HeadingNorth Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 For the sake of arguement lets say you earn 200/week Now your employer comes along as says that the company is in dire straits. It can recover if it cuts it's costs. That means: A. You take a 5% pay-cut B. You're made redundant, You end up on JSA What would you rather, £190 a week or £65? I know which one I'd choose. You'd be amazed how many people simply refuse to make a choice when neither option is palatable. They insist on inventing a third option which they like better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Cut pay or loose job But it’s not a straight choice is it ………. There is no guarantee that anyone’s job is safe, what happens next year another pay cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Cut pay or loose job It is if the company/council has a budget shortfall and can't afford to pay everyone their current wage. They either pay everyone a smaller wage, or they fire some people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 It is if the company/council has a budget shortfall and can't afford to pay everyone their current wage. They either pay everyone a smaller wage, or they fire some people. You are missing the point, you could take the pay cut and still loose your job further down the line …….. its not one or the other. 7000 people are being asked to take a pay cut to save 200 ……… that’s a big ask from the 6800 that might think its not going to affect me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iansheff Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 So what happens to people who are living on the edge and can just get by and have their paycut will the banks say thats alright we will reduce your mortgage and not charge you anymore. Yes of course they will, dream on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazybaby Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Maybe they should cut the pay of their top earners, not sure if there are more recent figures but this article from 2008 states that Doncaster council tops the fat cat pay league. http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/doncaster-news/council_bosses_among_top_earners_1_611498 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 You are missing the point, you could take the pay cut and still loose your job further down the line …….. its not one or the other. 7000 people are being asked to take a pay cut to save 200 ……… that’s a big ask from the 6800 that might think its not going to affect me. But there's a stark difference between definite and maybe. Personally and you might think this a crass way of doing it, I'd poll all 7000 workers. Out of those that vote to refuse the pay cut, a lottery is taken and 200 names are drawn, those are the ones that lose their job. Those that vote in favour of the pay cut are safe from redundancy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 So what happens to people who are living on the edge and can just get by and have their paycut will the banks say thats alright we will reduce your mortgage and not charge you anymore. Yes of course they will, dream on. How many of those "living on the edge" pay for luxuries like subscription TV, a car etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 You are missing the point, you could take the pay cut and still loose your job further down the line …….. its not one or the other. If you did get made redundant in the future after accepting a pay cut, would you also get a lower redundancy package because of your reduced wage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 A local council is not in a position to make that happen. It just has to to spend less money. I thought I just said that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.