|
|
Post by peterba on Dec 17, 2022 21:33:04 GMT
I have yet to see any convincing evidence that £30m was a real rather than a paper loss.
[£30bn, not £30m]
Real enough for those people whose mortgage repayments have increased as a result of the Truss/Kwarteng fiasco.
|
|
|
|
Post by lesleysm2 on Dec 17, 2022 21:54:10 GMT
A lot of these strikes aren't just about pay they're also about protecting jobs and working conditions Yes the nurses want and deserve better than a pay rise that given inflation will be a pay cut but a friend of mine who is one of the nurses on strike tells me it's also about patient care because they just can't recruit enough staff for cover NHS nursing vacancies are at an all time high and not just nurses a few weeks back one of her best health care assistants (the people who do most of the physical patient care since nurses now have degrees) left, she loved the job but the reality is she can earn a bit more on a Tesco's check out
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffr on Dec 17, 2022 22:26:22 GMT
I'm making the point that no one has a God given right to always keep pace with inflation.
Mick.
Working in manufacturing in the south-east of England, I have to say that I agree with this. I've lost count of how many years it's been since I have had an "annual" pay rise, I've had to change jobs to secure a rise in income... in fact until a few months ago, I was earning less than I was about 5 years ago for various reasons. Covid didn't help, cost me one job then I couldn't find anything permanent until this past September. Of course it would be nice to get an automatic increase every year but if your employer isn't making money, how do they afford a pay increase? One problem is that those at the top are taking more and more for themselves whilst those at the bottom, who actually "do" the work rather than "manage" or "plan" have been left behind, and a percentage increase is obviously less helpful for them than the higher earners. Whether or not the current strikes will result in a dramatic change and doing away with some of the obscenely high salaries and bonuses of people at the top, I don't know (but somehow I doubt it). Unions striking may ultimately benefit their workforce, but for how long? Some industries have disappeared from the UK because the high wages have in time made the UK uncompetitive, so factories have shut and the work gone overseas... I wish that the trade union leaders could see that. It still hurts when I see the figures being bandied around that so many staff working on trains get paid more that skilled engineers and designers with much experience and talent, yet the rail staff go home at the end of their shift with no worries about how to keep a business running in the future, how to sort out financing and investment for new plant and equipment etc etc. IMHO the current crisis could simply have been averted by the government regulating and subsidising the cost of energy. It would have stopped high gas and electricity bills, stopped increased transport costs being passed on by higher prices of food and all other goods etc, and then inflation would have been kept low and there wouldn't be a demand for significant wage rises with the accompanying strikes. But the furlough scheme meant that we would all be paying more in tax for some time anyway, it's a complete mess all of the government's doing - and not just the present government but governments going back 40, 50 years or more. Too much vested interests in short-term gain (re-election) rather that thinking of longer term benefits to the country as a whole (TBH a bit like trade union thinking too......) There is far too much short term thinking and nothing like enough forward thinking. Selling off the utilities made a short term gain but has resulted in the UK’s services paying for the foreign owners’ shareholders dividends. Failure to invest makes the balance sheet for the current year look good but sooner or later what wasn’t bought this year has to be obtained at a higher price. Sure sometimes you have to economise in one area to finance another but you can only get away with it for a while. The long term failure to maintain our roads is now biting the councils in repairs to damaged cars and they have to repair the road, double whammy. If MP were given a “use by” date there might be more forward planning. When an MP knows s/he can’t restand at the next election there is no reason not to vote for the unpopular but necessary. How about we let them have three terms (three general elections) and then they must stand down?No politically related jobs for another five years and a confidentiality clause to prevent them from profiting from what they know is on the way. |
|
|
|
Post by andy on Dec 17, 2022 22:29:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffr on Dec 17, 2022 22:55:10 GMT
A lot of these strikes aren't just about pay they're also about protecting jobs and working conditions Yes the nurses want and deserve better than a pay rise that given inflation will be a pay cut but a friend of mine who is one of the nurses on strike tells me it's also about patient care because they just can't recruit enough staff for cover NHS nursing vacancies are at an all time high and not just nurses a few weeks back one of her best health care assistants (the people who do most of the physical patient care since nurses now have degrees) left, she loved the job but the reality is she can earn a bit more on a Tesco's check out I agree, skilled people need to be retained and that costs but it costs far less than training a replacement and then waiting while they gain experience. Rishi might be right that the nurses pay offer is fair, if they were being paid properly in the first place. Back in the 90s we went through a process called “Business Process Reengineering”, it was a mess. That however isn’t important, what is important is that we were told “people are staying too long, you need more turnover of staff”. The effect of high staff turnover is similar to that of failing to retain staff, you spend a lot of money making the new staff as competent as the ones who left. As a result, despite paying them less, costs rise. What the business actually needed was a good, long running, apprenticeship scheme to produce the skilled staff for the future. It also needed to accept the good, skilled, dedicated, professionals must be paid appropriately. The same is true of the NHS, the Civil Service, the Police, Ambulance and Fire services etc. It isn’t true of politicians, they become institutionalised and stop thinking about serving the country (fortunately not all of them). |
|
|
|
Post by peterba on Dec 18, 2022 8:04:08 GMT
I hadn't seen the figure put that high before, Andy!  I'd seen figures ranging between £30bn and £40bn.
Regardless of the actual figure [as calculated by finance 'experts'  ], IMO, the important point is the effect on people. The Truss/Kwarteng mini-budget certainly made life harder for those making mortgage repayments. |
|
|
|
Post by peterba on Dec 18, 2022 8:43:47 GMT
Rishi might be right that the nurses pay offer is fair, if they were being paid properly in the first place. That's right, Geoff. Nurses have effectively lost 20% since 2010 as a result of government austerity policies, and that's why they are now pitching for 17%. I hope they get it.
A couple of years ago, the government was very keen on clapping NHS workers on a Thursday night, but that has proved to be (as I'm sure many suspected at the time) nothing more than cheap window-dressing. |
|
eightbittony
Full Member
[insert witty status message here]
Posts: 111
|
Post by eightbittony on Dec 18, 2022 9:05:12 GMT
I support those striking.
For the most part, people are prepared to suffer at work and put up with a lot of crap. We all do it, we know we do. So when people decide that enough is enough, and they're prepared to not get paid near the festive period in a difficult economic climate, in order to make a point then I think that point is important.
It's never just the last 6 months, this has been brewing for 6 years. People tend not to strike as a result of overnight changes, they strike because they're at the end of their good will after years of abuse.
|
|
|
|
Post by mick on Dec 18, 2022 9:25:09 GMT
Apolitical!!! Wow!!! A few random comments. 1. I didn't see Thatcher's appearance coming. It's been 30 years and is it 7 Prime Ministers since she had any power. Reagan? Isn't he something to do with the USA? 2. Martin, where's the evidence for the PO 'banking hours' assertion? I've looked and even the PO union doesn't mention that. There's an agreement (which I admit to only skimming) between the Union and PO about dealing with the shrinking letter market and the growing parcel market. The union claims that the PO are trying to implement changes without consultation - but there's no mention that I can see of your hours banking story. 3. If the rail unions had their way every train would still have a fireman (stoker) and guard as well as a driver! 4 Long term planning. If only. There are many areas that would have benefitted. Power is an obvious one given the current situation. 5. Mortgages etc. Increased mortgage rates were on their way long before Truss. It's true that the Truss affair was a complete disaster and accelerated the problem, maybe even made it worse. However to think that was the only cause is a bit blind. Just had a text to say that my power is going off (safety!!!!) so stopping now. Best wishes Mick
PS none of the above is to be taken that I'm against higher pay - for some sectors, especially nurses. I declare an interest here. My youngest son is a nurse and so is his wife.
|
|
|
|
Post by andy on Dec 18, 2022 9:34:21 GMT
I hadn't seen the figure put that high before, Andy! I'd seen figures ranging between £30bn and £40bn.
Regardless of the actual figure [as calculated by finance 'experts' ], IMO, the important point is the effect on people. The Truss/Kwarteng mini-budget certainly made life harder for those making mortgage repayments. I think the 30bn or so is what it cost the taxpayer but the cost to the economy as a whole was much higher. We are all paying for it....or at least those of us not getting pay rises that keep us ahead of inflation and adding fuel to the fire. |
|
|
|
Post by mick on Dec 18, 2022 10:14:24 GMT
I hadn't seen the figure put that high before, Andy! I'd seen figures ranging between £30bn and £40bn.
Regardless of the actual figure [as calculated by finance 'experts' ], IMO, the important point is the effect on people. The Truss/Kwarteng mini-budget certainly made life harder for those making mortgage repayments. I think the 30bn or so is what it cost the taxpayer but the cost to the economy as a whole was much higher. We are all paying for it....or at least those of us not getting pay rises that keep us ahead of inflation and adding fuel to the fire. Power is restored!
You are talking about very different things.
The 300bn is the decline in the value of the market. I'm unable to discover what's meant by the market so have no idea how valid the number is. That's akin to saying that your house has declined in value
The 30bn is additional (unfunded) expenditure caused by some of their giveaways. That's akin to saying that your household expenses have increased but your income has not.
I believe that the 30bn began at 60bn but the Hunt 'about turns' reduced the damage but couldn't eliminate it.
Mick
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffr on Dec 18, 2022 11:22:18 GMT
3. If the rail unions had their way every train would still have a fireman (stoker) and guard as well as a driver! Trains are very heavy machines needing skilled operators to drive them. The idea that there should be two people in the cab is a completely valid one, that there is a "dead man's handle" doesn't negate the benefits of having a second person. The Guard was always there for the benefit of the passengers as a safety measure to ensure that it was safe to proceed. However, that has absolutely nothing to do with the current dispute. The train drivers are represented by The Amalgamated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen (ASLEF). They are not in dispute.
The striking workers are represented by The Rail Maritime and Transport union (RMT).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2022 11:32:58 GMT
My mistake, I did mean £30 bn. However no idea on the real loss rather than the paper loss ie impact on the stock markets. However these are coming back but in the short term eg my pension funds have suffered so retiring on 31 Dec this year is not possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by MJB on Dec 18, 2022 12:26:21 GMT
My source for the 'banked' hours plan was my postie. He's not some militant trade unionist, but his is mightily pee'd off with the Royal Mail's plans. A friend of mine worked as a health & safety guy at Network rail before retiring. From a purely safety perspective he's horrified at the staffing cuts the rail companies are proposing. Feel free to moan about people getting 'high' pay rises, but remember that anyone claiming a state pension is getting a 10% rise.
|
|
|
|
Post by davem399 on Dec 18, 2022 13:33:44 GMT
My source for the 'banked' hours plan was my postie. He's not some militant trade unionist, but his is mightily pee'd off with the Royal Mail's plans. A friend of mine worked as a health & safety guy at Network rail before retiring. From a purely safety perspective he's horrified at the staffing cuts the rail companies are proposing. Feel free to moan about people getting 'high' pay rises, but remember that anyone claiming a state pension is getting a 10% rise. The government abandoned the triple lock deal for pensions last year. And 10% of not a lot is not much at all. ETA, I also get a company pension, but the rules only allow a maximum increase of 5% p.a., although the company can allow more at it's discretion. |
|
I'd seen figures ranging between £30bn and £40bn.
], IMO, the important point is the effect on people. The Truss/Kwarteng mini-budget certainly made life harder for those making mortgage repayments.
