Civil servants redundancy payments @ 6 years Salary!

[Wildcat]

Partially, something in the region of 33%, while the rest was paid by the tax payer. Even if it is just 3 years, as you suggest, that’s a heck of a lot more generous then one weeks pay per year of service currently given by the workers in the private sector.

 

You are in the wrong pension scheme if that is all you can get as a lump sum.

[Gormenghast]

You're all talking bolleaux. The average civil service pension is about £4000. And they want to reduce it because of the **** up that has been made by the bankers.

 

Just wait until the cuts come. When you can't get what you are entitled to because there aren't enough people to process it.

[andyofborg]

Paying a large number of them redundancy however will cost more in the short term. Precisely the wrong thing to do when we have a short term blip in finances caused by bailing the banks out.

 

this has nothing to do with bailing out the banks, your quite correct in saying that this cost is a short term blip which would have been financed over the cycle quite easily. unfortunately, the previous government had already saddled the country with a massive structural debt which can only be addressed by cutting public sector spending

[Wildcat]

this has nothing to do with bailing out the banks, your quite correct in saying that this cost is a short term blip which would have been financed over the cycle quite easily. unfortunately, the previous government had already saddled the country with a massive structural debt which can only be addressed by cutting public sector spending

 

That is simply not true. The structural debt was the same as the one John Major's Govt was running with, in fact a bit less.

 

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/downchart_ukgs.php?year=1900_2010&view=1&expand=&units=p&fy=2010&chart=G0-total&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&color=c&title=UK%20Public%20Spending%20As%20Percent%20Of%20GDP

[Berberis]

You are complaining that they are getting more than you (that is quite clear in the original post of yours that i quoted). You accused me of various things because i was complaining about some people getting more than others.

 

It would be acceptable for those working in the public service to receive slightly higher packages then those working in the private sector for obvious reasons, but the figure they receive are nothing less than appalling, not only to those outside the sector but those within who receive no such golden handshake.

 

Why do you think such a huge disparity is justified?

 

It does seem to be a moot point now anyway as it appears common sense prevails

 

BBC NEWS: Civil servant redundancy payouts to be capped

Some civil servants have received payouts equivalent to six years' salary The government has set out plans to cap redundancy payouts to civil servants at a maximum of 15 months' pay.

 

ref:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/politics/10519726.stm

 

It seems the civil service gravy train (for some, and I have worked in the civil service myself) is finally over

[truman]

It would be acceptable for those working in the public service to receive slightly higher packages then those working in the private sector for obvious reasons,

 

Can I look foolish and ask why ?

[Berberis]

Can I look foolish and ask why ?

 

Its not foolish to ask a question

 

I would say that due to the years of unequal pay when comparing the public with the private sector and their relative disadvantage at finding a new job, this could be countered by allowing for a slightly more generous payout.

 

I’m not talking year’s worth of salary here, more like a few more weeks redundancy pay as the disparity between public and private sectors has all but vanished over the last 10 years anyway. The understanding that somehow the public sector is paid less than the private is somewhat outdated now and the two are very similar in terms of pay and conditctions.

[Wildcat]

As I said before the 6 years issue was dealt with 23 years ago.

 

This really does show the Govt up for what they are. So much for the promises of protecting accrued rights. The high Court has twice said it would be illegal to retrospectively change the compensation scheme.

 

So now they are resorting to primary legislation to retrospectively change Civil Service contracts. How vicious and nasty can an employer get? They might as well retrospectively change salaries while they are at it.

 

Well they can expect an awful lot of resistance. We shall see if they can get this through parliament.

[Wildcat]

I wonder, does it include humphry civil servants, or just the visible civil servants?

 

It will include the vast bulk of Civil Servants who are on low pay. The people most affected will be those that have dedicated their lives to public service and working on low pay on the basis of the rights and entitlements they have accrued.

 

Expect some big strikes over this and intensive lobbying of parliament.

 

"nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege" they plan to treat Civil Servants worse than they could treat criminals.

[Wildcat]

Its not foolish to ask a question

 

I would say that due to the years of unequal pay when comparing the public with the private sector and their relative disadvantage at finding a new job, this could be countered by allowing for a slightly more generous payout.

 

I’m not talking year’s worth of salary here, more like a few more weeks redundancy pay as the disparity between public and private sectors has all but vanished over the last 10 years anyway. The understanding that somehow the public sector is paid less than the private is somewhat outdated now and the two are very similar in terms of pay and conditctions.

 

Income Data Services, the experts in pay comparisons say otherwise:

 

* Administrative officers across the civil service delivering a range of services such as getting people back into work, tax credits and passports are paid £4,608 (21%) less than their colleagues doing comparable jobs in the private sector. Compared to the rest of the public sector the gap is £4,045 (19%) and for the financial sector the figure is £3,330 (16%).

* Executive officers who typically work in a supervisory role or a job which requires a vocational qualification are paid £4,783 (18%) less than the private sector and £3,945 (15%) less than the financial sector. Compared to rest of the public sector the gap is £4,503 (17%).

* Higher executive officers who manage teams of people are paid £5,338 (16%) less than their counterparts in the financial sector and £4,305 (13%) less than those working in the private sector. Compared to rest of the public sector the gap is £1,873 (6%).

* Administrative assistants who typically undertake clerical duties such as processing benefit claims, tax credits and self assessment forms earn £979 (6.5%) less than the private sector and £572 (3.6%) less than the rest of the public sector.

 

http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/news_and_events/news_centre/index.cfm/id/FA6EFBE0-1760-41D8-817FACE6DDED4482