gash!
so the job centre has drawn up the 10 jobs most likely to survive the recession. surprise surprise, they are almost all in the public sector.

but the public sector is funded by taxes from the private sector. so how the hell does the dumbass government think there is still going to be enough money to pay for it all, when the bottomless well of taxpayers' money is now running drier with every fresh batch of 2,000 redundancies and every new administration?

even answers like "your mum" would have more sense in them than anything this shower of pricks could come up with...
( rachelswipe with a fork, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 16:43, 41 replies)

As a public sector worker
I have no answer. The expansion of staff in the DWP and Jobcentre Plus is probably pretty self explanatory though. More unemployed = bigger dole queues = need for more staff to process them.

In the North East the public sector is the biggest employer by far, I believe. Partly because previous Governments shot the arse out of traditional industry.
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Tue 27 Jan 2009, 17:03, closed)

Easy -
the government simply fires up the printing presses to run off some more money.

As a bonus, people with safe public sector jobs are less likely to vote for one of those nasty other parties who might want to reduce government spending.

What could possibly go wrong?
(TheCircleIsNowComplete is longing for the endless immensity of the sea, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 17:06, closed)

Fair point
My job is only 'safe' until 2013, at which point the funding runs out.

Although doubtless there'll be another wave released at that point. I might have got bored by then though.
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Tue 27 Jan 2009, 17:14, closed)

The gubmint
While I am all in favour of slashing 50% from our public spending (dead easy, don't vote for Labour. Ever) it's the misuse of money that worries me greatly.

Calamity Brown has borrowed 10x the amount we needed to help us fight WWII - we only finished paying for the war in 2005.

If he had a brain - and I strongly suspect he doesn't - he'd put the money into infrastructure, where you'd see a return in years to come. Public works committees building urgently needed railway improvements, motorways (whatever the eco-mentalists think, restraining personal transport will cost us billions), bridges, an eco-friendly transport network (at least give your voters the choice before you tax the arses off them) would transform Britain into a country with decent infrastructure and would help wealth flow from the cities and beyond the suburbs.

The government would reap those rewards many times over...
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Tue 27 Jan 2009, 17:26, closed)

You see
you're thinking like a sensible person, that's why Obama has said he will plough shit loads of cash into roads, bridges, railways and stuff.
(Bazongaloid, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 20:56, closed)

As a keen member of the eco-mentalist class
I say add energy efficiency and alternative energy to the list.

Now that our North Sea bonanza is running out, every day the UK has to go out, begging cap in hand, to ask for more oil and gas from various countries of variable friendliness and all we have to offer in return is a currency that is falling in value and financial services that are looking less and less useful.
(TheCircleIsNowComplete is longing for the endless immensity of the sea, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 21:15, closed)

Sir, you are spot on...
Baling out the banks so they can continue with suicidal profligacy is one thing, but hedging our bets against a currency going down the shitter faster than John Prescott's mutton vindaloo is utter madness.

Brown HAS to go. Now. Britons owe more than our annual GDP, we're screwed unless we can guarantee some technological or infrastructure advantage in the future. I'm all for energy independence, but not a political solution like a wind turbine - expensive, requires frequent maintenance and is very environmentally unfriendly to manufacture and dispose of.

We need investment in nuclear fusion, tidal power (much more reliable than wind turbines), new nuclear plants to bridge the gap (Britain has to lean on Germany and France here - the nation that invented commercial nuclear power now no longer possesses the means to build new plants), we need proper roads to help ease emissions and a train service that's cheap and comprehensive.

But instead we'll get more expensive trains, lesbian creches, wind farms, QUANGOs and committees because we've fuck all else to offer.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Tue 27 Jan 2009, 23:25, closed)

click
Was just discussing this and our pathological hatred of having to deal with the public sector today. Also, "shower of pricks" is a top insult, it's up there with "go climb a wall of cocks" and "a shower of shites led by a shitemaster"
(mymilkshakebringsallthemongstotheyard poison hearts, poison minds - joining hate, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 19:02, closed)

Erm
thanks....
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Tue 27 Jan 2009, 19:30, closed)

Cry me a river
I have my own business which I happen to break my arse on and pay a LOT of taxes as a reward; which are subsequently spent on a load of underachievers running around in the firm belief that they are doing real jobs, discussing their next very important meeting, whilst waving paper around.
But don’t get back to me tomorrow or for the next 14 days or ever: due to flexi days, not in till 10am/ gone by 4pm / 2 hour lunch break / picking my pubes in the toilet / interference with my core hours / bank holiday / holiday holiday / sniffly nose for 2 weeks / stress for the next 6 months. Don’t ask for my colleague or manager either because their up to the same sad sack tricks.
Public sector are a shower of lazy shites - having spent 4 years as a lawyer engaged with various governmental and local agencies I possess the t-shirt and tattoo so don’t tell me any different, sweet Jesus, Mary and indeed Joseph the stuff I’ve seen and the shovelling of public monies down the toilet would make you cry. If anything why not add another layer of bureaucracy as if three or four wasn’t enough through increased pointless legislation, we can then have another shower of pricks bumbling around feeling self important; oh wait, hang on, I have to pay for this abortion. So that’s the wrecker, the people who pay the taxes are going to the wall, whilst those in receipt have a smarmy smirk that they have a guaranteed paper waving job until 2013, by which time they may or may not be bored.
I work 7 days a week, 15 hours a day, 24 hour call out, with fuck all holiday to make a go of things; if I’m blowing stuff out of my arse I still turn up at 7am every day and get work done BECAUSE I HAVE TO. Sadly this sentiment is not shared by my work shy public sector colleagues, nor indeed their equally capricious scally dole scum mates, whom I unfortunately seem to be funding. Wicked. Get some reality check wanker, failing which a real job if indeed this is at all possible given your hopeless public sector skill set.
( Light In Chains maker of the ikea sofa, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 21:19, closed)

I work in the private sector
I aim to work in the public sector as soon as possible. I don't like you pre-emptively insulting me.
(Cuthbert Annihilator, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 21:30, closed)

I work in the public sector
I work in a rough primary school where being told to fuck off without have a chair thrown at you is a good day.

Don't tell me I'm lazy.
( Mrs Entity is in hiding., Tue 27 Jan 2009, 21:41, closed)

He did admit he was a lawyer
And you know what they say, it's just 99% of them that give the rest a bad name.
(TheCircleIsNowComplete is longing for the endless immensity of the sea, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 21:48, closed)

tl;dr + you bore me + you are rude.
( enoughblueskyforsailorstrousers, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 8:03, closed)

HEAR HEAR
I heartily endorse the above. In terms of local authority paper pushers of course.. there are worthy causes in the public sector (NHS etc,) but even they, sadly suffer under-funding due to the idiots who do nothing whilst mopping up most of the money

The question is, what are we going to do about it?

I for one am going self-employed so that I can control how much of my money the government gets to splash around on their pathetic pet projects, (currently on PAYE.. this will not be continuing.) Even they will have to cut down on such luxuries eventually.
(AndyC4m Eject Eject [><], Wed 28 Jan 2009, 10:24, closed)

M.E.K.O.N.
I was being mildly self deprecating.

I'm well aware that a lot of the public sector is wasteful, I'm well aware that many workers within it are hopeless and wouldn't survive in the real world. I've spent long enough working with them. And long enough working with a client base that doesn't actually want to fucking work. Thank Christ I got out of that game.

I'm also well aware that a lot of private businesses couldn't give a flying fuck about their clients and have completely hopeless staff that haven't a clue what they are fucking doing. I don't, however, assume that you are one of them. So why assume the same of me? In my book that makes you out to be the wanker. It sounds like you made a conscious decision to get out of the law business - why was that? Moral scruples? Disillusioned? No social life as a result? Couldn't hack the pace?

So much of my job is about trying to break down the bureaucracy in the system to make life easier for the customer. Which I don't have to do, I might add, but since I hate wasteful bureaucracy as much as the next man, I'm happy to make life as easier for the punter as possible.

Don't assume that all public sector workers are out for an easy time. I'm lucky, and I acknowledge that. I have a job that I enjoy, I get a decent wage (after about 14 years of staggering on by on abysmal salaries and ten of those loathing my work), but I work hard for it. Probably not as hard as you, but you know what? That's life. Used to be a lawyer? Probably your choice. You own your own business? Good for you. That's your choice as well. Part of my job involves people forming their own businesses. I may get bored of it or disillusioned at some point; the point is, if I do, I'll make an active decision to go out and find something else rather than whining on about how fed up I am. It might take a while (Christ knows it did the last time, but I did it), but I'll perservere.

And my job isn't guaranteed. Believe it or not, no job in the public sector is anymore. I could be made redundant at the drop of a hat. You know what? I don't particularly mind.
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Wed 28 Jan 2009, 13:23, closed)

There are limitations
Mostly the way that it works in the private sector is that if you have a permanent job, then it is secure. If you leave your job, you won't be replaced (those around you just have to compensate for your workload). If you end a contract, it won't be renewed.

I know this because I am a public sector worker (a frontline health professional in the NHS). My three year contract comes to an end in three weeks and it will not be renewed. I have been completely unable to find work elsewhere because the NHS aren't hiring at the moment (and the private sector don't significantly employ my profession).

The teams I have worked in over the past two years have consistently shrunk (due to people leaving/going on maternity leave etc. not being replaced) whilst our workload has increased.

Whilst the job security that exists is a luxury in this economy, it is also an absolute necessity for teams who work on skeleton staff doing essential work. It is also part of the pay-off many of us accepted (along with the pension and maternity benefits) when we agreed to work for such low wages relative to our qualifications and experience, and in such poor working environments.

The vast majority of the public sector has been so understaffed for so long, that the fact that it is not shrinking now at the same speeds that many private businesses are, does not mean it is not suffering.
(cherrynicola, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 20:34, closed)

.
The NHS is laying people off, really? Shit, that's harsh.

In the long run you've got demographics on your side, the UK population is aging so you're in a profession where demand will increase. That probably doesn't help when you're looking at the end of a contract though.

Maybe I read the wrong parts of the press but it sounds like the public sector is not understaffed overall, it's just that too much money goes on useless projects like the police force hiring media relations experts or the NHS hiring multiple layers of bureaucrats.
(TheCircleIsNowComplete is longing for the endless immensity of the sea, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 21:04, closed)

Yeah
But think about how the press report on your industry or profession - be it science, technologies, whatever; on the whole, the mainstream press takes a very uneducated, sensationalist stance on just about everything.

Having worked in nine NHS teams across six trusts over the past nine years (equivalent to a residency position), every one of my managers has been hugely over-worked and under-resourced. In comparison to the 3 private hospitals I worked in, there is virtually no management presence at all.

It's true that at times we get frustrated about how resources are getting allocated, or about who is making financial decisions and how, but the press is so far off the mark it isn't funny.
(cherrynicola, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 11:50, closed)

Not everyone...
I work in the public sector and I work extremely hard. I am also paid a reasonable wage, although I started out on the wrong side of fuck all. My job is reasonably secure, but not necessarily safe. We have lost 3 posts through simply not filling them, and there is a meeting next week about how further savings can be made.

Unfortunately, some of my colleagues' attitude to the job makes me pull my hair out. They are the biggest bunch of workshy bastards I have ever had the misfortune to meet. They are the very reason the public sector gets such an appalling reputation - and its basically because we can't sack anyone.
(grandmaswhiskers, Tue 27 Jan 2009, 21:54, closed)

Haha. Calling them a shower of pricks... coming from a lawyer. Fuck me, I've heard it all now.
( enoughblueskyforsailorstrousers, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 7:54, closed)

oi!
that is all.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 9:22, closed)

;)
The lawyers I know are all nice people.
( enoughblueskyforsailorstrousers, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 18:57, closed)

ah
it's not the public sector workers who i am slagging off, although some of them are lazy twats, others work their arses off.

it's the govt advising people to go for jobs there, to keep down the unemployment figures. it all comes back to the same question:

BROWN, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY FOR IT?
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 9:23, closed)

But...
I'm no economist, but there must be something wrong with your reasoning there. After all, Economies have existed in the past where there is no private sector at all; if your working at anything then surely you're generating wealth?

Isn't it a bit simplistic simply to say that taxes pay for the public sector, without considering the effect of the public sector on the wider economy?

Besides, it's surely better (and cheaper in the long run) to pay public sector workers to work rather than pay them to look for work.
(silene, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 9:55, closed)

it's the basic bottom line
that anything the government pays for either comes from taxes or from borrowing. and then paying back the borrowing from taxes.

obviously public sector workers also pay tax, and i am NOT having a go at them. well, apart from the twunts at hammersmith and fulham council. but this government seems to see the public sector as a bottomless pit, without thinking that the money still has to come from somewhere.

so don't encourage everybody to go and work in the public sector, because otherwise you'll run out of blank cheques in that public funded chequebook...
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 10:50, closed)

But what you forget
When you label 'the public sector' in that way, is that some public sector workers do actually have a positive effect on the economy through their work. Not only does treating people effectively for many health (and mental health) problems at an early stage keep down the overall costs for the country of dealing with those problems (not to mention the pain and suffering for the individual and their family), but it also reduces time off work, sick pay, potential for job loss, and impact on employers (especially small companies, who are greatly impacted by long-term sickness, and which could be the difference between the whole company going into administration and several people loosing their jobs).

Similarly, preventing, and dealing appropriately with issues such as domestic violence and child abuse can mean the difference between a lifetime in and out of services, or on and off benefits, or a more secure future in employment.

Of course, most of these things also mean less money for the blood-sucking lawyers...
(cherrynicola, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 12:07, closed)

i am not sure how much more clearly i can put this
I. AM. NOT. HAVING. A. GO. AT. PUBLIC. SECTOR. WORKERS.

i am saying that the government should not be trying to push everyone into the public sector, because they will run out of money to pay everyone's wages if they overload the system.

surely that's not a difficult comment to grasp?

since i am a property lawyer, feel free to make as many ambulance chaser jibes as you like, i'll agree with 99% of them, they've brought the profession a lot of ill-repute.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 12:20, closed)

I know you're not
And for the record, I agree.
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Wed 28 Jan 2009, 13:27, closed)

hoorah
now let's go and tell gordon...
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 13:35, closed)

righto
*dons public sector cape*

*strides purposefully out of door*
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Wed 28 Jan 2009, 13:38, closed)

I know you're not!
I didn't mean to imply you were. I just wanted to explain my position. And I still don't think the government is trying to push everyone into the public sector, otherwise there'd still be enough jobs for everyone in the public sector. It's just that the public sector aren't loosing their jobs as quickly as everyone else.

Also I was just having a fun little jibe at lawyers on the basis of stereotypes, cos there seems to be loads around doing the same about public sector workers on the basis of sterotypes. And if we can't make fun of lawyers then what has the world come to?
(cherrynicola, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 15:08, closed)

well yes
this is very true.

it must be very irritating to be tarred with the "skiving public sector" brush when you work that hard. and some public sector workers are workshy - don't you want to kick them in the feck?
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 15:22, closed)

I would
If and when I ever come across them myself.

It's the people at my bank that really get me going. And my boyfriend's too come to mention it (Lloyd's fucking TSB - don't know their fucking arse from their elbow - at least 8 banking errors this year, and have tried to blame us for every one until we've pointed it out to them. Also, can't call back after 8pm - er, we're not back from work by then; can't call back the next day, can't call back at weekends; can't call back on your mobile number - it's your fucking error arghhhh!).

And the workshy conveyencers and estate agents that tried to spin us some bullshit about whether or not we were going to actually own the garden not affecting the property price (just nervous first time buyers apparently, because we expected the deeds to match up with the estate agent's spec). It took over six months to exchange, with no chain and the mortgage all agreed, because they kept forgetting what lies they had told. THESE are the kind of people I want to kick in the feck. Generally.

/Ranty
(cherrynicola, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 16:29, closed)

cherrynicola
You have a point. My job is about growing the rural economy. And OK, it could arguably be done via private sector delivery, but it would still be getting done with public money.
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Wed 28 Jan 2009, 13:42, closed)

Yes but...
... if the public sector workers contribute enough to the economy that the government gets back more in taxes than it pays in, then your objection doesn't hold.

Like I said, economies with no private sector have worked reasonably well in the past. It doesn't necessarily matter whether I pay the government or a private company to deliver goods or services as long as they are produced. I can see that there's an issue about what proportion of the economy is under direct government control, but I'm not sure that the problem you propose really exists (prepared to stand corrected though).

P.S I can see that you're not having a go; no need to be defensive. I'm just interested, that's all.

P.P.S Nothing wrong with being a lawyer. I, for one, quite enjoy not having to go out and fight people who don't play by the rules!
(silene, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 13:18, closed)

yup, i agree with that,
up to the point where "the government gets back more in taxes than it pays in" - which is precisely what won't happen with this group of nobrots in charge!
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 13:22, closed)

I'd love to see .............
those in the public sector try and do a proper job for a few weeks - without flexi-time, two hour lunch breaks and a 37 hour week.

As somebody who worked in local government for over ten years before escaping to work in the real world I think I'm qualified to state that:

80% of local council white collar staff do sweet f.a. and get paid a shit-load of money for doing it. They get institutionalised after a while - 20 years of pasing the same piece of paper backwards and forwards between 10 different departments means they become useless in the real world.

There are whole departments purely in charge of 'policy' - they spend months producing a 40 page document on some utterly trivial subject, full of totally incomprehensible management speak which no will ever read and then a few years later they'll rewrite it 'cos the last one is now out of date.

But by far the two biggest wastes of space in the local council are social services and HR - despite working there ten years I never actually managed to figure out what HR did (except get in the bastard way - oh and insist we interview a guy in a wheelchair for a paviours job)

As for social services (specifically social workers) what a fucking work-shy lot they were - one lass was on the sick for FIVE years due to stress - every six months she'd come back to work for a couple of days, become 'stressed' again and go back on the sick - but 'cos she never had more than six months off she was on full-pay for the whole five years.
They had human-rights at the council before the EC had even thought of it.
(apollo36uk, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 13:49, closed)

I agree to some of what you say
I've worked with loads of people that could be classed as career civil servants, and they have certainly become institutionalised. I saw the horror in their eyes when computers started replacing pen and paper - big, burly hardmen being reduced to gibbering wrecks because they suddenly had a typewriter with a telly attached to it on their desks.

I could be classed as a career civil servant, I suppose, having always worked in the public sector. Not really through choice initially; I started on a casual contract because I would rather work than not, it was the first job that came along, and I ended up being sucked in and trying to get out of it again for a few years.

I eventually found something that I get a buzz out of, that just so happens to still be in the public sector, and so now I don't mind. My current organisation is a bit different in that it has a very definite private sector vibe to it in terms of the work ethic. It actually threw me a bit for a few months and I did question my decision to join, but stuck with it. Now - I love it, I'm busier than I ever have been and it's great.

Point taken about the sick leave stuff though. And sacking. I've only ever seen two people sacked - one a senior manager who was discovered to have a stash of hard core porn in his desk; the other a casual admin person who was marched off the premises for managing to reconfigure the stand alone stationary ordering PC in order to send emails to his girlfriend - in the days before emails were commonplace. The kid was a genius...
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Wed 28 Jan 2009, 14:18, closed)

I really can't comment on your local council
But I have worked within the NHS and social services for 9 years, and I can assure you that the established culture is that of no lunch breaks at all (I certainly haven't taken one since I was band 4 - ie earning about £11,500 in a graduate job, you can't really blame me!). Flexitime is common yes, of course, to enable call out for emergencies etc., wouldn't you be grateful of this if someone close to you needed care at night or weekends?

As for a 37 hour working week. We are all contracted to work 37.5 hours under A4C. I would estimate my average working week to actually be around 60 hours. And there is no such thing as overtime pay (for the vast majority of staff anyway).

I have done more 'proper' jobs than I am able to blot out the memory of - including working in the city, in admin, as a librarian, as a waitress, in sales, as a runner, and in probate. If 'the real world' means working less than a 45 hour week on a reasonable salary with no chance of being physically assaulted, not having to witness the worst of societies pain and suffering, then yeah, it would be a shock to most of my colleagues.
(cherrynicola, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 15:01, closed)

Those 2 hour lunch breaks...
Anytime I was 'at lunch' in my previous job, I was in fact desperately trying to buy myself some time to actually sort out what the person who was ringing me wanted me to do, whilst balancing it with the other 300 million things I had to do that day.
(grandmaswhiskers, Wed 28 Jan 2009, 18:30, closed)