Public sector want inflation busting rises again

[Cambon]

2 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said:

It circles back to which jobs to cut. The common ones to get criticised are Cabinet Office and DfE. The non-IT bit of Cabinet Office has a wage bill of about £8m, and that includes HR. The DfE agencies combined have a wage bill of about £6m. Bin them all off and you’ve saved probably £10m/year. Great, but the wage bill just at Nobles Hospital alone is £150m, and even at that level they have huge problems with staff retention.

There are tough conversations to be had about what we want. We want to compete with the Channel Islands on tax but they don’t have a free to access NHS; a trip to the GP in Jersey costs you up to £38 and a trip to A&E in Guernsey costs up to £570.

Jersey has always charged for doctors appointments. The few times I went to A&E I was not charged. Last time was as a Manx resident, not Jersey. Cannot speak for Guernsey. If you attend A&E over here as a non resident, theoretically you can be charged. 

[John Wright]

2 minutes ago, Cambon said:

If you attend A&E over here as a non resident, theoretically you can be charged

Not if you’re British resident. Reciprocal Agreement applies for first 6 months here temporarily.

[Banker]

21 minutes ago, Cambon said:

Jersey has always charged for doctors appointments. The few times I went to A&E I was not charged. Last time was as a Manx resident, not Jersey. Cannot speak for Guernsey. If you attend A&E over here as a non resident, theoretically you can be charged. 

Guernsey charge & also charge if you attend A&E and that’s for residents!!

[Albert Tatlock]

1 hour ago, manxman1980 said:

You're suggesting a whole sale restructure of the public sector and your starting point is HR?  That would be the department with the expertise and knowledge of how to plan and manage restructures effectively to minimise risk and future claims?

I can tell you that managers who think they understand the legislative requirements around what you are proposing are the worst to deal with and often the ones that wind you up in an Employment Tribunal.  

Are the HR team in the public sector effective?  I don't know I don't work there but I do know HR and if you have the right people and enable HR to be more than personnel then it can deliver results.  

That's the point of starting there.

[manxman1980]

24 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

That's the point of starting there.

What is?  You think they are ineffective?  You think they don't have the knowledge and skills required?

Or, as often happens, are you viewing HR, Learning & Development, IT as costs to the organisation and would prefer to target them than make the truly difficult choices to take out more 'operational' roles?

You also risk losing your best HR people if you start there as they, like other talented people elsewhere in organisations, are the ones who will find new roles easily.  You then get left with the less talented and skilled people.

Seen that happen plenty of times in the past as well.

[Albert Tatlock]

22 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

What is?  You think they are ineffective? 

I know they are.

[MadAsHell]

1 hour ago, asitis said:

Financial suicide for the island !

They're going to get up to 15% from some companies, due to Pillar II.

[Two-lane]

31 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

You also risk losing your best HR people if you start there as they, like other talented people elsewhere in organisations, are the ones who will find new roles easily.  You then get left with the less talented and skilled people.

This is what will happen if a company asks for volunteers for redundancy.

In this case, it would be better to identify the least competent people, and some how remove them.

But if the gov. is an idiocracy, what will happen is that the person at the top will make sure that  the next one down is worse than him or her, and the next one down will do similarly. So the best people will be selected for exit.

But I'm a cynic.

 

[manxman1980]

10 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

I know they are.

If you say so.  As I say I wouldn't know.

I do know that you sound like a lot of other people who are anti-HR in general though.  A lot of the general hatred towards HR seems to stem from people generally only encountering HR professionals through rejected job applications, disciplinary, grievance and redundancy procedures.  

[manxman1980]

2 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

This is what will happen if a company asks for volunteers for redundancy.

It doesn't just happen when it comes to voluntary redundancy.  As soon as you start to make cuts in an organisation whether to save money or simply restructure you risk the best talent leaving.

That is why, every time I have been involved in these types of processes, I take great care to go through and identify who are the people we absolutely want to keep and assess the flight risk.  This assists with planning communication and engagement during the process.  

[Manx Bean]

3 hours ago, Ringy Rose said:

In the private sector they just put their prices up as high as they can. Which is why inflation on “telephony” is 11% and on “internet” it is 12%. And why Tesco have just announced a 9.1% pay rise for their staff.

Utter bullshit. Its not always possible to pass on all costs without pricing your products out of the market. Where I work we got a 1% increase and kept our jobs. It was a choice of that or get inflation linked payrise but place some colleagues jobs at risk. In other words, you cut your cloth accordingly..and for clarity, the senior managers didn’t get a rise or any bonus. 

What gives you the right to think your are different and deserve any more than me or anyone else working in the private sector?

Edited June 11 by Manx Bean

[manxman1980]

13 minutes ago, Manx Bean said:

What gives you the right to think your are different and deserve any more than me or anyone else working in the private sector?

I work in the private sector and think that Trade Unions (in any sector) will always ask for an above inflation pay increase.  They are there to represent the interests of their members in the first instance.  Occasionally that will mean that they will not push for pay increases if that leads to job losses.

In the Private Sector we have largely stepped away from Trade Unions preferring instead to represent ourselves and seek out a package we feel is acceptable.  In some cases that works perfectly fine but in many cases it doesn't particularly in relatively low skilled jobs where employers can, if they wish, abuse the power they have.

It is interesting to see politics come into this as well with a public worker v private sector worker battle.  In my experience public sector roles can carry some great benefits but you have to deal with an awful lot of bureaucracy and lack of long term planning as often the plans will change when a new Government is formed or a new Minister takes up post.  Private sector roles tend to pay better but have less fringe benefits, at least until you get into a senior role, and can often be much more fast paced.

Neither is right and neither is wrong.  They are just different approaches of utilising labour. 

[Albert Tatlock]

26 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

If you say so.  As I say I wouldn't know.

I do know that you sound like a lot of other people who are anti-HR in general though.  A lot of the general hatred towards HR seems to stem from people generally only encountering HR professionals through rejected job applications, disciplinary, grievance and redundancy procedures.  

I have no particular grievance, but I do know what I am talking about here.

You need to ensure HR is fit for purpose first, before starting any regrading,  restructuring and downsizing projects.

[Ringy Rose]

14 minutes ago, Manx Bean said:

Utter bullshit. Its not always possible to pass on all costs without pricing your products out of the market. Where I work we got a 1% increase and kept our jobs.

Without knowing what industry you work in I couldn’t comment.

But generally that is precisely what happens. 90% of the world’s grain comes from just four manufacturers- they can, and do, charge what they want as there’s no alternative, and are making record profits. Oil and gas companies are making record profits. So are manufacturers such as Unilever and Mondelez- even after the EU just fined Mondelez €300m for price fixing. So are retailers such as Tesco- their profits are up 159% and their CEO just got a 50% pay rise.

But do tell me more about how it is civil servants driving inflation.

17 minutes ago, Manx Bean said:

What gives you the right to think your are different and deserve any more than me or anyone else working in the private sector?

It’s not us versus them. People in the private sector should be getting wage rises that keep pace with inflation too.

And even if your company is struggling, look up the food chain and I bet your suppliers and your suppliers’ suppliers aren’t struggling.

[HeliX]

24 minutes ago, Manx Bean said:

Utter bullshit. Its not always possible to pass on all costs without pricing your products out of the market. Where I work we got a 1% increase and kept our jobs. It was a choice of that or get inflation linked payrise but place some colleagues jobs at risk. In other words, you cut your cloth accordingly..and for clarity, the senior managers didn’t get a rise or any bonus. 

What gives you the right to think your are different and deserve any more than me or anyone else working in the private sector?

You are entitled to take a real terms pay cut should you wish. Presumably there are reasons you accepted that rather than looking for work elsewhere. But there's nothing wrong with people demanding fair pay rises.