jastons wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:33 pm
All of them I would imagine. Do you think different?
Yes.
Again, how could a Nurse be 10% more efficient?
By working with better IT, by having standardised and automated Nursing Needs Assessments, by taking part in more efficiently operated MDTs, to have patient reviews determined in a more efficient 'needs based' way rather than going by the calendar/clock.
It would be helpful if the conversation matured enough to outgrow the notion that the entire NHS is one long Christmas special of Casualty when discussing it's efficiency, and that of other public services.
I'd be amazed if there are many public sector workers who don't look at some aspects of their job and say "that's a waste of time", "that's too complicated", "why are they involved?" "there must be a better way of doing it than that".
If, in some cases, certain areas of the public sector get inflationary (10%) rises, what happens when inflation drops to the targeted 2-3%, will they then have to take a subsequent pay cut?
bubbles1966 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:21 pm
How many nurses out of the total do you think spend their day 'saving lives'?
As I've always said when people slag off tradesmen, you're not paying for their hours, you're playing for their knowledge. I think the government would do well to learn that.
westham,eggyandchips wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:23 pm
If, in some cases, certain areas of the public sector get inflationary (10%) rises, what happens when inflation drops to the targeted 2-3%, will they then have to take a subsequent pay cut?
Greatest Cockney Rip Off wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:29 pm
As I've always said when people slag off tradesmen, you're not paying for their hours, you're playing for their knowledge. I think the government would do well to learn that.
Their pay-bands reflect their respective levels of expertise and knowledge, GCRO. Not all nurses are equal.Telling the truth isn't 'slagging someone off'.
Some are exploiting nurses & trying to use them as a human shield to prevent modernisation, efficiency and the debate about most productive use of resource within the public sector.
It's always nurses, isn't it? Not the poor downtrodden bloke issuing travel infringement fines, or the miserable old so and so doing fortnightly signing.
Last edited by bubbles1966 on Fri Feb 03, 2023 1:46 am, edited 2 times in total.
westham,eggyandchips wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:23 pm
If, in some cases, certain areas of the public sector get inflationary (10%) rises, what happens when inflation drops to the targeted 2-3%, will they then have to take a subsequent pay cut?
No public sector wage should be linked to inflation - it should be linked to the amount of government income extracted from taxpayers.
And it should be the total amount of the payrolls that is linked - not individual salaries.
westham,eggyandchips wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:23 pm
If, in some cases, certain areas of the public sector get inflationary (10%) rises, what happens when inflation drops to the targeted 2-3%, will they then have to take a subsequent pay cut?
Inflation is a measure of how much things go up in price, if things go up by 10% then they've gone up by that amount. If it drops next year then they'd still have gone up by the 10%, the issue is ensuring people ain't worse off but without fuelling more inflation by simply giving them more money. Not an easy trick to pull off.
When things go up they go by % of what they were, say your rent goes up by 5%, it goes up by 5% of what it was, not 5% of your wages. If your rent was £1000 pm and it goes up by 5% then you need at least another £50 pm on your wages to break even, problems really start when everything goes up, which is where we are now.......
bubbles1966 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 1:38 am
No public sector wage should be linked to inflation - it should be linked to the amount of government income extracted from taxpayers.
And it should be the total amount of the payrolls that is linked - not individual salaries.
Simply cannot have a system that allows greater wage rises than the source from which it came from. It’s possibly the best way of running down the kitty available to buy medical kit, steel for train tracks or keep canteens stocked with food for staff.
Plashet Grove Pete wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:21 am
So just to be clear, would increasing staff numbers by 50% make them 50% more efficient? Why don't we double the number of nurses then?
I get a bit confused when people start conflating macro economics with homespun frontier gibberish.
Well if we want to save the NHS a ton of work just ban the pensioners from using... Just a drain on Society now eh
(Just a sarcasm warning for Pete as he always misses it and gets triggered)
bubbles1966 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:44 pm
I'd be amazed if there are many public sector workers who don't look at some aspects of their job and say "that's a waste of time", "that's too complicated", "why are they involved?" "there must be a better way of doing it than that".
Now we’re getting somewhere. It’s what I was banging on about before people came in and derailed the thread.
Improve the working conditions. Improve and upgrade the resources they use to do the job, the workforce levels etc etc. Make their job easier to do and ensure they can do that job well.
I’m promising you all this, teachers wouldn’t have voted to strike if there was a genuine attempt to address the systemic issues which is bringing down the education system.
Friend or Foé wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 7:27 am
If we increase staff levels, will we be able to contractually freeze any pay rise and reduce pension contributions for 20 years ?
How about we fully staff to safe numbers first eh?
Nurses minimum safe numbers under the strike plan trying to be forced through there are times it's below that on a normal day
How is it safe on a normal day?
Increasing the work force by 10% wouldn't even get it fully staffed
Take the police the Tories banging on about 20,000 new officers... When they have just returned numbers to the level before they cut 20,000 .
hammers92 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 7:24 am
Now we’re getting somewhere. It’s what I was banging on about before people came in and derailed the thread.
Improve the working conditions. Improve and upgrade the resources they use to do the job, the workforce levels etc etc. Make their job easier to do and ensure they can do that job well.
I’m promising you all this, teachers wouldn’t have voted to strike if there was a genuine attempt to address the systemic issues which is bringing down the education system.
There are always improvements but nobody ever wants to make them.
We had someone in years ago brought in to save the company money..he studied us for 6 months and reported he could save us all the money required without one cut to service or front line staff
He was paid his contract out and let go
Instead we cut station staff
Nobody ever wants to stream line middle management. Doesn't suit the agenda.
We need a well run but not underfunded overworked public service
There is no question society runs better if health. Transport, education and alike are all smooth running and not being used as political weapons.
hammers92 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 01, 2023 7:09 pmWe spent £38bn on a track and trace system that didn’t work, £15bn written off in Covid fraud and £2bn given to the DUP to keep May in power. The money is there.
Our public services are now broken, and no longer working. They’re the fabric of the society we live in, and need to be working efficiently.
You mentioned pensions. I would take away the state pension for high earners (won’t give you an exact figure as naturally that’s for another thread). I would also completely reform the tax system and introduce statutory conditions to explain what taxes go on and how they’re spent.
Going back to strikes, I would use some of that money to increase starting salaries in various professions and target young people, encouraging them to join.
We cannot go on doing more for less. It costs more to society when our public services fail us.
Maybe the reason why more people in general have patience with this load of strikes. We've all seen that when it is required, the money simply does seem to be there, so no more of that we can’t afford it please.
I thought you can already log into HMRC and see where your money has been spent?