Budget will cost 1.3 million jobs

[View From The Top]

There are millions of self employed and small business owners that work far in excess of this.

 

 

 

...and so he should. Wouldn't want him sitting on his arse at home at the taxpayers expense.

 

 

 

You can't beat a taxpayer funded jolly on the **** with like minded people

 

 

 

Maybe he is hard working for a Public Servant, but his hours are part time compared to hundreds of thousands of people in the private sector.

 

[Joensuu]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1290427/Black-magic-online-poker--just-slow-day-Town-Hall.html

[/Quote]

 

Just wanted to point out some very misleading 'facts' dropped into an otherwise factless stream of xenophobic, straw-dummy filled Littlejohn diatribe.

 

For instance, in Scotland, staff sickness costs NHS Tayside more than £260,000 a week in wages alone. That's 1,116,841 working days lost in a single health authority every year.[/Quote]That's rather a large number of lost working days! 1,116,841 lost days is a crazy number. Based on a working year of 222 days, that's the equivalent of Tayside having 5031 full time staff sick all year. Thats a ridiculous number, made more ridiculous by the fact that Tayside NHS's website only lists 4249 staff.

 

Oh, and then there's this 'fact':

 

A whole range of exciting new non-jobs is still being created. Reader Alex Jackson has drawn my attention to an advert from Newham Council, in East London, for a Community Catalyst Co-ordinator on £28,000 a year. How ever did they manage without one? [/Quote]Wrong again. Richard, this job is being advertised by a charity 'Your Space E16 Counselling Project' not by Newham council. The job in question is to provide cheap/free counselling to people with emotional, psychological and relationship problems who live in one of the most deprived parts of London. Obviously a 'non-job', well done Littlejohn.

 

Yesterday, the British Medical Association - a trades union in everything but name - said that 'up to' 30,000 doctors and nurses were facing the sack ... It's always doctors and nurses facing the chop, not 'patient pathway managers' or any of the plethora of wasteful back office jobs, which trebled under Labour. [/Quote]And wrong for the third time. I can't find any reference to the BMA ever having said this, let alone yesterday. However, the Torygraph reported that the Royal College of Nursing (unfortunately not the BMA, and therefore not an institute even vaguely comparible with a trade union), "said earlier this year that about 5,600 jobs were under threat across 26 hospital trusts. In a “worst case scenario”, the true figure could be as high as 30,000, it said". Don't forget, this statement was made in April before the election, before the ConDem alliance, before any ringfences were definate, and before the budget. Oh and Richard, if you read the RCN quote you might notice that it specifically mentions 'jobs' and not 'doctors and nurses' to which you conveniently change it. Political agenda?

 

So as all three 'facts' in the article are nonsense, I wonder how accurate the stories are about Doreen (the hypochondriac), Jerry the gambler, and the villa renting chap AWOL in Marbella? Obviously the Daily Facist investigated these people at depth, making sure they backed up their claims, they wouldn't just invent them out of thin air would they? Not the Daily Facist, surely not...

Edited 1 July, 2010 by Joensuu

[angelman]

re - Tayside. Good point, but I think that temporary staff cost a lot more as no doubt an agency has to be paid and then no doubt they have higher wages.

[buctootim]

re - Tayside. Good point, but I think that temporary staff cost a lot more as no doubt an agency has to be paid and then no doubt they have higher wages.

 

Tayside's annual budget is £752m. Even if the sickness cost is £250,000 per week as claimed - that is £13 million pa - ie 1.6% of their budget is lost to staff sickness. The private sector sickness rate for large employers is 3%.

[bridge too far]

Tayside's annual budget is £752m. Even if the sickness cost is £250,000 per week as claimed - that is £13 million pa - ie 1.6% of their budget is lost to staff sickness. The private sector sickness rate for large employers is 3%.

 

That's a very low sickness rate. Especially so as many NHS frontline staff ARE NOT ALLOWED to come into work if they have any sort of bug.

[buctootim]

That's a very low sickness rate. Especially so as many NHS frontline staff ARE NOT ALLOWED to come into work if they have any sort of bug.

 

I dont actually know how much of that £752m is spent on staff - but you can be sure its more than 50%, which keeps the rate at below that for large private employers

[Joensuu]

I've worked it out.

 

Littlejohn 'accidently' said "1,116,841 working days", when he meant "1,116,841 working hours". One harmless not at all politically motivated slip of the keyboard...

 

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1786188

[bridge too far]

I've worked it out.

 

Littlejohn 'accidently' said "1,116,841 working days", when he meant "1,116,841 working hours". One harmless not at all politically motivated slip of the keyboard...

 

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1786188

 

You should write to his rag and point out his 'mistake'. I think they're duty bound to publish a correction

 

Littlejohn = the Alf Garnett of the 21st century.

[Joensuu]

Seen as he's sidestepped (overlooked?) my question, I wonder if it's safe to assume Dune's name is indeed Charles?

[dune]

Seen as he's sidestepped (overlooked?) my question, I wonder if it's safe to assume Dune's name is indeed Charles?

 

Why are you asking?

[Joensuu]

Why are you asking?

 

Not really sure, thought it was a possibly interesting tangent

[dune]

Not really sure, thought it was a possibly interesting tangent

 

Of course you're sure or you wouldn't have asked.

[Joensuu]

Of course you're sure or you wouldn't have asked.

 

Just a hunch. Wondered if I knew you.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

dune, I have said this OVER AND OVER AGAIN: The school holidays are there for the benefit of the pupils, not for the staff. Also dune, what you need to take into account is that we ALWAYS have to pay premium prices for holidays (which apparently we don't deserve) and we can NEVER take time off when we want (for example, I wanted to Glasto this year, but I couldn't as it was term time!).

 

I tell you now, you reduce teacher holiday without rising pay substantially, you will lose thousands and thousands of teachers. I know it falls on deaf ignorant ears but I'll say it anyway. It's 8:30, i've been home for 20 mins (apparently we work 9-3), been sworn at today and generally talked too like I was a peice of **** (now remember, I can't swear back, I can't 'give it back as good as I got it' like I could with adults, I just have to take it on the chin). The FIVE (not six) weeks holiday coming up I will be spending 2 of it in school with the new Yr.7 intake and another 3-4 days sorting out my classroom and preparing for next year - that leaves me with 2 weeks and 3 days of actual hoilday. My half terms are usually spent in the house catching up with paperwork and marking/lesson planning, my easter and xmas holidays (apart from the 'holiday days' xmas day, easter sunday etc) are spent working; either inputting data, assessing pupil progress, writing reports etc.

 

I can hear him now "Ooooh marking books, wow!" I have 6 KS3 classes and 2 KS4 classes, each pupil has a book, it roughly takes on average to thouroughly mark 2 weeks worth of worth about 20 mins...you do the maths!

 

So all in all I reckon I actually have 4 weeks of 'not doing anything' which is NO different to those in your beloved private sector. I'll say it again, dune, if you think we have it easy, go into a secondary school and spend a week in ANY department and see what we have do...but you won't, because you're an ignorant **** who likes to stick his fingers in his ears and his head in the sand!

 

But regardless, they're not going to change it, and so when it's July 16th at 1pm and school finishes for the summer, I'll think of dune and smile.

Edited 1 July, 2010 by Thorpe-le-Saint

[dune]

been sworn at today and generally talked too like I was a peice of **** (now remember, I can't swear back, I can't 'give it back as good as I got it' like I could with adults, I just have to take it on the chin).

 

Are you being serious?

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

There are millions of self employed and small business owners that work far in excess of this.

 

 

 

...and so he should. Wouldn't want him sitting on his arse at home at the taxpayers expense.

 

 

 

You can't beat a taxpayer funded jolly on the **** with like minded people

 

 

 

Maybe he is hard working for a Public Servant, but his hours are part time compared to hundreds of thousands of people in the private sector.

 

You like dune, are deluded. Go into a school and have a look for yourself before you make accusations that are unfounded and not true!

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Are you being serious?

 

Of course I am, you can't retaliate against children. What is your point?

[dune]

Of course I am, you can't retaliate against children. What is your point?

 

I wasn't being funny, I feel sorry for you. You can't have that. No way. Unless you nip it in the bud you'll have no future in teaching.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

I have sent 4 children through the schools system and obviously went to school myself. My Wife also went to uni as a mature student to become a midwife and my Uncle was a Head teacher for many years.

 

In my experience there are some fantastic teachers who inspire and enthuse the children. There are also some hopeless one's completely out of their depth, who do more harm than good. It should be up to the headmaster to get rid of these hopeless cases, just as it is for me to Manage out any hopeless staff I have. It is the useless lazy teachers that are bringing the profession into disrepute and allowing people to make stupid comments that tar all teachers.

 

Does anyone know the % of teachers that are fired, not for misconduct, but for capability in this Country. My gut feeling is that it is not many. We should pay good teachers more, a lot more, but have zero tolerance of bad teachers, with Headmasters given the freedom to decide such issues.

 

The holiday issue is just a very silly tool to hit teachers with. If we want our children to have 6 weeks off in the summer, it makes sense that teachers are off to. Unless you want them going into school with no one to teach.

 

This Lord D, hits the nail on the head - I could easily name about 4 or 5 members of staff where I work who are absolute RUBBISH.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

I wasn't being funny, I feel sorry for you. You can't have that. No way. Unless you nip it in the bud you'll have no future in teaching.

 

I don't want you're pity and frankly you are in NO position to comment on my teaching - the pupil was dealt with, I was merely giving an example of a situation which some poor souls in this profession face on a daily basis.

[dune]

I don't want you're pity and frankly you are in NO position to comment on my teaching - the pupil was dealt with, I was merely giving an example of a situation which some poor souls in this profession face on a daily basis.

 

Believe it or not I once went school as did everyone else so everyone is in a position to comment on this sort of thing. The thing is good teachers don't get abuse from pupils. That's not me having a dig, just reliving how it was when I was at school and if i'm honest I wasn't a model pupil. I know times have changed and 13 years of a namby pamby Labour government are certain to have made things worse.

[Johnny Bognor]

Are you Stanley in disguise?.

 

Nope, just can't stand this public sector (particularly teachers) hard done by ********

 

And if you think attending a case conference about an abused child is a jolly then you are a sad, deluded idiot.

 

One of my business areas is organising events/conferences, some of which are for the Public Sector. If you think that many public sector events are not just about having a **** up (sorry, networking with industry colleagues), then I am afraid you are deluding yourself in the public-sector-can-do-no-wrong-cloud-cuckoo-land. I see Tory From The Top even posted a picture of his favourite tipple (because he knows deep down I am right)

 

I was exhibiting at the Data Marketing Show this week in Olympia. About 12 delegates from West Sussex County Council came on stand. The fact that none of them worked in marketing, or the fact the the main focus of the show has absolutely nothing to do with Local Government whatsoever, just confirms my belief that a good day out of the office at the tax payers expense is one of the 'perks' of the job.

 

You like dune, are deluded. Go into a school and have a look for yourself before you make accusations that are unfounded and not true!

 

What has anything I said have to do with unfounded accusations? If you are representative of the average teacher, then I fear they may be overpaid afterall. I was merely stating the fact that many self-employed / small business owners work many hours in excess of BTF's "Hard Working" Son in Law. Those hours may be deemed 'hard' in the teaching profession, but it doesn't even come close to many in the private sector (or the NHS for that matter). Even the 7-11 shop keeper works 16 hours a day, 7 days a week (with no sick pay, very little holiday, no final salary pension etc etc) - do they complain? Nope, they just get on with it. 50 hours a week (plus the odd saturday or sunday) doesn't even come close to the hardest working people I know - both in the Public & Private sectors.

 

I have no problem with teachers pay and in my own personal experience, the teachers at my two 5 year olds primary are fantastic and do a sterling job. However, don't play the hard-done-by card with me as I will bite.......

 

The only area of the Public Sector that has any right to complain IMO are those working in Social Services. This is the lowest paid area of the Public Sector and is comparable in terms of pay to the lowest paid private sectors (Retail, Hospitality, Cleaning, etc). They do a thankless job that most people wouldn't do, for pay that most people wouldn't want to do it for. The education profession, however, is an entirely different matter.

Edited 2 July, 2010 by Johnny Bognor

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Believe it or not I once went school as did everyone else so everyone is in a position to comment on this sort of thing. The thing is good teachers don't get abuse from pupils. That's not me having a dig, just reliving how it was when I was at school and if i'm honest I wasn't a model pupil. I know times have changed and 13 years of a namby pamby Labour government are certain to have made things worse.

 

Remember one pupil out of 1500 because I took his Ipod off him - Again, I was using it as an example to illustrate how some poor sods get this every day. Until you become an OFSTED inspector dune and tell me otherwise, Ill hang onto their 'Outstanding' rating thanks.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Oh and JB, I get sick of people, especially those who run a business, who think the whole world owes the private sector some sort of homage as the saviour and be all and all of job market. For people like you read 'muppets' who should have thought about what job offers what before they applied and now regret the decision every day.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Mods is there a way you can block my account from the off topic part of this forum before I end up getting myself banned? I can't be doing with these sorts of people and Im sure the feeling is mutual for them!

[Ponty]

It can be done but I'd rather you'd just exercise a bit of self-restraint and continue to contribute.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

It can be done but I'd rather you'd just exercise a bit of self-restraint and continue to contribute.

 

Well that is fair enough; ive tried the ignore function but I still have to read their bile when they are quoted by others - Ill be happy to give your option a go but I did warn you in advance :-)

[Ponty]

Well that is fair enough; ive tried the ignore function but I still have to read their bile when they are quoted by others - Ill be happy to give your option a go but I did warn you in advance :-)

Do what I try and do; If I read something that is obviously cheap, ill-informed or an outright lie, I make a sarcastic yet obsequious comment then walk away and don't post on the thread again.

 

Not here, obviously, but on other forums where I'm a regular user.

[Saint in Paradise]

Mods is there a way you can block my account from the off topic part of this forum before I end up getting myself banned? I can't be doing with these sorts of people and Im sure the feeling is mutual for them!

 

Thorpe, the only thing about dune that I can put up with is his belief in UFO's

 

Please just try and ignore him, I try but now and then I do confess to biting, anyway as Ponty said

please keep posting. S.I.P.

[Saint in Paradise]

Do what I try and do; If I read something that is obviously cheap, ill-informed or an outright lie, I make a sarcastic yet obsequious comment then walk away and don't post on the thread again.

 

Not here, obviously, but on other forums where I'm a regular user.

 

You go on other forums Where do you get the time

 

You need to stay here to keep young Baj under control :lol:

[Johnny Bognor]

I can't be doing with these sorts of people and Im sure the feeling is mutual for them!

 

Not at all. I relish the opportunity to educate people about the real world.

[Kadeem Hardison]

As dune is a thicko who doesn't value education, I don't think we need to worry about his opinion really.

[View From The Top]

Nope, just can't stand this public sector (particularly teachers) hard done by ********

 

Strange how not one teacher on this thread thinks they are hard done by, but, as always you're to bigoted to see that.

We are just pointing out that school holidays do not always equate to teachers holidays and the school day does not equate to a teachers working day.

That shouldn't be to hard for you to understand.

[View From The Top]

Oh and JB, I get sick of people, especially those who run a business, who think the whole world owes the private sector some sort of homage as the saviour and be all and all of job market. For people like you read 'muppets' who should have thought about what job offers what before they applied and now regret the decision every day.

 

 

I quite agree. They strike me as a bunch of whinging bitter muppets who are disappointed in their own lives and empty jobs and look on enviously at those of us with worthwhile and fulfilling careers.

I don’t know if I should feel pity or contempt for them or perhaps both in equal measures.

[Johnny Bognor]

I quite agree. They strike me as a bunch of whinging bitter muppets who are disappointed in their own lives and empty jobs and look on enviously at those of us with worthwhile and fulfilling careers.

I don’t know if I should feel pity or contempt for them or perhaps both in equal measures.

 

Not bitter at all. If you notice, I only respond to whinging public servants / union types when they bang on about their hard done by lives or when they bang on about how great they are. I like to point out the realities by which the majority of people have to live by. I get riled by those in a cushy position complaining, when they clearly have nothing to complain about. It's called perspective you see.

 

Unfortunately, most teachers have an intellectual superiority complex and look down on those who are less educated. For them, academic achievement is the measure of greatness. For me, a career in teaching would have been a waste of my talents, so was not really a career option. I am educated to degree level, but at the same time, I see where SRS comes from in that I view/have viewed students as complete ****s.

 

Anyway, back to BTF's hard working son in law. Holding up someone who works 50 hours a week as "hard-working" is a complete **** take if you ask me. At best it is marginally above average. The fact that the EU set a limit of a maximum 48 hour working week suggests that a significant number of people work far in excess of this, so the "hard working" teacher is not really that hard working afterall. Many small business owners and self employed people work far in excess of this, so why is the teacher a ****ing hero? Most Junior Doctors work in excess of 80 hours per week and have to go through far more training than your average teacher (and is better educated BTW).

 

As for fulfilment, do you run your part time business on the side, because teaching is not as fulfilling as you make out? Or is it because the nasty tory/capitalist part of your brain is more prevalent than Thorpie's?

[Joensuu]

Not bitter at all. If you notice, I only respond to whinging public servants / union types when they bang on about their hard done by lives or when they bang on about how great they are. I like to point out the realities by which the majority of people have to live by. I get riled by those in a cushy position complaining, when they clearly have nothing to complain about. It's called perspective you see.

 

Unfortunately, most teachers have an intellectual superiority complex and look down on those who are less educated. For them, academic achievement is the measure of greatness. For me, a career in teaching would have been a waste of my talents, so was not really a career option. I am educated to degree level, but at the same time, I see where SRS comes from in that I view/have viewed students as complete ****s.

 

Anyway, back to BTF's hard working son in law. Holding up someone who works 50 hours a week as "hard-working" is a complete **** take if you ask me. At best it is marginally above average. The fact that the EU set a limit of a maximum 48 hour working week suggests that a significant number of people work far in excess of this, so the "hard working" teacher is not really that hard working afterall. Many small business owners and self employed people work far in excess of this, so why is the teacher a ****ing hero? Most Junior Doctors work in excess of 80 hours per week and have to go through far more training than your average teacher (and is better educated BTW).

 

As for fulfilment, do you run your part time business on the side, because teaching is not as fulfilling as you make out? Or is it because the nasty tory/capitalist part of your brain is more prevalent than Thorpie's?

 

JB, you make my 37 hour private sector week sound a breeze. Perhaps I should have joined the public sector to be worked a bit harder?

[Johnny Bognor]

JB, you make my 37 hour private sector week sound a breeze. Perhaps I should have joined the public sector to be worked a bit harder?

 

I wouldn't pretend that all jobs in the private sector are more than 37 hours a week and at the same time I wouldn't pretend that all jobs in the public sector are less than 50 hours a week (see all of my examples from both public and private sectors above). However, if you take into account teachers holidays and pro-rata the working week across the year, the "hard working" teacher would still not work much more than you do, which at 37 hours, is not that hard.....

[Lord Duckhunter]

One thing that has always puzzled me is why cuts and staff reductions always result in cuts to "front line services" in the Public sector?

 

It is not like this in the Private sector. Take Tesco, whatever you may think of them, for the past 20 years they have become a success story and in a cut throat and low margin business have become the major player in the Country. You can not tell me they have not cut staff numbers or made efficiency savings the past 5 years. I bet there have been recruitment bans and less staff working in stores. Obviously they have opened new stores taking on more people, but whatever their way of measuring efficiency is, whether £'s per hour worked or staff numbers per sq of retail space, I bet they have less staff doing more. Did the senior managers and CEO of Tesco accept the argument that cuts would "effect customer service"? Of course not, Managers would have been told to get on with it, deliver higher sales and still maintain customer service. They would have done this by moving staff about, clearing out the deadwood, cutting down on sickness and working smarter. Can this attitude be transferred to the Public sector? It bloody well should be.

 

Take my dustmen. On a Bank Holiday Monday, they pick up my bins by 07.30pm, they are running down the road, working full on. A normal Monday it's 10am at the earliest and they're dawdling about. What's the reason for this? I suspect that Bank Holidays are "job and finish" (although I don't know). If they can do the job so much quicker on a Bank Holiday, why cant they do it every Monday? My mates a post man, he told me that if there's someone sick or overtime available the first people back from their rounds pick this up, you still get paid your normal day plus the O/T. Therefore he gets round as quick as he can, to snap up the O/T. When there's no O/T he does his round in his paid hours. Why is there not a Manager questioning this, why isn't he being asked, "why does your round take 5 hours (although he's paid for a full day) some days and a full day on other days. Why does he do his round quicker on a Saturday, as well.

 

No Private Company I've ever worked for would put up with these examples. I have yet to work for a Company that, whether it was the 80's, early 90's or now, that have not sometime reduced numbers. Guess what, every single time we have to do the same job, deliver the same results and there are no excuses. If Private Companies can make cuts and deliver the same results, why can't the Public Sector?

[Johnny Bognor]

If Private Companies can make cuts and deliver the same results, why can't the Public Sector?

 

Because they don't want to, simple really.

[Joensuu]

One thing that has always puzzled me is why cuts and staff reductions always result in cuts to "front line services" in the Public sector?

 

It is not like this in the Private sector. Take Tesco, whatever you may think of them, for the past 20 years they have become a success story and in a cut throat and low margin business have become the major player in the Country. You can not tell me they have not cut staff numbers or made efficiency savings the past 5 years. I bet there have been recruitment bans and less staff working in stores. Obviously they have opened new stores taking on more people, but whatever their way of measuring efficiency is, whether £'s per hour worked or staff numbers per sq of retail space, I bet they have less staff doing more. Did the senior managers and CEO of Tesco accept the argument that cuts would "effect customer service"? Of course not, Managers would have been told to get on with it, deliver higher sales and still maintain customer service. They would have done this by moving staff about, clearing out the deadwood, cutting down on sickness and working smarter. Can this attitude be transferred to the Public sector? It bloody well should be.

 

Take my dustmen. On a Bank Holiday Monday, they pick up my bins by 07.30pm, they are running down the road, working full on. A normal Monday it's 10am at the earliest and they're dawdling about. What's the reason for this? I suspect that Bank Holidays are "job and finish" (although I don't know). If they can do the job so much quicker on a Bank Holiday, why cant they do it every Monday? My mates a post man, he told me that if there's someone sick or overtime available the first people back from their rounds pick this up, you still get paid your normal day plus the O/T. Therefore he gets round as quick as he can, to snap up the O/T. When there's no O/T he does his round in his paid hours. Why is there not a Manager questioning this, why isn't he being asked, "why does your round take 5 hours (although he's paid for a full day) some days and a full day on other days. Why does he do his round quicker on a Saturday, as well.

 

No Private Company I've ever worked for would put up with these examples. I have yet to work for a Company that, whether it was the 80's, early 90's or now, that have not sometime reduced numbers. Guess what, every single time we have to do the same job, deliver the same results and there are no excuses. If Private Companies can make cuts and deliver the same results, why can't the Public Sector?

 

Perhaps because workplaces aren't offering adequate incentives to stimulate/reward hard work. All but the strangest brown-nosing ladder-climbers tend to grind along at around 70-80% capacity except once of twice a fortnight when the brown stuff hits the fan.

 

Also doesn't your post sound a little Stalinesque? You know, five year plans, working at 100% etc. Secret Commie?

[Joensuu]

Because they don't want to, simple really.

 

Or, perhaps because the benefits of many of those people who are 'cut' are likely to cost the government about the same as they previously did in wages?

[Saint George]

and for decades in Britain, Public Tax money has just been this huge unacountable black hole that spews out pound notes on demand....Very few people had much of an understanding or interest of where it all came from, same way as kids expect their pocket money every week......That's what living under Nanny's apron does for you.

 

Looks like the penny maybe finaly dropping with a few more peeps now though.

[Saint George]

Or, perhaps because the benefits of many of those people who are 'cut' are likely to cost the government about the same as they previously did in wages?

 

So public sector jobs are just a way to get the 'no hopers' off of benefits?.......I gotcha, it all makes sense now

[Lord Duckhunter]

Perhaps because workplaces aren't offering adequate incentives to stimulate/reward hard work. All but the strangest brown-nosing ladder-climbers tend to grind along at around 70-80% capacity except once of twice a fortnight when the brown stuff hits the fan.

 

 

So people need an incentive to work at 100%? it defies belief.

 

We have to work at 100%, not through any incentive but because that's our job, and we're dealt with if we dont. I'm paid to ensure my guys work 100%, not "grind along at 70-80% capacity". If they did that, I'd soon find myself out on my ear.

 

Anyway, thanks for backing up my point that savings can be made without affecting front line services. If everyone worked at full capacity, that would be a great start.

[Joensuu]

So people need an incentive to work at 100%? it defies belief.

 

We have to work at 100%, not through any incentive but because that's our job, and we're dealt with if we dont. I'm paid to ensure my guys work 100%, not "grind along at 70-80% capacity". If they did that, I'd soon find myself out on my ear.

 

Anyway, thanks for backing up my point that savings can be made without affecting front line services. If everyone worked at full capacity, that would be a great start.

 

 

Of course all your staff work at 100% No time for coffee breaks in your office eh? No posting on online forums during work hours eh? And what hours is it you work again Lord D? Or is that a rule only your staff have to abide by?

 

Sorry to shatter you're illustion, but whether Public or Private, few people work every day at capacity.

[Lord Duckhunter]

The only web site that can be acessed during work is The BBC, so I post in my own time. The staff do have a coffee break, it's part of their terms and conditions. I even allow them a lunch break, but it's unpaid. I do whatever hours I need to, sometimes it's 45 others it's up in the 70's. I can assure you that my staff work pretty much flat out, they do not "grind along at 70-80% capacity". If they did, I would be out.

 

If I was told to cut 20% of my staff, they would still expect the same work. I would just have to rearrange things, prioritise, find smarter ways of working. The line I will hear is "you're paid to manage whatever we want, and if you can't, we'll get someone in who can".

 

You still haven't explained to me how my postie mate can finish early when it suits him, and the dustmen work quicker on a Bank Holiday. Just 2 examples, I'm sure there are thousends more.This is not a rant against Public sector workers, my wife is a midwife and works damn hard. However there are thousends of public sector workers taking the mick. If they stopped doing so, we may be able to pay off Labours Credit card bills, without too much pain.

[Joensuu]

You still haven't explained to me how my postie mate can finish early when it suits him, and the dustmen work quicker on a Bank Holiday. Just 2 examples, I'm sure there are thousends more.This is not a rant against Public sector workers, my wife is a midwife and works damn hard. However there are thousends of public sector workers taking the mick. If they stopped doing so, we may be able to pay off Labours Credit card bills, without too much pain.

 

I can finish early when it suits me, so it's not just your Postie, it's us skiving Private sector workers too. You're lucky your binmen work bank holidays at all. Mine don't, and we end up not knowing whether they will come as usual, or later that week, while sometimes they seem to come the day after they usually would have. Perhaps they have a different system altogether, perhaps they half the binmen get the bank holiday off, while the others have to work 14 hour shifts to cover them - then get a different day off later that week? Who knows? But it does seem a little mean spirited of you to be criticising workers getting up early on a bank holiday... I do hope they get generous overtime.

 

As for your office, sounds like a lovely workplace. No paid lunch break, beautiful. Blocked websites, how, err Maoist. Are you allowed to tell jokes? Take toilet breaks (without clocking off?).

[angelman]

Let's face it, we would all like to work as few hours as possible. In the private sector when overtime needs doing it works on a give and take basis. There seems little give and take in the public sector. I know that is unfair on people such as those wonderful nurses, I am more about councillors.

 

When I was a bit younger, 6-8 weeks of the year needed about 100+ hours a week. (Person I worked with said he had had to do a 48 hour shift, which I can't imagine Mr Councillor ever doing as I am sure it would be against is Human Rights!) Harvest time doesn't wait for you and the work had to be done to process the fruit asap. We got a little bonus and watered and fed very well, and a little trip away to "celebrate" finishing. Give and take and it was a happy ship.

[Kadeem Hardison]

Let's face it, we would all like to work as few hours as possible.

 

This isn't true. I'd like to work more hours. I don't want any extra pay though. You see, I work for Lord Duckhunter. I love working for him. I love to bathe in his glow. He motivates me to work 100% capacity ALL THE TIME. It is the great working conditions and charismatic boss that makes it so enjoyable.

[buctootim]

I can assure you that my staff work pretty much flat out, they do not "grind along at 70-80% capacity". If I was told to cut 20% of my staff, they would still expect the same work. I would just have to rearrange things, prioritise, find smarter ways of working.

 

My postie mate can finish early when it suits him, and the dustmen work quicker on a Bank Holiday. This is not a rant against Public sector workers, my wife is a midwife and works damn hard.

 

Dont you see this inconsistency Duckie? you're saying that - if pushed - you could get the same work done with 20% less staff whilst criticising public sector workers for finishing early on occasion.

 

The reality is that nearly all workers - private or public - can do more by working flat out under pressure for short periods of time - but cant sustain it week in week out.