Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
The Masked Tulip

100,000 Jobs To Go By Spring

Recommended Posts

Guardian headline for tomorrow morning - 100,000 jobs to go by Spring.

No more details yet but just highlighted at the end of Newsnight. To be honest, fed up now with such news stories.

Edit:

According to Sky it is that 100,000 public sector workers will find out over Christmas that they will lose their jobs by the Spring.

I suppose this ties in with the 90 days that they appear to need to be given. Let them know by Jan 1 and they can be gone by end of this financial year in April.

Edit 2:

The Baroness somebody talking about this story on Sky now says that the article says that most of the jobs going will be in the North of England and in Wales.

Edited by The Masked Tulip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual it will be the front line services jobs cut not the non jobs, advertised for years and years in the Guardian.

Get rid of all these parasites who nanny everyone around with their self styled "qualifications" in how to be an out reach worker, trampoline operator, blah blah blah. Fire the lot of them.

Then let's get back to making things in this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some may also be due to new laws regarding the retirement age that come into force in April.

Currently, companies and the public sector are entitled to insist on retirement for employees that reach 'retirement age'. So, when you turn 65, your employer can tell you to clear your desk and leave.

Come 1 April 2011, and this will no longer be legal. Employees will be able to continue working for as long as they like, as long as they can do the job, and the job remains for them to do.

As a result, many public sector departments are going for a mass cull of employees ages 65 or over prior to April.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some may also be due to new laws regarding the retirement age that come into force in April.

Currently, companies and the public sector are entitled to insist on retirement for employees that reach 'retirement age'. So, when you turn 65, your employer can tell you to clear your desk and leave.

Come 1 April 2011, and this will no longer be legal. Employees will be able to continue working for as long as they like, as long as they can do the job, and the job remains for them to do.

As a result, many public sector departments are going for a mass cull of employees ages 65 or over prior to April.

They can't pick people based on age. The law doesn't allow it. I never knew that length of service is no longer considered when choosing people either, again agaisnt the law now. Pick people based on these the council will end up in court.

It's done on a mixture of performance,sickness,ability etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working link

At least 100,000 public servants will receive grim news over the Christmas holidays or soon after as councils, police forces and other public services race to meet a deadline of 1 January to formally announce job cuts.

An analysis of local authority documents reveals that the number of council redundancies directly resulting from the coalition's austerity measures is expected to break the 100,000 mark by early in the new year, fuelled by the swingeing cuts announced this week to councils' budgets and the pressure to start cutting before the new financial year in April.

This comes on top of the 33,000 drop in public sector jobs over the three months to October that was detailed yesterday in official unemployment data and is likely to lead to a torrent of "at risk" warning letters hitting doormats across the country in the next few weeks. The letters are a legal warning that your job could be at risk. After months of political warnings, the imminent bloodletting in town halls across the country is the first tangible sign of the government's austerity budget beginning to bite outside Whitehall.

Council chiefs must reduce posts by 31 March in order to start making savings in their new reduced budgets, but by law they have to give staff 90 days' notice, meaning up to 140 councils that have not yet announced planned redundancies may break the news over the Christmas holiday period.

"Thousands of local government workers face having their Christmas ruined by redundancy notices," said Brendan Barber, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, yesterday. "Councils in particular are bringing forward job losses in order to cope with the deep budget cuts that take effect next April."

Eighty-two of the UK's 433 councils have already issued HR1 forms, which set out upper estimates of the numbers of workers they expect to have to make redundant, informing employees that their jobs are now at risk. The current total, as calculated by the GMB union, is 76,000. The remaining councils are expected to follow suit over the next three weeks, though some are opting to stomach the extra costs of salaries into their new budgets to avoid the negative publicity of laying people off at Christmas.

Employers and unions at each council will then begin a series of negotiations aimed at avoiding compulsory redundancies, including voluntary redundancy, cancelling agency work contracts and implementing a recruitment freeze.

A flurry of new public sector redundancies will increase pressure on ministers. The government accepts predictions that 330,000 jobs will be lost in the public sector over the next four years, but insists that this will be compensated by a rise in private sector jobs.

Yesterday, however, the latest official employment statistics from the Office for National Statistics revealed a 35,000 rise in unemployment in the three months to October, mainly caused by 33,000 jobs lost from the public sector, while the private sector flatlined. Job cuts are falling hardest in the north-east and Wales, and more people are taking part-time jobs to avoid unemployment.

The increase in female joblessness was double that of men and the number of 16- to 24-year-olds out of work increased by 28,000 to 943,000, one of the highest figures since records began in 1992, giving a youth jobless rate of 19.8%.

Douglas Alexander, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said it was a result of George Osborne's "economic experiment". He said: "These worrying figures show that the private sector is not yet creating enough jobs to make up for the posts that are being cut in the public sector."

David Cameron admitted to the Commons during prime minister's question time to being "concerned" about the figures. "Of course anyone should be concerned, and I am concerned by a rise in unemployment," he said.

"We have got to get the private sector going, increase the number of jobs that are available. Over the last six months, we have seen 300,000 new private sector jobs. We need more of them, and keeping the economy out of the danger zone is the way to get them."

Job losses so far extend from the local authorities to Whitehall to quangos and government-funded charities. A quarter of government-backed charities and four our of 10 charities overall are expecting to make redundancies in the next year, a survey published today by the Charity Finance Directors Group, the Institute of Fundraising and consultants PWC finds.

Local authorities which have already announced their redundancy estimates include Lancashire, which expects up to 5,000 posts to go, Birmingham (5,000), Leeds (3,000) and Norfolk (3,000).

Paul Kenny, general secretary of the GMB, said: "Council finance committee meetings are being held this week at many of the other councils to finalise the issuing of formal notices of redundancies that will trigger a 90-day consultation process. There are troubled times ahead and a lot of families face a miserable Christmas and bleak prospects for 2011."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is merely the beginning of a terrible episode.

The increase in female joblessness was double that of men and the number of 16- to 24-year-olds out of work increased by 28,000 to 943,000, one of the highest figures since records began in 1992, giving a youth jobless rate of 19.8%

So, there you have it, nearly a million youngsters sitting idle. What a terrible waste of talent.

The politicians, especially Labour, should be ashamed of themselves. These figures should give the government every reason it needs to ban all immigration immediately. The government also needs to tax the crap out of companies that are outsourcing.

I'm astonished and disgusted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is merely the beginning of a terrible episode.

So, there you have it, nearly a million youngsters sitting idle. What a terrible waste of talent.

The politicians, especially Labour, should be ashamed of themselves. These figures should give the government every reason it needs to ban all immigration immediately. The government also needs to tax the crap out of companies that are outsourcing.

I'm astonished and disgusted.

Yes and the female rate is only going to get worse because more women than men do these council non-jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As usual it will be the front line services jobs cut not the non jobs, advertised for years and years in the Guardian.

Get rid of all these parasites who nanny everyone around with their self styled "qualifications" in how to be an out reach worker, trampoline operator, blah blah blah. Fire the lot of them.

Then let's get back to making things in this country.

The only way wet get back to making stuff in this country is if we drop our pay and conditions to that of the poorest Chindian. However, if we did that, we would need to see house prices (or rents) drop by 90% alongside commensurate falls in the cost of food and a total deregulation of the workplace etc etc etc.

Not as simple as folks think, I'm afraid. In fact, impossible without facing major insurrection. Better to just keep those house prices aloft, stick our fingers in our ears and hope all the bad stuff goes away....

Which it, wont of course...

Edited by tallguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some may also be due to new laws regarding the retirement age that come into force in April.

Currently, companies and the public sector are entitled to insist on retirement for employees that reach 'retirement age'. So, when you turn 65, your employer can tell you to clear your desk and leave.

Come 1 April 2011, and this will no longer be legal. Employees will be able to continue working for as long as they like, as long as they can do the job, and the job remains for them to do.

As a result, many public sector departments are going for a mass cull of employees ages 65 or over prior to April.

Great for me, at least, that is. I've just turned 63 and I want to keep on working. :)

I'm sorry for the people who will lose their jobs though. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can't pick people based on age. The law doesn't allow it. I never knew that length of service is no longer considered when choosing people either, again agaisnt the law now. Pick people based on these the council will end up in court.

It's done on a mixture of performance,sickness,ability etc etc.

So over 65's will hang on in their jobs and their employers will only be able to fire them if they can prove that they are incompetent. With the risk of tribunals and claims for unfair dismissal they will be very wary of doing this.

So younger employees who could possibly do the job better will be denied the opportunity and employers may be saddled with salary levels that are based on seniority rather than competency.

Sounds like a lose lose situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it would be a different story if they had to actually fund this with the welsh tax take.

It is quite scandalous IMPO. The lack of money was used as an excuse, IIRC, to chop lots of Arts organisations from the funding list... now those remaining get more...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is quite scandalous IMPO. The lack of money was used as an excuse, IIRC, to chop lots of Arts organisations from the funding list... now those remaining get more...

why is that the scandal? Lots of arts organisations should have been chopped, the only thing wrong here is that the remaining ones were given anything.

Wales is not exactly a wealthy country and it is living on English subsidies. The welsh government should not be allowed to spend any more than they take in taxes. It makes it a very bitter pill to swallow for the English keep seeing this and free prescriptions etc etc knowing that they are paying for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't pay your mortgage coz we been fecked by labour and the bankers? Don't worry, you can pop down to the bay and enjoy an evening of opera!

On a serious note how can the WAG justify any penny of increase in arts funding when there are funding cuts in frontline public services. For example, my department within Public Protection had to find savings of 100k this financial year, this was achieved through efficiency savings and , well not doing stuff. Next year will be more than 100k and that will mean job losses.

Taffiosa at it's best I think MT.

Edited by Mr. Miyagi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why is that the scandal? Lots of arts organisations should have been chopped, the only thing wrong here is that the remaining ones were given anything.

Wales is not exactly a wealthy country and it is living on English subsidies. The welsh government should not be allowed to spend any more than they take in taxes. It makes it a very bitter pill to swallow for the English keep seeing this and free prescriptions etc etc knowing that they are paying for it.

Yes - exactly. As Miyagi points out - Taffiosa, and many would agree with that statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, if its the grunts they are getting shot of, just to PROVE the services wont work with cuts, then I suggest the PsTB cut the remaining staff salaries by 50% above 25K and halve their pensions above and beyond their state payment.

Also Halve the redundancy pay too.

oh, and no company cars, Iphone, Ipads, self propelling pencils and plastic cups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can't pick people based on age. The law doesn't allow it. I never knew that length of service is no longer considered when choosing people either, again agaisnt the law now. Pick people based on these the council will end up in court.

It's done on a mixture of performance,sickness,ability etc etc.

You are correct. However, legislation introduced by Labour in 2006 makes compulsory retirement for people over 65 a legal option for employers. An employee over 65 can be dismissed for any, or no, reason or refused a job offer. This legislation is the whimsically named 'employment equality (age) act 2006'. One of the first things the coalition have done is prepare for the repeal of this highly inequitable law.

By contrast, making staff redundant if they are under 65 is a huge chore - it has to be, and seen to be, fair. Even then, there is the threat of employment tribunals, etc. Not so, with the over 65s, they can be told simply to leave, with no possible legal come back.

I know of at least 1 NHS trust that has told their managers, that they need to start making preparations for mandatory retirement of all staff over 65, so that these staff can be served with 3 months notice that expires before the law changes. While managers may have some discretion, it is likely that it will be very minimal and only where the retiring employee is of exceptional value.

Edited by ChumpusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way wet get back to making stuff in this country is if we drop our pay and conditions to that of the poorest Chindian.

b*llocks

do you suppose this works, say, for reprocessed nuclear fuel made in Sellafield, or high tech warships made in Barrow, or jet engines made in Bristol, or fighter jets and airliner compoonents made in Preston, or motor industry electronics developed in Cambridgeshire?

no, these are things literally worth their weight in gold and utterly utterly more valuable than widgets, no housing boom required

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Daily Mash has it spot on here

CASH-strapped local councils have pledged to identify the workers who are most useful and then sack them.

As jolly communities secretary Eric Pickles confirmed a 10% funding cut, council leaders vowed to protect the pointless shits that exists only to keep themselves and their sweaty, self-serving chums in nice cars and lovely Waitrose food.

Martin Bishop, deputy leader of Newark Borough Council, said: "In times of austerity it's our duty to focus on gimlet-eyed middle-aged women with oversized wooden beads and weirdly-spelled names like 'Shealagh McLabrador'.

"And then there's the red-faced men called Ray who need to take six months off with stress and get regular visits from professional cuddlers, after getting over-excited by Toy Story 3."

He added: "Fortunately, our more pointless managers have contracts saying that we can't get rid of them without a redundancy package backdated to the reign of Aethelbald on the basis that if Newark council had existed in 733 AD they would almost certainly have been a grade six.

"But we will be looking closely at people who drive bin lorries, clean streets and run youth clubs and asking ourselves what contribution they're making to things like health equality and bisexual tolerance.

...

Edited by pepsi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So over 65's will hang on in their jobs and their employers will only be able to fire them if they can prove that they are incompetent. With the risk of tribunals and claims for unfair dismissal they will be very wary of doing this.

So younger employees who could possibly do the job better will be denied the opportunity and employers may be saddled with salary levels that are based on seniority rather than competency.

Sounds like a lose lose situation.

I agree. Only going on what ive been told, my sister works in HR for the council. I didn't believe her when see said length of service is no longer used. Again comes under age discrimination.

If the younger person does the job better then they will beat the older person on other criteria and keep their job over the older one anyway.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 294 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.