Making the news today....

[trigger_andy]

Full list of MPs who voted against the NHS being protected from foreign control in Brexit trade deals

WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM

---

The London Economic | Caroline Lucas put forward the amendment, calling for "red lines in the negotiations" rather...  

Had a read. Am I right in thinking it’s an amendment from the Green Party and Starmer that was put to a vote and not passed?

[Mark J]

[difflock]

Aye, them dammned foringers wont be as good at killing and disabeling babies as our wonderful NHS trusts have proved to be.

Just saying like.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

53 minutes ago, Mark J said:

Not looking for a fight on this one Mark, but the reason they weren’t included this time is because they are still in the timeframe from their last negotiated pay deal. 
 

Aren’t we meant to stand by deals?

[Mark J]

16 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Not looking for a fight on this one Mark, but the reason they weren’t included this time is because they are still in the timeframe from their last negotiated pay deal. 
 

Aren’t we meant to stand by deals?

 

Maybe so, but the dynamics are somewhat different now.
I think it's reasonable to renegotiate things when unforeseen events occur.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

26 minutes ago, Mark J said:

 

Maybe so, but the dynamics are somewhat different now.
I think it's reasonable to renegotiate things when unforeseen events occur.

Ah yes, “bands”

 

If not absolutely all, the vast majority of public sector pays scales are subject to bands which increase annually in recognition of an additional years experience and seniority gained in post. 
 

This was the “hidden” pay rise that (I’m going to say all - pending someone coming up with a random exception) public sector workers received OVER AND ABOVE the very well reported minimal rises during the period of austerity. 
 

Whilst the headlines reported zero or minimal % public sector pay rises during austerity, they spectacularly and simultaneously excluded annual incremental band progression from the headlines. 
 

The notion that public sector pay has stagnated for a decade is simply inaccurate. Annual (automatic) incremental band progression paints a very different picture to that which is broadly painted. 

[Youngstu]

7 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Ah yes, “bands”

 

If not absolutely all, the vast majority of public sector pays scales are subject to bands which increase annually in recognition of an additional years experience and seniority gained in post. 
 

This was the “hidden” pay rise that (I’m going to say all - pending someone coming up with a random exception) public sector workers received OVER AND ABOVE the very well reported minimal rises during the period of austerity. 
 

Whilst the headlines reported zero or minimal % public sector pay rises during austerity, they spectacularly and simultaneously excluded annual incremental band progression from the headlines. 
 

The notion that public sector pay has stagnated for a decade is simply inaccurate. Annual (automatic) incremental band progression paints a very different picture to that which is broadly painted. 

From what I understand, there is usually a top band which is reached after a certain number of years, for example teachers can reach the top of their pay scales in about 12 years. So a more experienced staff member who chose to stay in the classroom rather than chasing promotion would have had their pay stagnated for a decade. I'd imagine it's a similar scenario across other industries where pay increases with experience, that only goes so far. So in terms of majority of people in those industries their pay did increase but only as they gained experience, those who were already experienced and chose to stay in more hands on roles rather than going for more desk based jobs had pay stagnation or cuts when annual rises were below inflation. 

[nepia]

Not looking for a fight on this one... increments have always been there, in the private sector too.  But they're not automatic (though usually implemented) and not annual.  They vary but automatic increment every year is not the norm.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

10 hours ago, Youngstu said:

From what I understand, there is usually a top band which is reached after a certain number of years, for example teachers can reach the top of their pay scales in about 12 years. So a more experienced staff member who chose to stay in the classroom rather than chasing promotion would have had their pay stagnated for a decade. I'd imagine it's a similar scenario across other industries where pay increases with experience, that only goes so far. So in terms of majority of people in those industries their pay did increase but only as they gained experience, those who were already experienced and chose to stay in more hands on roles rather than going for more desk based jobs had pay stagnation or cuts when annual rises were below inflation. 

There are some good points there - and I'd agree, up to a point.  I don't know about teaching so don't want focus too much on that specifically as it may be the exception that doesn't prove the rule.

 

In general, public sector employment is considerably more hierarchical than private sector.  There are clearly defined routes, opportunities and mechanisms for advancement in 'grades.'  

 

Within each 'grade' there are perhaps 12 'bands' which equate to an automatic incremental annual pay increase based upon gaining another year of experience / seniority.

 

It would be beneficial to first consider the purpose of grades and then the purpose of bands.

 

(In theory) grades provide the mechanism for personal development and career advancement for the most dedicated, diligent, able and ambitious.  No problem there, that's meritocracy at its finest - what actually happens in practice might be quite different but that's a whole other subject.  Career prospects, advancement, pay rises exist in the public sector as an incentive - again, brilliant, meritocracy and the beginnings of a pyramidical staffing structure.

 

Bands similarly recognise attained experience within that grade but primarily are intended as retention incentives - the longer you stay the more we pay because staff churn is expensive.

 

So if we accept that there are almost unlimited public sector promotion prospects (limited only by ambition / ability) and there are 12 annual bands in most grades where an automatic incremental pay increase is guaranteed, that actually means you have 12 years of pay increases before you need to have achieved a grade promotion which puts you back to band 1 of 12 at the next higher grade and then the process recommences.

 

Also bear in mind, the process loosely described above has continued unabated throughout the entire (so called) austerity period where annual pay rises have been frozen - so it's actually not been any form of stagnation (as the headlines would have us believe) for the majority.  

 

Why do organisations have promotion opportunities and why do they recognise and reward experience?  Because there is an obvious requirement to retain and promote from within.

 

The harsh reality can be seen that - if you haven't advanced by grade within 12 years, you may have peaked.  Suck it up.  Alternatively, GOYA and get yourself a promotion. 

 

Another harsh reality is that bands are set at or around 12 years because it's most likely that by the 12 year point, if you haven't left the job already, you probably won't because you're tied in with personal financial commitments that mean you need the job more than the job needs you.  Net result, there's no need to incentivise someone to stay if they really can't leave.

 

That's life Im afraid.  The sort of basic economics and reality that appears so vacant in the Labour / Union / Momentum logic.

 

I speak with 30 years public sector experienced and the equivalent of 11 grade advancements - 1 every 2.7 years if you average it out.

 

There's no sympathy for public sector whining here, try convincing a private sector worker that public sector are hard done by.... 

 

 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

10 hours ago, nepia said:

Not looking for a fight on this one... increments have always been there, in the private sector too.  But they're not automatic (though usually implemented) and not annual.  They vary but automatic increment every year is not the norm.

Exactly the point.  Private sector is pay rise tied to performance or output.  Increase performance / output (hopefully) get a pay rise.

 

Public sector is annual incremental increase (every year for 12 years then start again if promoted) + annual pay rise (+/-) + bonus payments...

 

Smoke and mirrors....