Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 I thought I'd ask this on this thread as well dune just in case you don't go back to the other one: Why has the government refused to carry out an audit on the cost of public sector pensions? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Some might say that to assume the pension you originally signed up for at the time wouldn't need to evolve at some point in the future to accomodate the changes in human life expectancy was avoiding looking at the big picture. I think that's somewhat unfair. I was always more than willing to accept national pay deals, including pay freezes, and other minor alterations to my terms and conditions, but such a substantial adjustment to the terms of my pension has a massive impact on me. In many of the private sector pension schemes, defined benefit promises were honoured to existing incumbents, but were then withdrawn over time to new entrants. There is a bigger picture regarding the attractiveness to aspiring teachers in the future, but I just don't think it is fair to unilaterally withdraw and substantially alter my terms of employment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Here's an extract of an email I sent to my son's school 2 days ago: Please could you provide me with the following figures: a) the percentage of school staff that voted in the strike ballot b) the percentage of school staff that voted to strike (including those who didn't vote in the ballot) c) the percentage of school staff who, in light of the strike vote, have decided to go on strike on Wednesday (including those who originally voted against strike action and those that didn't vote) d) how many staff you are short of in order to provide a "safe site" To be fair there is a enough employent legislation out there that has to complied with that I'm amazed they even gave you the time of day with a response. The Head would simply not have the data for a), b) and c) (this is a national dispute, with a national vote and the teachers are not in dispute with the school). As for d), well I'd be happier to leave such a decision to the professional involved, rather than a second guessing "interested observer". I think that the Headteacher would have a much better feel for the security, safety and operations of her school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 To be fair there is a enough employent legislation out there that has to complied with that I'm amazed they even gave you the time of day with a response. The Head would simply not have the data for a), b) and c) (this is a national dispute, with a national vote and the teachers are not in dispute with the school). To be fair, given that likely scenario, why wouldn't the head simply say "sorry, I don't have the figures, the vote is taken nationally", rather than appearing to be obstructive by saying "not able to comment"? Many people really don't help themselves in this sort of situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 To be fair, given that likely scenario, why wouldn't the head simply say "sorry, I don't have the figures, the vote is taken nationally", rather than appearing to be obstructive by saying "not able to comment"? Many people really don't help themselves in this sort of situation. Well one answer might be that trousers looks like he's angling for ammunition. In which case he should follow the proper channels: make a FOI request. But it should be made to the appropriate body, which isn't necessarily the school. The Head is not necessarily the person in the know. The union conducts the ballot nationally, and it's not permissible for the Head to demand information on who among the staff personally did and who didn't vote for the strike in his or her school alone. That route lies the potential for intimidation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Trousers is normally a sensible poster, but if I was the head I would have ignored that email. It will no doubt bring about a few laughs in the staff room tomorrow morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 To be fair, given that likely scenario, why wouldn't the head simply say "sorry, I don't have the figures, the vote is taken nationally", rather than appearing to be obstructive by saying "not able to comment"? Many people really don't help themselves in this sort of situation. the Head did prefix their response with "I am afraid that I am not able to comment on many of your questions as that information is not available to me." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Thorpe le saint re Audit of pensions that is a question that has been asked in Scotland and the fact that Scotland may be ahead of their English counterparts in laying any regulations on pensions, it is not clear whether any valuations have been undertaken re the long term nature of pensions. Apart from the Hutton report Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Um The information should be available in the next couple of days from the school though after all teachers have to go through a form of registration i.e attendance records. The HT wouldnt know today who did or did not turn up for work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Um The information should be available in the next couple of days from the school though after all teachers have to go through a form of registration i.e attendance records. The HT wouldnt know today who did or did not turn up for work Not really. Those who vote for a strike do not equal those who go on strike. Many union members adopt the understandable principle of collective responsibility, whichever way they voted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 the Head did prefix their response with "I am afraid that I am not able to comment on many of your questions as that information is not available to me." Which is fine, but why then the rather terse and arguably confrontational "no comment" snippets after that? Someone has asked a series of legitimate questions, albeit aimed at someone who wouldn't actually know the answers, why the need for an arsey response like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Um The information should be available in the next couple of days from the school though after all teachers have to go through a form of registration i.e attendance records. The HT wouldnt know today who did or did not turn up for work Trouser's a,b and c questions all relate to the vote and the Head will never have that information. As for d), while I certainly wouldn't be sharing that with someone who would at best be second guessing from a position of ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Which is fine, but why then the rather terse and arguably confrontational "no comment" snippets after that? Someone has asked a series of legitimate questions, albeit aimed at someone who wouldn't actually know the answers, why the need for an arsey response like that? I didn't read them as legitimate questions. Taken for what they were - and not knowing the mild if confused manner of trousers - they could be seen as fishing for information that could be used to intimidate or make political capital out of at the expense of the school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 why the need for an arsey response like that? I didn't read the reply as being "arsey" and reading it again, I still can't see that. Having said that, given the absurd, second guessing and ignorant questions, i think the reply received was actually quite polite. i would have been minded to either ignore the fishing or told him it had nothing to do with him (in a nice polite way of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Trousers is normally a sensible poster, but if I was the head I would have ignored that email. It will no doubt bring about a few laughs in the staff room tomorrow morning. If they're that easily pleased I might just take to the stage. Money for old ropethis making people chuckle malarkey. Sigh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 given the....ignorant questions What was "ignorant" about the questions? I was genuinely interested to know what percentage of teachers at my son's school had decided to go on strike. Plain and simple curiosity. I still don't see why people apparently don't have any desire to be candid or transaparent with the situation. I don't see how that helps build their case and garner more sympathy from parents etc. Yours ignorantly.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 I didn't read them as legitimate questions. Taken for what they were - and not knowing the mild if confused manner of trousers - they could be seen as fishing for information that could be used to intimidate or make political capital out of at the expense of the school. The answer I got told me all I needed to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Trousers is normally a sensible poster I beg to differ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Trousers is normally a sensible poster, but if I was the head I would have ignored that email. It will no doubt bring about a few laughs in the staff room tomorrow morning. If ours he would simply be called a clueless cock for asking such dumb questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 If ours he would simply be called a clueless cock for asking such dumb questions. I've always admired the insightful wit of staff rooms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 What was "ignorant" about the questions? . Because it should be patently obvious that the Headteacher would not be privy to that information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Trousers is normally a sensible poster, but if I was the head I would have ignored that email. It will no doubt bring about a few laughs in the staff room tomorrow morning. So, as a head, you'd be happy to share a "private and confidential" email from a parent around the staff room having just extolled the virtues of privacy and confidentiality to them...? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Because it should be patently obvious that the Headteacher would not be privy to that information. How was it obvious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 The questions I posed were in response to a 'school closed' announcement email from the headmistress which included this sentence: "We have now had time to assess the impact of the national industrial action on our staffing and we cannot guarantee a safe site on that day." Why would it be wrong from that to assume that she knew percentages of staff that had decided not to turn up for work? What had they been assessing if not staff numbers...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 So, as a head, you'd be happy to share a "private and confidential" email from a parent around the staff room having just extolled the virtues of privacy and confidentiality to them...? ;-) Yes, as I wouldn't have extolled the virtues of privacy and confidentiality to them, as I would have ignored it ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Yes, as I wouldn't have extolled the virtues of privacy and confidentiality to them, as I would have ignored it ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 How was it obvious? Because the Head was not involved in organinsing the various ballots. Because the Head would not be informed of the result of the various ballots (other that at a national level). Because the dispute is not with the school. Beacuse teachers, support staff and administrative staff have no obligation to tell anyone whether or not they voted. Because teachers, support staff and administrative staff have no obligation to tell anyone how they voted. because teachers, support staff and administrative staff have no obligation to inform the school whether or not they were withdrawing their labour. Given your ignorance of these obvious facts, I struggle to understand your motivation or intention with regards posing these questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Because the Head was not involved in organinsing the various ballots. Because the Head would not be informed of the result of the various ballots (other that at a national level). Because the dispute is not with the school. Beacuse teachers, support staff and administrative staff have no obligation to tell anyone whether or not they voted. Because teachers, support staff and administrative staff have no obligation to tell anyone how they voted. because teachers, support staff and administrative staff have no obligation to inform the school whether or not they were withdrawing their labour. but apart from that....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Because the Head was not involved in organinsing the various ballots. Because the Head would not be informed of the result of the various ballots (other that at a national level). Because the dispute is not with the school. Beacuse teachers, support staff and administrative staff have no obligation to tell anyone whether or not they voted. Because teachers, support staff and administrative staff have no obligation to tell anyone how they voted. because teachers, support staff and administrative staff have no obligation to inform the school whether or not they were withdrawing their labour. Given your ignorance of these obvious facts, I struggle to understand your motivation or intention with regards posing these questions. Thanks for the reply. I think we'll have to agree to differ as I think they were valid questions. I was simply interested in how close the school had come to staying open. But, as I say, the nature of the response I received indirectly told me much more than I had asked for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Thanks for the reply. I think we'll have to agree to differ as I think they were valid questions. They might be valid questions, but they were questions that the Head was never going to be in a position to answer and given your interest, you really should have been aware of that. I certainly wouldn't want someone so ignorant of these basic details to be second guessing a senior teaching professional as to whether or not they shoud take the serious and wide reaching decision of closing a school. If you still feel that strongly, then you might need to write another letter, but this time address it to Chris Grayling seeking changes to employment law, secret ballots and how industrial disputes are regulated so that your questions might have a chance of being answered next time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Thanks for the reply. I think we'll have to agree to differ as I think they were valid questions. I was simply interested in how close the school had come to staying open. But, as I say, the nature of the response I received indirectly told me much more than I had asked for. What difference does it make? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 (edited) They might be valid questions, but they were questions that the Head was never going to be in a position to answer and given your interest, you really should have been aware of that. As I mentioned above, my questions were in response to the head writing to parents to advise: "We have now had time to assess the impact of the national industrial action on our staffing and we cannot guarantee a safe site on that day". I assumed from that statement that the head was in possession of the at least the basic facts regarding staff numbers. What else would they be "assessing" other than staff numbers based on the ballot results? If the closure was a fait acomplis ordered from above then there would be no need to "assess" the situation, surely? Even if the head was ignorant of the facts that could have answered my questions, the professional thing to have done would have to pointed me in the right direction: "Dear Mr Trousers, Thank you for your valid questions about your son's school. Unfortunately I'm not in a position to provide you with the information you've requested, however, if you contact blah at blah I'm sure they will be able to help you. Yours...." I certainly wouldn't want someone so ignorant of these basic details to be second guessing a senior teaching professional as to whether or not they shoud take the serious and wide reaching decision of closing a school. It wasn't my intention to use the stats to "second guess a senior teaching professsional". I was simply interested to know whether it was a close call or not. If you still feel that strongly, then you might need to write another letter, but this time address it to Chris Grayling seeking changes to employment law, secret ballots and how industrial disputes are regulated so that your questions might have a chance of being answered next time around. Fair point. I do indeed intend following it up with "the powers that be". As I've said all along, I still don't understand why anyone would want to keep the high level percentage stats a secret in the first place. Surely having acccess to facts in any debate is a good thing? Edited 30 November, 2011 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 As I mentioned above, my questions were in response to the head writing to parents to advise: "We have now had time to assess the impact of the national industrial action on our staffing and we cannot guarantee a safe site on that day". I assumed from that statement that the head was in possession of the at least the basic facts regarding staff numbers. What else would they be "assessing" other than staff numbers based on the ballot results? If the closure was a fait acomplis ordered from above then there would be no need to "assess" the situation, surely? Even if the head was ignorant of the facts that could have answered my questions, the professional thing to have done would have to pointed me in the right direction: "Dear Mr Trousers, Thank you for your valid questions about your son's school. Unfortunately I'm not in a position to provide you with the information you've requested, however, if you contact blah at blah I'm sure they will be able to help you. Yours...." It wasn't my intention to use the stats to "second guess a senior teaching professsional". I was simply interested to know whether it was a close call or not. Fair point. I do indeed intend following it up with "the powers that be". As I've said all along, I still don't understand why anyone would want to keep the high level percentage stats a secret in the first place. Surely having acccess to facts in any debate is a good thing? You're being disingenuous trousers. You were certainly not asking 'basic facts' of the headteacher; you were asking highly detailed ones to which he/she could not possibly know the answers without asking some pretty intimidating, and quite possibly illegal questions of staff. You were asking for specific figures on the following: a) the percentage of school staff that voted in the strike ballot - The Head would not be entitled to ask individual staff to find out b) the percentage of school staff that voted to strike (including those who didn't vote in the ballot) The Head would not be entitled to ask individual staff to find out c) the percentage of school staff who, in light of the strike vote, have decided to go on strike on Wednesday (including those who originally voted against strike action and those that didn't vote) Same as above - in spades, when you consider the actual implications of what you place in brackets! d) how many staff you are short of in order to provide a "safe site" The Head was clearly making a 'best guess' based on the sentiment in the school; this was his/her call and you are not entitled to second-guess, because you have no legal responsibility for playing God in this way. You may not have intended it, but your questions would have appeared to the Head as intimidating and not a little sinister. I think you spend too much time on here - it can be corrosive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 As I mentioned above, my questions were in response to the head writing to parents to advise: "We have now had time to assess the impact of the national industrial action on our staffing and we cannot guarantee a safe site on that day". I assumed from that statement that the head was in possession of the at least the basic facts regarding staff numbers. What else would they be "assessing" other than staff numbers based on the ballot results? If the closure was a fait acomplis ordered from above then there would be no need to "assess" the situation, surely? And as I have pointed out for someone so interested in the nuances of whys and hows regarding keeping a school open it is somewhat alarming that they are not even aware of the most basic issues regarding a secret ballot and calling lawful strikes. The biggest problem for Heads is that unless staff volunteer whether or not they are going on strike then they are in an absolute nightmare of a position of not knowing how many staff will not turn up on the day. As our Head did, they may have infomarlly tried to canvass anticipated numbers, but she was never going to be in a position of knowing one way or the other until 8:30 this morning. Of course they are going to assess potential problems, local and national Government advice, assessing whether they could open some Year Groups, whether they could provide some alternative would suggest that this head didn't take this decision lightly and went about it in a conscientious manner. Even if the head was ignorant of the facts that could have answered my questions, the professional thing to have done would have to pointed me in the right direction: "Dear Mr Trousers, Thank you for your valid questions about your son's school. Unfortunately I'm not in a position to provide you with the information you've requested, however, if you contact blah at blah I'm sure they will be able to help you. Yours...." Given your ignorant, somewhat "busy body" and second guessing I actually think the reply was rather pleasant. Fair point. I do indeed intend following it up with "the powers that be". As I've said all along, I still don't understand why anyone would want to keep the high level percentage stats a secret in the first place. Surely having acccess to facts in any debate is a good thing? The results of all the ballots are published in line with the current employment law. Any further analysis of that and you start to undermine the sanctity of a secret ballot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 I used to really like the programme "Teachers" on Channel 4. It had Andrew Lincoln and the woman who plays Jack Dee's wife in Lead Balloon, forget her name. Can any teachers tell me if teaching really is like how it was portrayed in the programme? Thanks in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 You're being disingenuous trousers. You were certainly not asking 'basic facts' of the headteacher; you were asking highly detailed ones to which he/she could not possibly know the answers without asking some pretty intimidating, and quite possibly illegal questions of staff. You were asking for specific figures on the following: a) the percentage of school staff that voted in the strike ballot - The Head would not be entitled to ask individual staff to find out b) the percentage of school staff that voted to strike (including those who didn't vote in the ballot) The Head would not be entitled to ask individual staff to find out c) the percentage of school staff who, in light of the strike vote, have decided to go on strike on Wednesday (including those who originally voted against strike action and those that didn't vote) Same as above - in spades, when you consider the actual implications of what you place in brackets! d) how many staff you are short of in order to provide a "safe site" The Head was clearly making a 'best guess' based on the sentiment in the school; this was his/her call and you are not entitled to second-guess, because you have no legal responsibility for playing God in this way. You may not have intended it, but your questions would have appeared to the Head as intimidating and not a little sinister. I think you spend too much time on here - it can be corrosive. Ok, hands up....fair assessment (especially the last bit!) My intentions were genuine. I still think knowing how likely your child's school is to close next time (if there is a next time) is useful information to know. But I'll concede I should have asked the questions in a less direct manner. Heading into town for a beer so over and out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 [/color] And as I have pointed out for someone so interested in the nuances of whys and hows regarding keeping a school open it is somewhat alarming that they are not even aware of the most basic issues regarding a secret ballot and calling lawful strikes. The biggest problem for Heads is that unless staff volunteer whether or not they are going on strike then they are in an absolute nightmare of a position of not knowing how many staff will not turn up on the day. As our Head did, they may have infomarlly tried to canvass anticipated numbers, but she was never going to be in a position of knowing one way or the other until 8:30 this morning. Of course they are going to assess potential problems, local and national Government advice, assessing whether they could open some Year Groups, whether they could provide some alternative would suggest that this head didn't take this decision lightly and went about it in a conscientious manner. Given your ignorant, somewhat "busy body" and second guessing I actually think the reply was rather pleasant. The results of all the ballots are published in line with the current employment law. Any further analysis of that and you start to undermine the sanctity of a secret ballot. Ok. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 UmI can see where trousers is coming from . The head teacher wouldnt know which unions members voted perhaps an FOI to the relative unions maybe more forth coming. The head teacher would know who supported the strike and who didnt. Figures will be required by the relevent organisations and governments on the effect of the strike on services. These will already have been provided for in various public sector organisations As for D then your right on this. Two people going on strike could stop the school opening ie the HT and janitor as they are the bonafide key holders of the school Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 I used to really like the programme "Teachers" on Channel 4. It had Andrew Lincoln and the woman who plays Jack Dee's wife in Lead Balloon, forget her name. Can any teachers tell me if teaching really is like how it was portrayed in the programme? Thanks in advance. Any particular aspect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 A damp squib - is how David Cameron describes Thorpe-le-saint and his chums little strike. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 "Better service than normal" at the airport according to one frequent flyer. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 UmI can see where trousers is coming from . The head teacher wouldnt know which unions members voted perhaps an FOI to the relative unions maybe more forth coming. It's not about the Unions not being forthcoming, it's about the sancity of a secret ballot enshrined in Law (early 80's under Thatcher). It is the legal right in a secret ballot that you, and you alone know how you voted. There are a number of reasons why secret ballots were brought in, one being to stop any attempts of intimidation from either fellow workers or employers. The head teacher would know who supported the strike and who didnt. Figures will be required by the relevent organisations and governments on the effect of the strike on services. These will already have been provided for in various public sector organisations The headteacher would only know after the event, never before. Even then, there are limitations and protection for both those who either went on strike or who continued to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 A damp squib - is how David Cameron describes Thorpe-le-saint and his chums little strike. :lol: I wouldn't call 2,000,000 people a damp squib. It's a pretty huge statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Best quote of the day from me (and very insightful journalism from my former employers at Meridian). "I don't agree with the strike, I've never had a pay rise in 20 years". Now either: a) He was on a mega wedge in 1990 and it's been slowly "decreasing in worth" ever since, or b) He has a really crap job, or c) He has a really horrible employer, or d) He has terrible negotiating skills, or e) He was making it up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 (edited) Best quote of the day from me (and very insightful journalism from my former employers at Meridian). "I don't agree with the strike, I've never had a pay rise in 20 years". Now either: a) He was on a mega wedge in 1990 and it's been slowly "decreasing in worth" ever since, or b) He has a really crap job, or c) He has a really horrible employer, or d) He has terrible negotiating skills, or e) He was making it up Ahahaha, what the hell. I just looked up inflation figures and that would be equivalent to a 42% pay cut! Edit: And that's not including this years inflation! Edited 30 November, 2011 by Saintandy666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 I wouldn't call 2,000,000 people a damp squib. It's a pretty huge statement. And it'll be used to wrap tomorrows fish and chips. Public sector workers are just going to have to get used to the fact they are being dragged into the real world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 And it'll be used to wrap tomorrows fish and chips. Don't let the facts get in the way then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 Don't let the facts get in the way then. When you are old enough to be a taxpayer you can have an opinion. But until then you are far too naive to have a view on any of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 When you are old enough to be a taxpayer you can have an opinion. But until then you are far too naive to have a view on any of this. I earned enough to pay tax last month actually, so boo hoo. But hold on, are you saying that low earners aren't allowed to have an opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 30 November, 2011 Share Posted 30 November, 2011 I earned enough to pay tax last month actually, so boo hoo. Paper rounds must pay well where you live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now