Is The UK Public Sector Becoming The New Private Sector?
Public sector servants in some parts of the UK have a higher salary than a private sector employee within the same region. A new study reveals that teachers, nurses and council workers earn nearly 15 percent more than private sector employees in similar cadre. The pay scale further varies depending on age, gender, qualification and experience. Even though the findings are true, leaders and unions oppose the revelation and term it as "misleading". They even argue that such a comparison is helping people to use it as a mean to erode further their pay and work conditions. According to Policy Exchange study, public sector servant earns 6.1 percent pay premium or £1,400 more in a year in similar conditions than the private sector employee.
To further complicate the issue, the pay is dependent on the area and its development. For example, in central London, a public servant receives a less pay in comparison to the private sector employee in equal category. However, according to Matthew Oakley, economics head of Policy Exchange, states that the pay scale and the bargaining depend on regional managers and their decision depending on circumstances. The scenario is different and has a lot of momentum. "A well established school in an area may not be having a problem attracting staff, but the one down the lane has a serious challenge in doing so" he added.
On the contrary, there was a possibility for the public sector to save recent rounds of cuts if it was possible for the civil servants to agree to a pay cut. This is what happening in the private sector where employees have agreed for a slight or a nominal pay cut to restrain a layoff. However, public servants with tremendous experience and skill are being paid enormously which equals to the pay scale in the private sector company. This is specific to certain employment categories and is not possible with every cadre of employment.
According to Dave Prentis, General Secretary of public sector workers union, the real difference between the top-level and bottom level employees. Bankers and financiers are always receiving bonuses and taxes at all times irrespective of economic condition. On the contrary, the public sector may be after the footsteps of the private industry regime to save money and employment. Eliminating pay scale based on the region will bring a positive approach to employment and will end the inequality that the country now faces. There will be inequality in the public sector and the biggest losers will be lower-paid staff.
Both public and private sectors have to work together to bring out a policy or action that would put an end to the existing inequality. It is necessary for both the sectors to think about offering a minimum wage that would help meet each weekend for an employee depending on their qualifications and experience. Ending inequality is another way to balance the gap and end the long run comparison procedure. Becoming commercial is one way helpful for the public sector as it can reap benefits and yet support the same team even in tough times. That said; the company has to work out thoroughly on developing a scale that will not create a gap within the organization.
There are many challenges ahead for the public sector before it adopts an appropriate action that would decrease and eliminate, over a period, the inequality in pay scale. Privatization of the UK public sector will help reduce over spending and at the same time deliver an even pay scale across all the regions based on the cadre. Such action will bridge the gap between the government and private sector pay scales. By Manish P
Can the US Adapt to a Rapidly Changing World?
As a country, the United States has a dearth of new ideas. Our Washington establishment is mired in outdated concepts and beliefs which prevent the US from moving forward. We are not in this position because our people are not hardworking or inventive but because our national political caste is more focused on their own survival in office than the greater good.
There is no longer rational or calm discussion between political parties... only invective. I am never quite sure if our political class believes their myopic and idiotic statements or if they are setting up straw issues in order to excite the extremes. For some time now, our bureaucrats and elected leaders have spoken in sound bites and talking points. This has translated into individual citizens doing the same. There is no exchange of new information or ideas only the repetition of tired dogma which has long been irrelevant because of a changing world and circumstance.
In order to solve the problems faced today, we must stop using the outmoded methodologies and theories of another era. We need to change the paradigmatic processes to reflect the current world. Society and government need to accept the premise that the United States is not the same country as it was in 1932 or 1980. Presidents Roosevelt and Reagan put forth policies and ideas that were relevant to their times. The programs they conceived were to solve problems as they existed then. Nothing they proposed or enacted should be sacrosanct. The one similarity that both those presidents possessed was flexibility. Either man had no qualms about discarding policies that no longer worked. Therefore we should not consider their policies as sacrosanct and as Holy Writ.
Some of our most pressing problems that need to be solved such as our tax code, regulatory apparatus, or retirement system are operating on programs conceived in the 19th and early 20th centuries. While they may have been admirable in their day, these solutions no longer are adequate for today's society. What we have done is continue to apply band aids to antiquated programs. At best, this briefly mollifies but does not correct the underlying challenges we currently face.
Our existing government structure has become moribund since it refuses to act in a cohesive and communal fashion. The politicians of both parties are all too willing to curry the favor of entrenched interests and the extremists on both ends of the political spectrum. The results of this quagmire are that we, as a nation, seem unable to staunch our deterioration. Our national outlook becomes more and more insular. The entrenched interests, whether political or economic, are more concerned with maintaining the status quo than finding modern solutions. New answers that will affect the existing profits or position of the entrenched are discarded. Instead jingoistic rhetoric is espoused that give the illusion of our national superiority while, in actuality, our world position is sadly eroding.
We need to confront and solve our problems now. They are not impossible or insurmountable. Waiting only increases the chance that they will become so. Eventually the U.S. will fall under the weight of sclerotic programs and institutions. Most of these programs should be abandoned and something truly new will have to take their places more in keeping with today's needs. The sooner we act, the less disruption will occur to society. If we continue to substitute illogical rhetoric for concrete solutions, then we are doomed to lose our economic, political and moral standing in a changing world.
There is no longer rational or calm discussion between political parties... only invective. I am never quite sure if our political class believes their myopic and idiotic statements or if they are setting up straw issues in order to excite the extremes. For some time now, our bureaucrats and elected leaders have spoken in sound bites and talking points. This has translated into individual citizens doing the same. There is no exchange of new information or ideas only the repetition of tired dogma which has long been irrelevant because of a changing world and circumstance.
In order to solve the problems faced today, we must stop using the outmoded methodologies and theories of another era. We need to change the paradigmatic processes to reflect the current world. Society and government need to accept the premise that the United States is not the same country as it was in 1932 or 1980. Presidents Roosevelt and Reagan put forth policies and ideas that were relevant to their times. The programs they conceived were to solve problems as they existed then. Nothing they proposed or enacted should be sacrosanct. The one similarity that both those presidents possessed was flexibility. Either man had no qualms about discarding policies that no longer worked. Therefore we should not consider their policies as sacrosanct and as Holy Writ.
Some of our most pressing problems that need to be solved such as our tax code, regulatory apparatus, or retirement system are operating on programs conceived in the 19th and early 20th centuries. While they may have been admirable in their day, these solutions no longer are adequate for today's society. What we have done is continue to apply band aids to antiquated programs. At best, this briefly mollifies but does not correct the underlying challenges we currently face.
Our existing government structure has become moribund since it refuses to act in a cohesive and communal fashion. The politicians of both parties are all too willing to curry the favor of entrenched interests and the extremists on both ends of the political spectrum. The results of this quagmire are that we, as a nation, seem unable to staunch our deterioration. Our national outlook becomes more and more insular. The entrenched interests, whether political or economic, are more concerned with maintaining the status quo than finding modern solutions. New answers that will affect the existing profits or position of the entrenched are discarded. Instead jingoistic rhetoric is espoused that give the illusion of our national superiority while, in actuality, our world position is sadly eroding.
We need to confront and solve our problems now. They are not impossible or insurmountable. Waiting only increases the chance that they will become so. Eventually the U.S. will fall under the weight of sclerotic programs and institutions. Most of these programs should be abandoned and something truly new will have to take their places more in keeping with today's needs. The sooner we act, the less disruption will occur to society. If we continue to substitute illogical rhetoric for concrete solutions, then we are doomed to lose our economic, political and moral standing in a changing world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)