490,000 jobs
- Thread starter Christine Hough
- Start date
E
Esk247
Very few surely.
The private sector is about to get punched in the face by higher VAT and the fact that a proportion of its customers have just lost their jobs.
The government don't seem to understand how an economy works. You need people in employment to pay taxes to pay off national debt. You don't make everyone redundant and then pay them jobseekers allowance.
The private sector is about to get punched in the face by higher VAT and the fact that a proportion of its customers have just lost their jobs.
The government don't seem to understand how an economy works. You need people in employment to pay taxes to pay off national debt. You don't make everyone redundant and then pay them jobseekers allowance.
Upvote
0
i know of a few of my suppliers have let staff go in last few months.
I had a meeting today with an architect who has gone from 7-4 staff this year,at the start of the year I was going to employ another skilled maker but I held back glad i did now,
with the loss of the school building program i have lost a fair bit of work.
I hope things will settle after todays announcements
I had a meeting today with an architect who has gone from 7-4 staff this year,at the start of the year I was going to employ another skilled maker but I held back glad i did now,
with the loss of the school building program i have lost a fair bit of work.
I hope things will settle after todays announcements
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #5
I wasn't asking about the prosperity of private business continuing in their own marketplaces, more about how many of these 'job loses' will on fact not be lost so much as moved from public sector to private sector subcntracting to the public sector.
This has happened a lot in social housing with council houses being transferred to housing associations.
This has happened a lot in social housing with council houses being transferred to housing associations.
Upvote
0
E
Esk247
Yes but they're bashing the private sector too remember. Less people in employment is a bad thing all over, whether they are state employed or private company employed. They'll stop spending either way and then the economy slows down again, then the government hike up VAT and we're going down hill like a rock falling off a mountain.
You cannot just cut jobs without a clear plan. If there is a plan, we haven't been shown the blueprint.
Upvote
0
G
Gord
A good point and I think the answer is yes. This has already occurred to a degree, with some public bodies closing departments and out-sourcing services.Although I suspect that for every £1 saved circa £0.10 might find filter through as a necessary spend budget.
Upvote
0
I agree that across the whole country and on the timescale suggested these job losses should be covered by the private sector all things being equal etc...but the likelihood of all things remaining equal seems to be somewhat in doubt.
I must say though that it has hard to imagine many of these public sector bods that one comes across (when dealing with local planning departments as an example) fitting in easily and thriving in the private sector. What are some of the more heavy-handed career 'public servants' actually going to do in the private sector ? Who wants them ?
I must say though that it has hard to imagine many of these public sector bods that one comes across (when dealing with local planning departments as an example) fitting in easily and thriving in the private sector. What are some of the more heavy-handed career 'public servants' actually going to do in the private sector ? Who wants them ?
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
V
VeraJ
Actually you probably can just cut jobs without a plan if they are public sector jobs.
Many more than 490,000 public sector jobs of little real value to the economy. And paying them unemployment benefit is cheaper than paying their salaries so it's a net saving to have them on the dole.
And effect on total spending? They can still use their dole money to buy food etc. They just won't have the money to buy expensive imported goods or go on foreign holidays. So what is lost to UK plc?
Sounds like a net gain to me.
Many more than 490,000 public sector jobs of little real value to the economy. And paying them unemployment benefit is cheaper than paying their salaries so it's a net saving to have them on the dole.
And effect on total spending? They can still use their dole money to buy food etc. They just won't have the money to buy expensive imported goods or go on foreign holidays. So what is lost to UK plc?
Sounds like a net gain to me.
Upvote
0
Actually you probably can just cut jobs without a plan if they are public sector jobs.
Many more than 490,000 public sector jobs of little real value to the economy. And paying them unemployment benefit is cheaper than paying their salaries so it's a net saving to have them on the dole.
And effect on total spending? They can still use their dole money to buy food etc. They just won't have the money to buy expensive imported goods or go on foreign holidays. So what is lost to UK plc?
Sounds like a net gain to me.
you seem to have forgoten the redundancy payments and pensions,e,t,c,
They will only be buying the cheapest Chinese imports on dole money ,thats for sure if anything at all except at the charity shops.:|
Earl
Last edited:
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 9840
I'm sure I saw an ad for a position in the public sector for a "Deputy Understudy to the Assistant Analytical Commissioner" WTF do they do ?:|
I'm certain no private sector company would have an opening for one. Sack the free loading to$$er who created this opening and every work shy Guardianista who applied for it.
Steve
I'm certain no private sector company would have an opening for one. Sack the free loading to$$er who created this opening and every work shy Guardianista who applied for it.
Steve
Upvote
0
E
Esk247
You should read the Jobs section in The Times or the Guardian or whatever I found them in (haven't looked since i put the last lot on the bonfire in disgust).
The jobs and pay that 'SOME' NHS and Education/Government staff get is shockingly shocking beyond shocking. It's like shock physically being shocked itself. (If that were possible)
You'll see jobs such as 'Directive Administration and Council Lead Operations Co-Ordinator' which is probably defined as 'shuffle more paper than the person in the office next to you'
You'll see wages such as 145k plus pension, private car and private medical cover. For a 3 day week.
Let us remember that a mere Staff Nurse can be netting just 25k a year.
My argument is that, yes we need to cut but we have to be careful who we cut, we could happily sack off 20 odd 'Directive CoOrdinators' on 3 day weeks in order to maintain something like 100 Nurses.
The jobs and pay that 'SOME' NHS and Education/Government staff get is shockingly shocking beyond shocking. It's like shock physically being shocked itself. (If that were possible)
You'll see jobs such as 'Directive Administration and Council Lead Operations Co-Ordinator' which is probably defined as 'shuffle more paper than the person in the office next to you'
You'll see wages such as 145k plus pension, private car and private medical cover. For a 3 day week.
Let us remember that a mere Staff Nurse can be netting just 25k a year.
My argument is that, yes we need to cut but we have to be careful who we cut, we could happily sack off 20 odd 'Directive CoOrdinators' on 3 day weeks in order to maintain something like 100 Nurses.
Upvote
0
V
VeraJ
No not at all. Say the government pays the public sector workers 1.5 years salary as redundancy. That means future salary is stopped which could have gone on for many many years with their pension cost continuing to escalate in value.
It's like saying how much do we need to pay now to stop pouring money down the drain for the next 20 years. A one-off payment to stop it permanently is a great deal for the tax payer.
It's like saying how much do we need to pay now to stop pouring money down the drain for the next 20 years. A one-off payment to stop it permanently is a great deal for the tax payer.
Upvote
0
E
E Storey
Thing is, it's not £25k. It's £25k plus 1/3 in pension contributions, generous holiday entitlement, and ridiculous levels of sick pay.
In fact, I know of one Quango where staff are paid more if they are off sick than they are if they are at work!
Upvote
0
The jobs and pay that 'SOME' NHS and Education/Government staff get is shockingly shocking beyond shocking. It's like shock physically being shocked itself.
Got the point. Your shocked.
Upvote
0
E
Esk247
My dad used to be a staff nurse.
He paid for his own parking. His own food and drink. He paid for his own petrol to work and to training courses 100 odd miles away. All that on less than 20k a year at the time. While working shifts, not coming home till 10pm after 14 hours cleaning up blood and trying to save someones life after a car crash. He didn't get lunch breaks, he was allowed an hour but never got it..more like open the bag of crisps and then 'bleep bleep' pager.
Somehow, i dont see how the 145k a year person with full pension and company car, can justify his salary in comparison.
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote
0
V
VeraJ
Doesn't matter who caused the current problems. The public sector has needed a serious cull for years.
Upvote
0
Oh I think it matters very much who caused the current problems.:|
I mean we don't want the same people doing it again.
As for the public sector,well maybe they could be organised to do more productive work .?
I mean we are all public sector workers in a way.
Earl
Upvote
0
V
VeraJ
Its obvious who is responsible - Gordon Brown. Inadequate control of the financial sector, an inadequate effort to promote a broader industrial economy instead of the heavy reliance on financial services and excessive government spending. Not rocket science really.
And the public sector being better organised to do productive work? That's a non sequitur surely.
And the public sector being better organised to do productive work? That's a non sequitur surely.
Oh I think it matters very much who caused the current problems.:|I mean we don't want the same people doing it again.
As for the public sector,well maybe they could be organised to do more productive work .?
I mean we are all public sector workers in a way.
Earl
Upvote
0
Its obvious who is responsible - Gordon Brown. Inadequate control of the financial sector, an inadequate effort to promote a broader industrial economy instead of the heavy reliance on financial services and excessive government spending. Not rocket science really.
And the public sector being better organised to do productive work? That's a non sequitur surely.
Oh it would be nice to think it was all Gordons fault,but afraid its the culmination of 40 years erroneous economic policies that got us to this position.
As to public sector workers ,they were a pretty usefull bunch before privatisation left what was left stuck behind a desk twiddling there fingers and planning the next paranoid attack on the population.
Earl
Upvote
0
C
crossdaz
If the bank bail-out money was all paid back tomorrow then you'd be still in the hole. Public spending was exceeding national income long before any banking crisis happened.
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote
0
Latest Articles
-
Andy Burnham's Manifesto for Small Business, and How It Stacks Up Against Count BinfaceIf all goes to plan (or rather, to Labour's timetable), Andy Burnham...- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
SEO in the Age of AI: What UK Small Businesses Actually Need to KnowTL;DR Search has shifted from "ten blue links" to answer engines, and...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
What Carphone Warehouse, Microsoft and Uber Have in Common: They Started in a DownturnThere's a comforting myth that you need a booming economy to start...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
What Makes a Small Business Actually Sellable?There's a question that a lot of small business owners never think to...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Why Your Team Keeps Asking the Same Questions (And What to Actually Do About It)Every small business owner knows the moment. You're halfway through...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
