorne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People also need to remember that cuts are going to hit that hidden public sector workforce of private consultants and out sourcing companies who have taken an ever larger share of public expenditure in recent years.

The private consultants sponge lots off the public sector, often just for telling bosses what the frontline staff knew anyway!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The private consultants sponge lots off the public sector, often just for telling bosses what the frontline staff knew anyway!!

...yes ....which the bosses if they were doing their jobs right should know ...plenty of high level sacking due ...ineptitude must reign ...consultants love this stupidity.....keep them stupid and we will be hired forever ....£1000 per day or whatever.... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was chatting with a friend over the weekend and he was of the opinion that they will simply freeze public sector hiring - making it cr*ap for any job-seekers out there - but few of those in public sector jobs will actually lose their jobs.

The thing I dislike about this approach is that gaps appear randomly and in an uncoordinated fashion. Nevermind actually managing the thing properly, just wait for a few people to leave and then hope their jobs weren't important ones. Brilliant. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing I dislike about this approach is that gaps appear randomly and in an uncoordinated fashion. Nevermind actually managing the thing properly, just wait for a few people to leave and then hope their jobs weren't important ones. Brilliant. :rolleyes:

...agreed ..that's the thickos approach to leadership and management .... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any govt aims to put and keep people on the scrap heap.. it makes no sense.

But that to one side I would be surprised if most of the job cuts don't go through natural wastage. I also think depts will find a lot of efficiencies within themselves, it wouldn't surprise me after 12 years of very fat years under labour if pretty much every dept couldn't do essentailly the same job delivering pretty much the saem service on perhaps 5%-10% less money

There are hugh disparities between authorities and individual departments. A few years ago I worked for a rural local authority and in a six year period it went from 600 FTE to 300 FTE, some depts. ended up only part staffed.

At the coal face there was little money for anything, however the chief exec and head of HR managed to make the infamous list for earning more than the PM, so there was cash about for some.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262692/1-250-council-chiefs-100k-plus-31-earn-PM.html

Oh I'd agree some areas of govt have grown greater degrees of wastage than others, others have not chosen the most cost efficient way to do things and still others are probably hoorifically overmanned.. it won't be the same solution for all..... in many ways setting the budget lower at the top forces the various depts to cull costs effectively but either through changing purchasing habits, altering employment costs , stopping services etc BUT the problem with doing the cut via a top down budget is that you are asking those who were happy to waste the cash to suddenly propose a solution.... I wonder if they are capable of it... but the other point is the cuts cannot be done effectively by micro managing it from the top down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from the fact that they keep talking about public sector job cuts but few actually appear to have been cut - lots of annoucements about proposed cuts of several hundred here, several hundred there, but no actual cuts happening as far as I can see...

I was chatting with a friend over the weekend and he was of the opinion that they will simply freeze public sector hiring - making it cr*ap for any job-seekers out there - but few of those in public sector jobs will actually lose their jobs.

Just listening to Mickey Clarke on Fivelive now and he was pointing out that the savers are being punished by low IRs and the people who have been greedy with mortgages are benefitting... I just wonder whether it is going to be a case, also, of those in public sector jobs beneftting and those currently out of work being left on the scrap-heap?

Apparently Humphrey told DC that by cutting actual jobs more money would have to be spent on the civil service because fewer jobs would lead to more hiring to make up the slack caused by inefficiency which means that by actually hiring more civil servants the deficit would be reduced as productivity trends would narrow the gap between actual expenditure and hiring new people which in turn would stimulate savings and cut down on the waste that would follow if less jobs were in existence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently Humphrey told DC that by cutting actual jobs more money would have to be spent on the civil service because fewer jobs would lead to more hiring to make up the slack caused by inefficiency which means that by actually hiring more civil servants the deficit would be reduced as productivity trends would narrow the gap between actual expenditure and hiring new people which in turn would stimulate savings and cut down on the waste that would follow if less jobs were in existence.

blink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can tell you that hiring has already been frozen in our local authority for some time. This means that when people lower down the heirarchy (the people who actually do work for their money) leave, they are not replaced, which leaves more workload for remaining staff. If a job-share partner leaves, the remaining partner is forced to work full-time, presumably.

Edited by blankster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing I dislike about this approach is that gaps appear randomly and in an uncoordinated fashion. Nevermind actually managing the thing properly, just wait for a few people to leave and then hope their jobs weren't important ones. Brilliant. :rolleyes:

I mentioned this on another thread.

The Home Office has just announced a total recruitment freeze. The problem is that the Labour government got into the habit of hiring frontline workers, or workers who actually do the work that is needed to be done, on temporary contracts for six months or just shy of a year. What the freeze will mean is that these guys do not get their contracts renewed so will go, while the extraneous staff on permanent contracts will stay. We will end up with a public sector made up of loads of chiefs and no indians.

But the problem of overstaffed government departments does need to be tackled, but Labour's ideas about how to go about employing people in the public sector make the problem twice as hard to solve (largely because Labour's solutions to any issue that arose was to announce the creation of a body to deal with it). The sheer weight of the managerial tier in the public sector is drowing the system and the services offered, but the structure of many departments now means that the real workers are most likely to go.

I have had a lot of exposure to what has gone on in the public sector since 1998, and, to be honest, I feel that Labour instituted a system of structure that was always destined to bring down the public sector at some point. The channels by which private entities (not meaning welfare claimants here) can milk the system in not very illegal ways is astonishing, and tantamount to a style of corruption you often only find in developing countries -- for example, legal aid is a joke.

I get really angry when the left and Labour go on about "protecting frontline services" and "cuts=unemployment" because the one thing Labour did in the last 13 years was undermine these roles to the point of idiocy -- hurting both the public and themselves as government. The sheer number of times I've seen a department hire staff on temp contracts, train them up and then not renew their contracts just when they are able to do the work in question is unbelievable. No wonder there are so many backlogs across the public sector.

Besides, it is time for government to rethink exactly what the state is supposed to provide and do. It's time to get realistic. The state should not be funding yoga classes for public sector workers at a national conference (this is true), nor should it be funding bodies that dream up new ways of working for local government. The junket has got to stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...that element of the private sector needs to turn their skills to enterprise...instead of feeding from a golden 'Brown' hen.... :rolleyes:

+ 1.......for all of us to survive costs/debt will have to be kept down, we then wouldn't need such a big income to survive...people have been living and spending what they earn and more instead of putting something away to support the future, growth in our industries, infrastructure, and fuel to sustain as all into the future.....too many short term gains only create long term pain, will have to get used to learning to live with less, more will have to start managing their money effectively and becoming less wasteful with our valuable resources....make do and mend.... something we will soon have to get used to living with again.....things could have been different, but the powers that be have fixed it to suit their own agenda. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mentioned this on another thread.

The Home Office has just announced a total recruitment freeze. The problem is that the Labour government got into the habit of hiring frontline workers, or workers who actually do the work that is needed to be done, on temporary contracts for six months or just shy of a year. What the freeze will mean is that these guys do not get their contracts renewed so will go, while the extraneous staff on permanent contracts will stay. We will end up with a public sector made up of loads of chiefs and no indians.

But the problem of overstaffed government departments does need to be tackled, but Labour's ideas about how to go about employing people in the public sector make the problem twice as hard to solve (largely because Labour's solutions to any issue that arose was to announce the creation of a body to deal with it). The sheer weight of the managerial tier in the public sector is drowing the system and the services offered, but the structure of many departments now means that the real workers are most likely to go.

I have had a lot of exposure to what has gone on in the public sector since 1998, and, to be honest, I feel that Labour instituted a system of structure that was always destined to bring down the public sector at some point. The channels by which private entities (not meaning welfare claimants here) can milk the system in not very illegal ways is astonishing, and tantamount to a style of corruption you often only find in developing countries -- for example, legal aid is a joke.

I get really angry when the left and Labour go on about "protecting frontline services" and "cuts=unemployment" because the one thing Labour did in the last 13 years was undermine these roles to the point of idiocy -- hurting both the public and themselves as government. The sheer number of times I've seen a department hire staff on temp contracts, train them up and then not renew their contracts just when they are able to do the work in question is unbelievable. No wonder there are so many backlogs across the public sector.

Besides, it is time for government to rethink exactly what the state is supposed to provide and do. It's time to get realistic. The state should not be funding yoga classes for public sector workers at a national conference (this is true), nor should it be funding bodies that dream up new ways of working for local government. The junket has got to stop.

I may be getting into TFH area, but i believe that the what they have done exceeds incompetence and is probably deliberate, in an effort to run things into the ground, so they can turn around later, point to the mess and say that it would be much better privatised.

it's all part of the EU plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 152 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

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.