[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

And by any means you have made it quite clear what you mean....violence, rioting, terrorism, and murder!

I see your facebook page has also been shut down, probably due to your extremist posts.

Now stop tring to move all the topics towards your political agenda, and let us get back on topic.

For god sake, you keep on callling me an extremist, we sorry to dissapoint you, but I am not, I have not called for a "Ayran Race, "Workers of The World Unite", "Jihad" etc

---------- Post added at 14:45 ---------- Previous post was at 14:43 ----------

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

the main one been its anti growth.

---------- Post added at 09:59 ---------- Previous post was at 09:54 ----------



by increase the private sector pay rates?

adding a postcode lottery to job pay in the public sector is bad for growth but I do also agree with the point its bad as well for other reasons already stated such as.

attracting decent staff to poor areas, like good GPs and teachers.
people doing the same work but for different levels of pay based on where they live. I think its more likely to be based on the companys address tho, so it may be possible someone will live in an expensive area but travel to a poor located workplace. So it may force people to move to poorer areas.

So in affect it will make rundown areas even worse and good areas better widening poor/rich gap.

---------- Post added at 10:00 ---------- Previous post was at 09:59 ----------



I think the way they acting now they expecting to not be reelected so as such dont care about their public image and are just pushing through everything the tory donaters want (the rich want).


---------- Post added at 10:05 ---------- Previous post was at 10:01 ----------



people can be easily manipulated when the media backs government.

also proven with the voting referendum.

All this will do is make more people move to London or start rioting outside London, if this keeps going, it will be more than Scotland that starts demanding "freedom" from the UK!

---------- Post added at 14:47 ---------- Previous post was at 14:45 ----------

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

The trouble is that they are unlikely to increase anybodys pay, and it is just a costcutting excercise.

In my profession, if I worked 20 miles down the road I would earn an extra £6000 London weighting. If I worked 10 miles down the road I would earn and extra £550 as fringe London weighting. If I worked in my old home town in West Yorkshire I would earn the same as I do now, but I would be better off due to the cost of living, by anything between £4000 and £6000. The area where I work is an extremely expensive part of the country, yet in real terms we are probably in the worst financial position....but do you think the wages would go up in my area to compensate?....I don't think so.

Remember London has a high cost of living and the wages do not compensate, and they are the highest in the UK!

---------- Post added at 14:48 ---------- Previous post was at 14:47 ----------

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

the variations in the private sector however could also be accounted for different jobs for different companies tho.

with GPs, teachers etc. they working for the same employer doing the same work.

its nothing to do with subsidies but more to do with the private sector changing its priorities from salary levels to profit.

the only reasonings for this policy is probably company owners using their joke of a minister hotlines ringing up to complain their employees want pay rises (how dare they) and its harder to turn them down when the public sector pays better. Also the good old saving money as I suspect there will be a net saving from it.

Its funny how you consider it a subsidy, I wonder how much cash is going to the private sector from the NHS contracts and th high speed rail work.

Also, there are less unionised workers in the private sector then in the public sector!

---------- Post added at 14:50 ---------- Previous post was at 14:48 ----------

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

I used doctors and teachers because their jobs are more or less the same in the private and public sectors. I could also add firefighters and nurses to the list if you want, with the same results. In fact the only direct private comparrison to public sector firefighters would be airport firefighters, who I believe on average earn roughly 25% more.

Many public sector jobs have now gone to private contractors, who make a profit, and then pay very low wages. But this now puts those workers in the private sector.

You have to remember that many statistics are manipulated to fit in with the governments agenda, so don't take them too seriously. An example is how they reduced the number of fire death statistics. Now someone who dies in a fire that was started through arson, is not listed as a fire death, but as a murder. And someone who gets drunk, then passes out leaving their chip pan on, is listed as alocohol related, and not a fire death. Then someone who has a fire, and calls the fire service, but manages to knock the fire down themselves. If there are no visible flames on arrival of the fire service (even if it is still smoldering), this isn't put down as a fire.

There may be exceptions, but in general for long term employment it is well known that public sector jobs pay less. Although during a recession, businesses whos profits are down, may pay lower wages. But this usually changes as the economy improves, and unemployment drops.

By the way, it is illegal to pay men and women different pay rates just based on sex.

Which is why we need radical reform, like more trade union members and more powerful unions!

---------- Post added at 14:50 ---------- Previous post was at 14:50 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

so if the vote goes one way, it's democracy in action - if it goes the other way, it's manipulation.....

How can you explain people voting for a lower standard of living?