Quangos Still Giving Ceo Payrises Despite Supposed Spending Freezes

[newbonic]

Today's Sunday Times (p8 main paper) shows how supposed spending cuts and recruitment freezes are actually being implemented. From their survey of the 100 biggest quangos they got these figures for the pay rises of some Chief Execs between 2007 and 2011:

• General teaching Council England £128k per annum 2007 -> £173k 2011 = +35.2% (8.9% average annual pay rise)
• Care Quality Commission £152.6k -> £195k = +28% (6.9% ave)
• Health Protection Agency £175k -> £210k = +20% (5% ave)
• Environment Agency £163k -> £190k = +16.5% (4.1% ave)
• Office of Fair Trading £255k -> £275k = +7.8% (2% ave)

Other gems were:

• Nat Inst for Health and Clinical Excellance (NICE) made 11 people redundant last year with an average payout of £53.7k each. Yet has increased staff numbers from 390 to 451.
• Coal Agency made redundancy and early retirement payments to 34 workers at a total cost of £1.8million (ave £53k each but payments of >£150k each to 3 senior bosses)
• Environment Agency paid out an average of £43.8k to the 662 staff made redundant
• British Council makes 400 redundant in last 2 years at an average payout of £70k each.

Real cuts among the tax consumers have barely started, and when they do they cost the Real Taxpayers a fortune. We are going to have serious problems getting the deficit down at this rate...

[Save me from the madness!]

Those redundancy / voluntary leaver payments are huge! At my place the max you can get on the voluntary leavers it one years salary and you have to have been there 12 years plus to get that.

[Bloo Loo]

leave the public sector, and your pension remains, unless you cash out at leaving.

[newbonic]

Those redundancy / voluntary leaver payments are huge! At my place the max you can get on the voluntary leavers it one years salary and you have to have been there 12 years plus to get that.

I've been self employed for most of the last decade so get no redundancy payment! However, at the place where I'm now a permie the standard redundancy payment is statutory minimum e.g. something like 1 weeks pay per year worked, capped at £400 per week, e.g. a 45 year old would get £6.5k after 15 years service LINK. It's obviously different in the public sector and quangoland. Plus as blu loo pointed out, they get to keep the final salary pension benefits.

[billybong]

The people getting the good pension payouts must have been in the public sector for 2 years or longer otherwise their benefits aren't protected. After 2 years they are protected.

Upto 2 years on leaving you get something like your contributions back or transfer your contributions into another pension scheme (your employers contributions will stay in the public sector fund to benefit that fund i.e for the long termers). I don't think you even get any investment benefit from the 2 years that the public sector fund has held your money - not even inflation linked compensation. It's the return of the bare contributions at original face value.

Upto 2 years you can only defer your own contributions in the scheme and they're not inflation/investment linked so after a few years on retirement they're as good as worthless to you (and the deferred pension is a money purchase one and not final salary linked so after a few years doubly worthless with low annuity rates) but of course they've been extremely valuable to the fund itself i.e. valuable to the long termers who tend to be the managers running the show.

I think another point with the 2 year rule is that if you've deferred your pension in the public sector fund you have to claim it by your 65th birthday or you lose it entirely. It all goes towards the long termers pensions.

Apart from less redundancy money that's the reasons they like contract/temporary workers with contracts expiring within 2 years and why they went overboard with recruitment just before the election expressly as redundancy fodder and now the 2 years is getting to be about up so they can be ditched with less expense and with a contribution boost (all courtesy of the taxpayer) towards the public sector pension fund because of the employers contributions that the employee isn't allowed to take with them.

Of course some would call it all outright theft but it's the public sector pension rules.

Maybe Quangos and some special groups have preferential terms regarding the 2 year rule but it'll not be for the average sort of job.

It's important to make the distinction between the different groups of public sector workers. Of course the unions (often run by the long termers public sector workers as well) usually quote the figures for the less well off public sector groups.

Edited August 7, 2011 by billybong

[newbonic]

The people getting the good pension payouts must have been in the public sector for 2 years or longer otherwise their benefits aren't protected. After 2 years they are protected.

.....

It's important to make the distinction between the different groups of public sector workers. Of course the unions (often run by the long termers public sector workers as well) usually quote the figures for the less well off public sector groups.

I suspect that a lot of the people with the £50-£70k payoffs will be time served with 20+ years service. The main point is that it seems to be very expensive to fire many time served public sector workers. I'd take £70k tax free if I were 55 (and then wait for the final salary pension from age 60!). But the equivalent private Real Taxpayer would be lucky to get £10k, and then have to wait for a money purchase pension at 65.

I know a couple of public sector managers who are actually targeting a final promotion at early 50s so that they can do 3 years and then take early retirement in mid late 50s, hopefully with the kind of pay off stated above.

And it's as rational a choice as a teenage girl deciding to bang out a few kids, get a free house, and also live off the taxpayer for the next 25 years.

[AteMoose]

problem with final salary pensions... people get there salaries Bumped for the last two years of employment and then take home a mega pension...

[Bloo Loo]

I suspect that a lot of the people with the £50-£70k payoffs will be time served with 20+ years service. The main point is that it seems to be very expensive to fire many time served public sector workers. I'd take £70k tax free if I were 55 (and then wait for the final salary pension from age 60!). But the equivalent private Real Taxpayer would be lucky to get £10k, and then have to wait for a money purchase pension at 65.

I know a couple of public sector managers who are actually targeting a final promotion at early 50s so that they can do 3 years and then take early retirement in mid late 50s, hopefully with the kind of pay off stated above.

And it's as rational a choice as a teenage girl deciding to bang out a few kids, get a free house, and also live off the taxpayer for the next 25 years.

it shouldnt even BE a choice.

Yet the whole empire of management in the public sector colludes to carry this on.

So much for "service"...Its more about ME ME ME

[aa3]

Bloo Loo has been one of the people on the forum predicting managements salaries will continue to rise even amongst spending freezes. (and thus also leading to layoffs for people lower down on the chain, to make room in the budget for the generous raises.)

[fluffy666]

Bloo Loo has been one of the people on the forum predicting managements salaries will continue to rise even amongst spending freezes. (and thus also leading to layoffs for people lower down on the chain, to make room in the budget for the generous raises.)

Seems to be endemic in the private sector as well.

[guitarman001]

Seems to be endemic in the private sector as well.

Wish I could see some of it myself!