Jump to content

Council pay awards of up to nearly 14 per cent!!!


robocop

Recommended Posts

They justify it by trying to kid us with the usual lines that the public sector uses "They would go elsewhere if we didn't pay them the going rate for the job"

 

In the private sector, have you ever seen the following posts?

 

 “future shape programme manager” (North East Lincolnshire council on £70,189 a year)

"assistant director for supporting communities" (Liverpool City Council on £90,000 a year)

“cheerleading development officer” in Falkirk

"Walking coordinator" (Islington Council on £31,395 a year)

 

Of course the councillors would argue these are worthy jobs, but would they really get jobs like that in the private sector?

 

and who would want to employ someone that can add "Walking coordinator" to their CV?

Link to post
Share on other sites
while public sector pay marches on.

Strange, because Gideon implemented a pay freeze in 2011-12 and 2012-13, and council employers imposed a pay freeze a year before the government, so earnings have fallen by more than 18% in the last four years add to that half a million local government employees being paid below the living wage and I am left wondering where the public sector are marching to. :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it public sector pay was frozen for 2 years and capped at 1% rise for 3 years including this one. I wouldn't call a 1% cap a freeze. Like many others in the private sector I've seen my salary frozen for over 3 years and benefits cut. Germany managed to get to the top in Europe by clamping down on salaries in the 80s and 90s and is now seeing the benefit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Problem is Asp; it's bottom salaries that are being cut, not top salaries; as the topic highlights.

 

The salaries of people at the top in the public sector operate on a positive feedback loop. Because they compare salaries against those of others within the public sector, there is a persistent drive to increase them, all sold on the basis that they're needed to attract the 'best people'. That is IMO the reason why we've seen salaries spiral. As observer says it's not an issue of what happens at the bottom (and middle). It's about what happens at the top where things are out of control.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Employees in the upper echelons of councils play musical chairs, they change titles or move offices and call it restructuring which then attracts a higher salary.  Councillors get there remuneration increased as a reward for playing the music.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smoke and mirrors at the end of the day, and the Councillors fall for it every time.  They reduce the top echelon of management, argue it's made a "saving" of a post or two; then argue that because of the additional responsibility and workload, the remaining Officers warrant the pay rise. Are they suggesting, that with this "extra workload", these senior Officers are now working 24/7, or is the reality that the work just gets filtered down to lower grades or worse, just doesn't get done? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
They justify it by trying to kid us with the usual lines that the public sector uses "They would go elsewhere if we didn't pay them the going rate for the job"

 

In the private sector, have you ever seen the following posts?

 

 “future shape programme manager” (North East Lincolnshire council on £70,189 a year)

"assistant director for supporting communities" (Liverpool City Council on £90,000 a year)

“cheerleading development officer” in Falkirk

"Walking coordinator" (Islington Council on £31,395 a year)

 

Of course the councillors would argue these are worthy jobs, but would they really get jobs like that in the private sector?

 

and who would want to employ someone that can add "Walking coordinator" to their CV?

 

While you give few examples of jobs with silly titles the fact remains if you want someone to do a responsible job you need to pay them a decent salary.

 

The lower skilled workers are in the same boat in the private sector with wages going down, pensions abolished while the higher paid personal are getting huge pay rises and walking away with pensions worth millions.

 

Is it right no but that is what is happening

Link to post
Share on other sites
While you give few examples of jobs with silly titles the fact remains if you want someone to do a responsible job you need to pay them a decent salary.

 

They already get a decent salary Coffee... the problem is; the prats that are supposed to represent US the voter are allowing them to get a 14% hike in their salaries... which as Asp said, will merely contribute to the ever upward salary spiral of public sector manager jobs...

 

Most of the directors in council positions just wouldn't cut it in the private sector. In my experience; very rarely do you see someone in a high powered local authority position leaving for a job in the private sector

 

It is noticeable that the likes of Cllr Settle and Cllr Parish have yet to comment.... maybe we should drop a few mentions of butterflies or gypsy horses in somewhere? seeing as that appears to be more important to some than inflation busting pay rises

Link to post
Share on other sites

We currently have a system for senior LA management, similar to the Premiere League; which means large sums paid for "the best players". This is exacerbated by "competition" between Local Authorities, creating an upward spiral in top salaries. The excuse that's dragged out on these occasions, that "if you want the best people, you have to pay a decent salary", never seems to apply to lower grades however; and imo is all part of the bulls**t that is the system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...