What would the public sector accept?

BroomBurner

I would rather a paycut, or a suspension of increments, than forced unpaid leave. I see absolutely no reason why they can't suspend increments.

In fact, if they had any balls, they would halt all increments owed to CPSU members who, on the advice of their unions, would not take part in the mid-year PMDS review. This is a necessary part of the review, which goes towards your end-of-year PMDS, which then effects whether someone receives their increment. Last week, the CPSU finally said that their members could take part - surprise surprise, right before end-of-year.

In my mind, if you failed to take part in the PMDS cycle, regardless of what stages, then you pay the price - no increment.

murphaph

BroomBurner wrote: »

I would rather a paycut, or a suspension of increments, than forced unpaid leave. I see absolutely no reason why they can't suspend increments.

In fact, if they had any balls, they would halt all increments owed to CPSU members who, on the advice of their unions, would not take part in the mid-year PMDS review. This is a necessary part of the review, which goes towards your end-of-year PMDS, which then effects whether someone receives their increment. Last week, the CPSU finally said that their members could take part - surprise surprise, right before end-of-year.

In my mind, if you failed to take part in the PMDS cycle, regardless of what stages, then you pay the price - no increment.

Is an increment not a pay rise?

BroomBurner

murphaph wrote: »

Is an increment not a pay rise?

Yes it is, is there a point to your question? Not being facetious here, just wondering why you asked.

murphaph

BroomBurner wrote: »

Yes it is, is there a point to your question? Not being facetious here, just wondering why you asked.

I saw one other post here a while back that claimed increments weren't treated as pay rises and just wanted clarification. Would a typical public servant say he'd got a pay rise if asked if in fact he'd only received an increment? I really wonder why two different terms for the same thing exist (in the PS) tbh. Anyone know where this came from?

Gumbo

murphaph wrote: »

I saw one other post here a while back that claimed increments weren't treated as pay rises and just wanted clarification. Would a typical public servant say he'd got a pay rise if asked if in fact he'd only received an increment? I really wonder why two different terms for the same thing exist (in the PS) tbh. Anyone know where this came from?

i'd class an incriment as a pay rise imo.

kippy

kceire wrote: »

i'd class an incriment as a pay rise imo.

Same here.....Don't know what else you could class it as......

BroomBurner

I would also class an increment as a payrise. It's called an increment, I think, due to the fact that it's standardised. It takes the responsibility of awarding individual payrises from people in the PS, which is both good and bad.

I've never viewed my increments as a God-given right, but know a few who do, unfortunately.

diverdriver

My core objection to your posting style is the unnecessary use of terms of abuse. It reduces discussion to the level of name-calling.

Fine Mr Breathnach, I did use perjorative terms. I don't often do so. But on this occasion I feel it fits.

Let's look at how they behaved.

Ignoring the reality of the economic bind this country is in. They pursued the agenda of no pay cuts and led their members into a campaign of pointless marches and a strike, including their 'once in a generation' slogan which looked to me suspiciously like a call to arms, (not literally of course). This fits neatly with the, quite honestly the rather Marxist attitude of many senior union officials. They make no secret of it. They fostered the idea of a private/public sector split apparently driven by the media. This split simply doesn't exist because all of us are inextricably intertwined. Yet again and again we hear the same term used by interviewees on television in the papers and here on this very website. 'We in the public service are fed up being scapegoated for this recession' A certain expert on propaganda now long dead, must be smiling in the grave.

Frequent suggestions of a wealth tax is another rather Marxist viewpoint (or is it Trotskyite, I can never remember). Pure fantasy that one.

Now facing across the table from the government, they suggest unpaid leave, which anyone with half a brain knows is a fudged pay cut. Most of all it demonstrates a paucity of ideas and is a demonstration of how poorly thought out this whole campaign is. Even Cowan realises this. Frankly the unions are in danger of making FF look like economic geniuses.

So yes, my rather abusive description is unusual. But frankly I stand by it.

My Father, a long standing trade unionist, from whom I inherited a distaste for FF, sadly acknowledged at the end of his life that the the unions did as much damage to this country as the politicians.

Not much has changed. The problem now is that more than ever we need unions to protect much of what we have, yet they don't seem capable of it.